HomeMy WebLinkAboutPACKET Town Board 2015-12-08The 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.
The Town of Estes Park will make reasonable accommodations for access to Town
services, programs, and activities and special communication arrangements for persons
with disabilities. Please call (970) 577-4777. TDD available.
BOARD OF TRUSTEES - TOWN OF ESTES PARK
Tuesday, December 8, 2015
7:00 p.m.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.
(Any person desiring to participate, please join the Board in the Pledge of Allegiance).
PUBLIC COMMENT. (Please state your name and address).
TOWN BOARD COMMENTS / LIAISON REPORTS.
TOWN ADMINISTRATOR REPORT.
Meter Division Reorganization
Online Billing
1. CONSENT AGENDA:
1. Town Board Minutes dated November 24, 2015, and Town Board Study Session
Minutes dated November 24, 2015.
2. Bills.
3. Committee Minutes:
A. Community Development/Community Services Committee, November 19,
2015.
4. Estes Valley Board of Adjustment Minutes dated September 1, 2015
(acknowledgement only).
5. 2015 Financial Audit Clifton Larson Allen Engagement Letter.
6. Appointment of Reuben Bergsten to the Platte River Power Authority Board of
Directors for a 4-year term commencing January 1, 2016 and expiring December
31, 2019.
2. LIQUOR ITEMS:
1. NEW LIQUOR LICENSE - LA CABANA MEXICAN BAR & GRILL, LLC DBA LA
CABANA MEXICAN BAR AND GRILL, 165 VIRGINIA DRIVE UNIT 18-1 AND 18-2,
ESTES PARK, NEW TAVERN LIQUOR LICENSE. Town Clerk Williamson.
3. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS. Items reviewed by Planning Commission or staff
Prepared 11/30/15
* Revised: 12/8/15
NOTE: The Town Board reserves the right to consider other appropriate items not available at the time the agenda was
prepared.
for Town Board Final Action.
1. CONSENT ITEMS:
A. AMENDED PLAT Portions of Lot 26, Little Prospect Mountain; 531 Highland
Lane; Robert Shipman/Owner; Lonnie Sheldon/Applicant. Planner Gonzales.
B. RIVERVIEW PINES TOWNHOMES DEVELOPMENT PLAN & AMENDED
PLAT, Tract 56B, Replat of Tract 56, Amended Plat of Lot 2, Deercrest
Subdivision & Tracts 56 & 57, Fall River Addition; 1150 W. Elkhorn Avenue;
Frederick Kropp/Applicant. Item Continued to January 26, 2016.
4. ACTION ITEMS:
1. RESOLUTION #24-15 2015 SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET APPROPRIATIONS.
Finance Officer McFarland.
2. ESTES VALLEY RECREATION AND PARK DISTRICT INTERGOVERNMENTAL
AGREEMENT FOR STANLEY PARK AND YOUTH CENTER. Item to be moved to
the first meeting in January 2016.
3. VISIT ESTES PARK 2016 INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT. Assistant
Town Administrator Machalek.
4. BUSINESS INCUBATOR EDA GRANT CONSULTANT CONTRACT. Assistant
Town Administrator Machalek.
5. ORDINANCE # 16-15 MUNICIPAL COURT JUDGE AND CLERK EMPLOYMENT
CONTRACTS. Director Williamson & Attorney White.
5. REQUEST TO ENTER EXECUTIVE SESSION:
24-6-402(4)(e) C.R.S. – For the purpose of determining positions relative to matters that
may be subject to negotiations, developing strategy for negotiations, and/or instructing
negotiators. MPEC/Stall Barns.
24-6-402(4)(b). C.R.S. – For a conference with the Town Attorney for the purpose of
receiving legal advice on specific legal questions regarding Lot 4, Stanley Historic
District.
6. ADJOURN.
MEETING CANCELLATION NOTICE:
The Town Board meeting scheduled December 22, 2015 has been cancelled.
*
Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, November 24, 2015
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 24th day of November 2015.
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
Travis Machalek, Assistant Town Administrator
Greg White, Town Attorney
Barbara Jo Limmiatis, Recording Secretary
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 COMMENT.
Johanna Darden, Town resident, expressed concerns regarding damages done to Town
owned property near the Stanley Hotel by construction activities and requested the
Stanley Hotel repair the damage by planting seedlings.
Charley Dickey, Town resident, commented on the Parking Strategy presented by the
Transportation Advisory Board. He was impressed with the recommendations and
stated the Town needed to incentivize people to use the transportation hubs.
TRUSTEE COMMENTS.
Trustee Ericson thanked the community for their increased involvement and wished all a
Happy Thanksgiving.
Trustee Nelson attended a joint meeting of the Open Lands Board for all of Larimer
County with Public Works Director Muhonen. Nelson praised the Larimer County
Boards for their collaboration to get projects accomplished.
Trustee Phipps informed the public about the upcoming special Planning Commission
and Town Board meetings regarding the Stanley Hotel and vacation home rentals.
Mayor Pro Tem Koenig reported the Sister Cities Committee would meet at the Estes
Institute to finalize the details of the group of individuals coming to Estes Park from
Costa Rica in June 2016 and decide if delegates from Estes Park would be sent to
Costa Rica in February or March 2016. The Best Medium Sized Rodeo would be
announced in Las Vegas in the following week and Koenig wished the Rooftop Rodeo
good luck.
Trustee Holcomb reminded the Board and public of the Catch the Glow parade to take
place on Friday, November 27, 2015 and wished all a Happy Thanksgiving.
Trustee Norris thanked those who participated on the Bear Education Task Force in
2015, reminded the public of the Wildlife Ordinance to go into effect on April 1, 2016,
stated County Commissioner Donnelly would be at the Senior Center to get the
community’s input on the County adopting a similar wildlife ordinance. The Town met
with Visit Estes Park to discuss the IGA and interviews would be held for an open
County position on the Visit Estes Park Board.
Board of Trustees – November 24, 2015 – Page 2
Mayor Pinkham informed the Board and public of a visit of a delegation from Tolikara,
Papua, who were in the process of building a government from the ground up. They
spent time with the Community Development department to learn about government
planning and took a tour of the Town.
TOWN ADMINISTRATOR REPORT.
Menorah Lighting in Bond Park – The Town was recently contacted by Rabbi
Yerachmiel Gorelik of Fort Collins with a request to perform a Menorah lighting in
Bond Park on December 9, 2015. This would not be a Town sponsored event, but it
would take place on Town property. Administrator Lancaster requested direction
from the Board on whether or not the event would be allowed. It was moved and
seconded (Koenig/Ericson) to allow the celebration of Chanukah in Bond Park,
and it passed unanimously.
Fish Hatchery Property – Housing Authority & Land Trust – Administrator Lancaster
reported contact was made with the Housing Authority and the Estes Valley Land
Trust to investigate projects which would work well on the Town owned Fish
Hatchery property. The Land Trust proposed a conservation easement with less
active recreation potential. The Housing Authority would investigate workforce
housing potential.
Administrator Lancaster also provided updates on the Intergovernmental Agreement
and Service Level Agreement with Visit Estes Park, and the construction project on
Lot 4 by the Stanley Hotel. Lancaster stated the Building Code allows for
construction to move forward while plans are pending. The Builder has assumed
responsibility for the risks associated to overbuilding and possibly having to rebuild
portions should the plans not be approved as submitted.
1. CONSENT AGENDA:
1. Town Board Minutes dated November 10, 2015 and Town Board Study
Session Minutes dated November 2, 2015, November 9, 2015 and November
10, 2015.
2. Bills.
3. Committee Minutes:
A. Public Safety, Utilities & Public Works Committee, Novmember 12, 2015:
1. Purchase a Utility Box for Light & Power Duty Truck, Auto Truck
Group, $40,660.
2. Elm Road Landfill Leachate Mitigation Contract, C&H Excavation,
$517,583.99 with a contingency for a total cost not to exceed
$570,000.
3. Elm Road Landfill Leachate Mitigation Construction Management,
Stewart Environmental Consultants, $44.000 with a contingency for a
total cost not to exceed $50,000.
4. Visitor Center Restroom Remodel, Heath Construction, $176,801.40
not to exceed $200,000.
5. Conference Center Roof Repairs, B&E Builders, $44,738.54 – 2013
Flood Insurance funds not to exceed $49,709.49.
6. Public Works Purchase of a 2016 Outback, Valley Nissan-Subaru,
$23,026.
7. Public Works Purchase of a 2016 Forrester, Valley Nissan-Subaru,
$21,929.
8. Reallocate Fleet Division Capital Funds to Purchase a Tire Changer,
Vendor to be Selected, $20,000.
9. 2015 Street Overlay Contract Change Order, Coulson Excavating,
CO., Inc., $13,090.28.
10. FEMA Change Order #1 Construction Management, RG &
Associates, $58,080 – Osmun Contract Funds.
11. FEMA Change Order #2 Construction Management, RG &
Associates, $51,731 – Osmun Contract Funds.
Board of Trustees – November 24, 2015 – Page 3
12. FEMA Change Order #3 Construction Management, RG &
Associates, $56,463 – Osmun Contract Funds.
13. FHWA Change Order #1 Construction Management, RG &
Associates, $22,844.
14. Event Center & Pavilion Snow Guards, RTN Roofing, $32,557 not to
exceed $35,000 – Supplemental Budget.
4. Transportation Advisory Board Minutes dated October 15, 2015
(acknowledgement only).
5. Parks Advisory Board Minutes dated October 16, 2015 (acknowledgement
only).
6. Estes Valley Planning Commission Minutes dated September 15, 2015.
7. Estes Park Board of Appeals Minutes dated October 1, 2015
(acknowledgement only).
8. Resolution #21-15 – Setting the public hearing date of December 8, 2015, for
a new Tavern Liquor License for La Cabana Mexican Bar & Grill, dba La
Cabana Mexican Bar & Grill, 165 Virginia Drive Unit 18-1 and 18-2, Estes
Park, CO.
It was moved and seconded (Koenig/Holcomb) to approve Consent Agenda, and it
passed unanimously.
2. ACTION ITEMS:
1. 2016 STRATEGIC PLAN. Administrator Lancaster presented the 2016
Strategic Plan with no changes. It was moved and seconded (Norris/ Ericson)
to approve the 2016 Strategic Plan, and it passed unanimously.
2. PUBLIC HEARING – 2016 BUDGET - ADOPTION.
Mayor Pinkham opened the public hearing. Finance Officer McFarland
presented the remaining items for action regarding the adoption of the 2016
Budget.
Colorado Budget Law requires a public hearing be conducted to discuss how
the Highway Users Trust Fund revenues would be expended. Estimated
revenues are $260,510. The Town would expend $725,540 on street
improvements, curb, gutter, sidewalk, guardrail, snow removal, plow blades and
vehicle/equipment usage. It was moved and seconded (Koenig/Norris) to
utilize the Highway Users Trust Fund for expenditures for street
improvements, curb, gutter, sidewalk, guardrail, snow removal, plow
blades and vehicle/equipment usage, and it passed unanimously.
Resolution #18-15 sets the mill levy at the maximum of 1.719 mills yielding
$334,804. The net valuation of all taxable property within the Town increased
by 12% in 2015. An increase in the mill levy cannot exceed 5.5%, therefore the
original calculation of 1.822 mills would be temporarily reduced. It was moved
and seconded (Ericson/Holcomb) to approve Resolution #18-15 – Setting
the Mill Levy for 2016, and the motion passed unanimously.
Trustee Ericson requested a budget modification to include a 2% bonus merit
program and suggested funding it by reducing the transfer to the Streets fund
from the General fund by $435,000, which should be more than compensated
by the 1A Sales Tax money. Staff has not received an increase in over three
years and Ericson encouraged the Town invest in its employees. Public
comment was heard from Town residents Charley Dickey, Paul Fishman and
Jean McGuire who expressed concerns regarding the request to decrease the
funds transferred to the Streets budget. The Board suggested waiting until the
Spring of 2016 to consider reinstituting the merit program for staff. It was
Board of Trustees – November 24, 2015 – Page 4
moved and seconded (Ericson/Holcomb) to modify the 2016 budget to
include a 2% bonus merit program, and the motion failed with Trustee
Ericson voting yes.
Resolution #19-15 summarizes the expenditures and revenue for each fund
and adopts the 2016 budget. Resolution #20-15 appropriates sums of money to
execute the budget and states that revenues within each fund are sufficient to
support expenditures. It was moved and seconded (Koenig/Phipps) to
approve Resolution #19-15 – Adopting the 2016 Budget and Resolution
#20-15 – Appropriating Sums of Money, and the motion passed with Trustee
Ericson voting no.
3. RESOLUTION #22-15 ESTES PARK LOCAL MARKETING DISTRICT
BUSINESS AND OPERATING PLAN FOR 2016. Administrator Lancaster
stated Visit Estes Park has withdrawn the request for additional funding.
Elizabeth Fogarty, Visit Estes Park President and CEO, thanked the Board for
their continued support as the organization works to define its role and increase
year round economic activity in the Estes Valley. It was moved and seconded
(Norris/Phipps) to approve Resolution #22-15, and it passed unanimously.
4. ESTES PARK TRANSIT HUB PARKING STRUCTURE CONSTRUCITON
MANAGEMENT CONTRACT. Public Works Director Muhonen proposed to
hire SpaceIntoPlace Architecture + Design (SIPAD) for project management
services during the design and construction phases of the Estes Park Transit
Hub Parking Structure on the South lot of the Visitor Center as the department
does not have sufficient staff to handle the workload. Muhonen recommended
sole sourcing the contract to SIPAD for several reasons including the in-depth
familiarity with the project, a highly competitive hourly rate offered, proven
professionalism and technical competence, and availability to move the project
forward toward the construction goal in 2016. It was moved and seconded
(Koenig/Norris) to authorize the Mayor to sign a Professional Services
contract for the Transit Facility Park Structure with SpaceintoPlace
Architecture & Design in the amount of $151,500 with a budget at
$170,000, and it passed unanimously.
5. SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT EXTENSION – STREAMSIDE
CONDOMINIUMS ON FALL RIVER. Planner Kleisler requested the Board
consider extending the timeline for installation of required infrastructure
improvements to the Streamside Condominiums on Fall River. The Streamside
Condominium subdivision was approved in May 2006 and to date, no units
have been individually sold. This approval required installation of adequate
public facilities and the due date was no later than mid-2008. In March 2008,
the Board approved an infrastructure phasing plan with the completion date of
December 2013. The applicant requested another extension in January 2014
due to the desire to share infrastructure costs with The Sanctuary development
project on the adjacent lot. The developer of the Sanctuary has since decided
not to pursue construction and sold the property to the applicant. The
Streamside Condominiums and The Sanctuary are now under the same
ownership. The applicant proposed to extend the timeframe for sewer and
electrical work to March 31, 2016 and street improvements to December 31,
2017. The effected agencies do not have any objections. It was moved and
seconded (Ericson/Holcomb) to approve the Subdivision Improvement
Agreement Extension for the Streamside Condominiums on Fall River,
conditional to the recommendation by staff, and it passed unanimously.
6. RESOLTUION #23-15 SUPPORTING AN INCREASE IN H-2B VISAS.
Administrator Lancaster presented the Resolution to support the federal H-2B
temporary worker program and the retention of provisions of the program that
benefit seasonal industries and thanked the business community for bringing
this item to the Board’s attention. Cory Blackman, Best Wester Silver Saddle
General Manager, explained the importance of the H-2B visa program in Estes
Park’s seasonal economy, H-2B workers put little demand on our social
Board of Trustees – November 24, 2015 – Page 5
services while filling positions that would remain vacant due to a lack of local
workforce. Sean Jergens, Comfort Inn, stated his company has been using the
H-2B visa program for 15 years and relies heavily on the workers for continued
success. Jergens stated the workers are allowed for a maximum 10 month
period and requested returning workers not count toward the current cap of
33,000 visas. It was moved and seconded (Koenig/Norris) to approve
Resolution #23-15, and it passed unanimously.
7. PARKS ADVISORY BOARD APPOINTMENTS. Mayor Pinkham stated the
Parks Advisory Board currently has two vacant positons and one position to
expire in December 2015. The positons were advertised and five applications
were received. One applicant withdrew and one did not meet the residency
requirement. Interviews were held with the remaining applicants and it was
recommended to appoint Carlie Bangs and Vicki Papineau to 3-year terms and
reappoint Dewain Lockwood for an additional 3-year term. It was moved and
seconded (Koenig/Phipps) to appoint Carlie Bangs and Vickie Papineau to
3-year terms expiring on December 31, 2018 and reappoint Dewain
Lockwood for an additional 3-year term expiring on December 31, 2018,
and it passed unanimously.
8. TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY BOARD APPOINTMENT. Trustee Ericson
stated a vacancy on the Transportation Advisory Board was created by the
resignation of Cory LaBianca. The position was advertised and received one
application. An interview was conducted and it was recommended to appoint
John Gordon Slack to complete the term of Cory LaBianca. It was moved and
seconded (Ericson/Holcomb) to appoint John Gordon Slack for a term
expiring on March 31, 2018, and it passed unanimously.
3. REPORTS AND DISCUSSION ITEMS:
1. FINANCIAL REPORT. Finance Officer McFarland reviewed the 3rd quarter
sales tax and financial report stating sales tax is up 12% over 2014 and 14%
over budget. General fund balance remains at approximately 15% due to the
Events Center lagging in revenue and amendments needed for flood and grant
activity. The Community Reinvestment fund has several large projects pending.
The MPEC is almost complete, while the parking structure and Elm Road
Landfill mitigation would begin construction soon. The Utility fund shows
revenues are up in part due to Falcon Ridge tap fees, and the capital and flood
expenses being under budget. FEMA reimbursements have increased to
$1,247,000 in 2015 from $546,000 in 2014. Staff would continue to monitor the
Town’s financial position closely.
4. REQUEST TO ENTER EXECUTIVE SESSION:
It was moved and seconded (Norris/Ericson) to enter executive session for
discussion of specialized details of security arrangements under 24-6-
402(4)(d) C.R.S., and it passed unanimously.
The Board entered executive session at 8:38 p.m. and adjourned back to regular
session at 9:09 p.m. whereupon Mayor Pinkham adjourned the meeting.
William C. Pinkham, Mayor
Barbara Jo Limmiatis, Recording Secretary
Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, November 24, 2015
Minutes of a Regular meeting of the TOWN BOARD STUDY SESSION of
the Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held at the
Town Hall in Rooms 202/203 in said Town of Estes Park on the 24th day of
November, 2015.
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, Assistant Town Administrator
Machalek, Attorney White, Deputy Town Clerk Deats
Absent: None
Mayor Pinkham called the meeting to order at 4:45 p.m.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FEE STRUCTURE.
A stakeholders meeting was held on November 12, 2015, to discuss and receive input on
Community Development fee schedules. Attendance at the meeting was low, however,
those who did participate provided beneficial feedback to staff and agreed that the Town’s
development review fees are, in most cases, too low. Mallory Baker, Planning
Consultant, was prepared to present three fee schedules to the Board based on the three
fee structure options discussed at the September 8th Town Board Study Session.
However, based on information provided at the September study session, the Trustees
selected Option 3 to focus on and discuss. Option 3: Combination Cost Recovery Model,
would require a cost reimbursement structure for complex applications such as
development plans, minor and major subdivisions, code amendments and annexations,
with simpler applications continuing to be charged a flat fee. Staff asked the Board for
direction related to the level of cost recovery desired for the Community Development
Department. Discussion is summarized: staff proposes a 25% to 45% increase in fees,
staying closer to a 25% increase in the first year, to bring cost recovery to the 43% to
50% level; start with 50% level of cost recovery and work towards 100% cost recovery on
a shorter rather than longer timeline; suggest being at 100% recovery level in five years;
the Town should operate like a business and recover its costs; fees should be reviewed
on an annual basis to eliminate large increases; incremental increases each year are
preferable to large jumps in fees; cost reimbursement option encourages strong
applications and complete submittals; suggest discussions take place regarding ways to
use fees to benefit the community, such as to address workforce housing needs; impact
fees are not part of the Town’s current fee schedule nor are they included in the proposed
schedule; implementation of impact fees related to development’s impact on utility
infrastructure would require additional research and study; it is a philosophical decision
whether to use the fees to balance and maintain the general fund or put funds into
workforce housing; initially fees should stabilize general fund and as cost recovery
escalates perhaps divert monies to workforce housing; need to look at goals and projects
that are unfunded and research mechanisms and methods to fund these goals; and need
discussion on funding mechanisms. The desired cost recovery level for Planning is 50%
with incremental increases annually until 100% cost recovery is achieved.
For Building Division fees, the Board’s preference was Option 2: Locally-based
Assessment Model and Standardized Audit Procedures. This method will provide a more
realistic valuation assessment by utilizing local construction costs.
The current fee for floodplain permits is $50 which is way below the average permit review
cost of $500 to $1000, depending on the complexity of the project. The Board proposed
billing at cost and questioned whether floodplain permit fees are covered by insurance or
whether they are the expense of the property owner. The Trustees suggested cost
recovery of 50% if property owner’s responsibility and 100% if a pass through cost to
insurance.
Town Board Study Session – November 24, 2015 – Page 2
A second stakeholders meeting is scheduled to be held on December 10, 2015, at which
time staff will present the Board’s fee schedule recommendations for both the Planning
Division and the Building Division to the public.
Mayor Pinkham recessed the meeting at 5:25 p.m. for a dinner break and resumed the
meeting at 5:35 p.m.
TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY BOARD PARKING STRATEGY
RECOMMENDATIONS.
Belle Morris and Kimberly Campbell, representing the Transportation Advisory Board
(TAB), presented the Trustees with a proposed parking strategy. The document identifies
strategies and priorities based on input from TAB members and, if adopted by the Board,
could guide the Town in decisions related to strategies, and the implementation thereof,
to help mitigate parking issues in Estes Park.
Utilizing guiding principles such as: protecting the natural environment; designing a family
friendly downtown; building in harmony with nature; and avoiding vehicles becoming the
dominant characteristic of downtown; as well as incorporating the Town Board’s
objectives and goals, the TAB identified nine broad, key points to parking strategy. They
are as follows:
Strategically increase the parking supply
Simplify parking
Provide exceptional directional signage
Reduce parking demand through alternate modes
Implement a pay-to-park program
Encourage business owners and employees to park remotely
Redirect oversized vehicles to remote parking areas
Protect residential neighborhoods adjacent to downtown
Develop a special event management plan
Ms. Morris and Ms. Campbell noted that all of the strategies are interrelated, and
somewhat dependent upon each other and the timing of specific projects, in regard to
implementation. The TAB identified their top five strategies and requested that the Town
Board give consideration to directing staff to pursue implementation within the next two
years. The top ranking strategies are:
Pay-to-Park program – Strongly supported by the TAB, this would influence
behavior and potentially increase the usage of the visitor center parking structure
and the shuttle system
Increase parking supply – Pursue funding for Phase 2 of the visitor center parking
structure
Employee parking – Develop an employee parking initiative and work with the
business community to incentivize parking outside of the downtown area
Alternate Modes – Remain committed to the shuttle system and expand bike lanes
and bike racks
Oversized Vehicles – Direct oversized vehicles around downtown and provide
additional oversized parking spaces at the Fairgrounds parking lot
It was noted that these types of strategies will likely illicit strong opinions from the public
and that input would be solicited when and if implementation comes before the Board for
action. The Trustees asked that the reference to specific downtown neighborhoods be
removed from the document. The draft Proposed Parking Strategy will be posted to the
Town’s website as a general strategy that the Town is considering to allow for public
review and comment. The Town Board will consider adopting the strategy at a January
2016 Town Board meeting.
TRUSTEE & ADMINISTRATOR COMMENTS & QUESTIONS.
Additional work on Lot 4 was discovered by the building inspector prior to the work
being brought to the Town’s attention.
The “take-rate” study for Broadband service is being conducted by contacting a
large sampling of residents using mailing lists acquired from the Economic
Development Corporation (EDC), Estes Valley Partners for Commerce (EVPC),
Estes Area Lodging Association (EALA) and subscribers to Town utilities.
Town Board Study Session – November 24, 2015 – Page 3
Visit Estes Park’s (VEP) request for $95,000 for marketing of Town events has
been withdrawn. Town events will continue to be listed on the VEP website
calendars and promoted as part of destination marketing activities. Town
Administrator Lancaster reported that there are no funds in the 2016 budget for
marketing of individual Town events, however, marketing of the Event Center
facility is budgeted and will continue in order to rent and fill the facility.
In regard to filling the Special Event Director position, Town Administrator
Lancaster reported that two candidates will be participating in a second round of
interviews in early December.
FUTURE STUDY SESSION AGENDA ITEMS.
Trustee Phipps requested a discussion of Vacation Home Enforcement and Fees
be included as an agenda item for the study session scheduled for Tuesday,
January 12, 2016.
Trustee Ericson requested a philosophical discussion related to Fund Balance
Policy be held at the study session scheduled for Tuesday, January 26, 2016.
Updated Long Range Pavement Improvement Program will be discussed at the
January 26, 2016, study session, as well as a short discussion on Agenda Policy.
The following items will be moved to “Items Approved – Unscheduled” status:
Policy on Naming of Town Facilities; Update on Consideration of Transit Going
Year ‘Round in Order to Qualify for Federal Funding; and How the Board Handles
Off Cycle Requests for Funding from Outside Organizations.
Update and Report on Public Engagement Regarding International Maintenance
Code is duplicated and will be removed from the list.
Fish Hatchery Property Discussion will remain unscheduled pending discussions
between the Town of Estes Park, the Estes Park Housing Authority, and the Estes
Valley Land Trust.
There being no further business, Mayor Pinkham adjourned the meeting at 6:46 p.m.
Cynthia Deats, Deputy Town Clerk
Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, November 19, 2015
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
19th day of November, 2015.
Committee: Chair Ericson, Trustees Holcomb and Phipps
Attending: Chair Ericson, Trustees Holcomb and Phipps
Also Attending: Town Administrator Lancaster, Assistant Town Administrator
Machalek, Director Chilcott, Coordinator Jacobson, and
Deputy Town Clerk Deats
Absent: None
Chair Ericson called the meeting to order at 8:00 a.m.
PUBLIC COMMENT.
None.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT.
REPORTS.
Reports provided for informational purposes and made a part of the proceedings.
Verbal Updates –
o Downtown Neighborhood Advisory Committee and Logan Simpson
Timetable – 24 applications for 11 volunteer positions on the Downtown
Neighborhood Advisory Committee have been received. Interviews will be
held the week of December 7, 2015. A representative mix of the
community will be sought for the advisory committee. Director Chilcott
noted that the applicants were provided with a job description for the
committee positions and noted that a more specific meeting schedule will
be created following receipt of the project plan from the consultant, Logan
Simpson. She noted that negotiations with Logan Simpson to define the
scope of the project are ongoing and said a contract will likely come
before the Town Board in January with completion of the plan expected in
July 2016.
o Community Development Fee Schedule – Fee schedules for both Building
and Planning will be discussed at the upcoming Town Board Study
Session scheduled for Tuesday, November 24, 2015. Staff will request
direction regarding the level of cost recovery desired by the Board.
Currently, Planning fees cover approximately 36% of costs and Building
fees cover approximately 50% of costs. Examples of fee schedules to
cover various levels of cost recovery will be presented to the Board.
Additionally, methods to streamline processes will also be explored.
o Vacation Homes – Town Administrator Lancaster reported that the County
Commissioners will hold listening sessions in Estes Park to receive public
comment related to vacation homes and proposed changes to the code.
In addition, the Commissioners will be discussing vacation home fees and
enforcement at their December 21, 2015, meeting. Trustee Phipps
suggested that vacation home fees and enforcement be an agenda item
for the Town Board Study Session scheduled for January 12, 2016. Staff
concurred and added that a second joint meeting might be useful
subsequent to the County’s listening sessions to regroup and ensure that
both the County and the Town are up to speed and informed. Town
Administrator Lancaster commented the Town of Estes Park and Larimer
County have a unique relationship in regard to the Estes Valley Planning
Commission (EVPC) and said better communication between the Board of
County Commissioners and the Town Board would be beneficial when
Community Development / Community Services – November 19, 2015 – Page 2
considering code changes and other legislative issues and suggested
exploring options for better communication such as bi-monthly meetings.
o Falcon Ridge – Construction issues related to the improper installation of
trusses have resulted in additional work, additional cost, and the need for
revised engineering reports.
o Stanley Lot 4 – A special EVPC meeting will be held on December 9,
2015, for special review of the amended development application which
would locate the Wellness Center on the lower level of the
accommodations building and add a fourth story to the structure, requiring
a height variance. A special Town Board meeting will be held on
December 15, 2015, to receive the EVPC recommendations. Outside
consultants are in the process of reviewing the special review application
and the construction plans. An agreement will outline how the Stanley will
reimburse the Town for the costs associated with the use of these outside
consultants. Additionally, a hold harmless agreement between the Town
of Estes Park and the Stanley is being drafted. As construction continues
on the site, the agreement will state that the Town is not responsible for
expenses or additional costs that may be incurred related to compliance
with Town codes. Town Administrator Lancaster noted that continuing
construction on the site is allowed by the International Building Code (IBC)
however the Stanley is moving forward at their own risk.
COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT.
REPORTS.
Reports provided for informational purposes and made a part of the proceedings.
Event Report – The Fall Back Beer Festival held on October 31st was a success,
however, attendance numbers were slightly lower than last year. Coordinator
Jacobson said that some reevaluation and adjustments to the event will occur in
2016 related to the Town’s role and production of the event. The series of holiday
events will kick off on Saturday, November 21st with the 5th annual tree lighting
ceremony. A sneak peek at the Catch the Glow parade will be held on Monday,
November 23rd, the parade itself will take place on Friday, November 27th and
Winterfest will be held in January 2016.
Manager Lynch reported that she attend a sporting event expo in Las Vegas recently
which generated leads and interest in the Event Center ranging from a cheerleading
camp, a dance competition, and a corn hole toss tournament. She will provide a
more detailed report related to contracts for use of the Event Center and Pavilion at
the next CDCS Committee meeting.
Verbal Updates –
o Shuttle Report – Free trolley service will be offered from noon until 8 p.m.
on Friday, November 27th for parade attendees, from West Park Center to
the Visitors Center; and again to provide transportation on Saturday,
November 28th from Bond Park and the Visitors Center to the Event
Center for Santa’s workshop activities.
o Fairgrounds and Events Director Selection – One final interview will be
conducted via Skype. A background check on the final candidate will be
conducted and a job offer will likely be made in early December.
o Town of Estes Park’s Centennial Celebration – The first Centennial
planning meeting was held on November 18th. Museum staff is leading
the Centennial planning efforts.
There being no further business, Chair Ericson adjourned the meeting at 9:17 a.m.
Cynthia Deats, Deputy Town Clerk
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Special Meeting of the Estes Valley Board of Adjustment
September 1, 2015 9:00 a.m.
Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall
Board: Chair Pete Smith, Vice-Chair Don Darling, Members Wayne Newsom,
John Lynch, and Jeff Moreau
Attending: Chair Smith, Members Darling, Lynch, Newsom and Moreau
Also Attending: Planner Kleisler, Recording Secretary Thompson
Absent: None
Chair Smith called the meeting to order at 9:00 a.m. There were two people in
attendance. He introduced the Board members and staff.
The following minutes reflect the order of the agenda and not necessarily the chronological
sequence.
1. PUBLIC COMMENT
None.
2. CONSENT AGENDA
Approval of minutes from the July 28, 2015 special meeting
It was moved and seconded (Newsom/Moreau) to approve the Consent Agenda as
presented and the motion passed unanimously.
3. LOT 1, VISITOR CENTER SUBDIVISION LESS PORTION IN TAX DISTRICT
3300, 500 Big Thompson Avenue
Planner Kleisler reviewed the staff report. He stated the applicant was the Town of Estes
Park, and there were two variance requests regarding the proposed Estes Park Transit
Facility and Parking Structure. The proposed four-story structure would be located south
and across the river from the existing Estes Park Visitor Center, and would utilize existing
access from Highway 36. Planner Kleisler noted that due to an amendment to the Estes
Valley Development Code approximately 18 months ago, any projects requiring variances
are heard by the Board of Adjustment following all other board hearings (Planning
Commission, Town Board, and/or County Commission). The Planning Commission
approved the Development Plan for this project on August 18, 2015.
Planner Kleisler stated the initial submittal included an alteration to the parking stall
dimensions. Staff identified the Planning Commission had the authority to approve the
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Board of Adjustment – Special Meeting 2
September 1, 2015
modification to those standards, so that variance will not be coming to this board. There
are two variances being reviewed today: Section 4.4.D.2.a, which requires the main
entrance of all buildings in the CD–Commercial Downtown zone district be oriented to the
frontage highway. The intent of that provision is to have all the shops facing the street. In
this case, it doesn’t make sense to have the opening to the structure oriented to the
highway. Other variance requests are for building height and setback. Planner Kleisler
stated the proposed roof of the main stair tower would extend 32 feet above grade, with
the light poles extending 47.5 feet above grade once the final level is complete.
Regarding the setback variance request, the CD zone district has a minimum and
maximum setback to encourage a building wall downtown. In this case, there is no
building wall on either side of the property. Planner Kleisler stated the Town has worked
with the Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) to satisfy their needs. At this time, the proposed
structure complies with the setback standards; however, staff suggests allowing a setback
variance in case the BOR requests additional revisions and recommends changing the
final location of the structure.
Planner Kleisler stated a variance for a proposed parking structure was approved in early
2014. That project would have put the structure on the north side of the river in the Visitor
Center parking lot. After further review, it was determined the better site would be on the
south side of the river. The intent remains the same.
Planner Kleisler stated land ownership and zoning of this project are unique; a portion of
the proposed site is owned by the Town of Estes Park, and the other portion is federally-
owned land currently being managed by the Estes Valley Recreation and Parks District as
part of the nine-hole golf course. There are two zone districts involved, CD–Commercial
Downtown and CO-Commercial Outlying. Most of the proposed structure is in the CO
district. To the northwest of the proposed structure is commercial property, while single-
family residential zoning is to the south. Although the residential district is just across the
street, there is a significant difference in elevation (homes sit much higher than the
proposed project). In the early stages of the review process, it had to be determined
whether to review it as being in CD or CO zone district. After much thought and staff
discussion, it was decided to review it according to the CD–Commercial Downtown review
standards. Planner Kleisler stated the BOR has the final say as to the location and site
design, as the majority of the structure will be on federal land. The existing entrance
location will remain, as will the existing surface parking spaces.
Regarding the height variance, Planner Kleisler stated building height will be just over 26
feet above grade at full build-out. However, approximately 500 square feet of roof over the
main stairwell would extend to approximately 32 feet at build-out. Additionally, light poles
for the top level are proposed at 47.5 feet above grade. Planner Kleisler explained that,
similar to the initial approved variance, lighting would be necessary to address security
needs, but measures are being taken to minimize impacts to the neighborhood. Due to
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Board of Adjustment – Special Meeting 3
September 1, 2015
the existing topography, much of Phase I (ground level plus one additional level) would be
naturally screened from the highway. The Town held public meetings to explain the
design of the project, including the height.
Planner Kleisler stated the application was routed to affected agencies and adjacent
property owners in at least a 1000-foot radius from the proposed site. No concerns were
addressed by affected agencies, and as of August 24, 2015, no public comments were
received.
Planner Kleisler stated this project will be considered an entryway into downtown, and the
applicant has worked to keep the variances minimized. There will be planters along the
highway side to provide a positive aesthetical entrance to the downtown area. Because
the proposed structure is nestled in between the highway and the river, there is little room
to rotate the structure and create an entrance on the front. Because of that, the code
standard requiring the entrance on the front did not fit well with this unique project; thus,
the reason for the variance request.
Staff Findings
1. Special circumstances or conditions exist:
Staff found that special circumstances and conditions exist. The purpose of having a
maximum setback in the CD district is to ensure a continuous “commercial street wall”.
In this particular area, there is no established street wall, as is found in the central
downtown area. Furthermore, the site is nestled between the highway and river,
limiting site design options.
2. In determining “practical difficulty”:
a. Whether there can be any beneficial use of the property without the variance;
Staff found the existing surface parking lot could remain
b. Whether the variance is substantial;
Staff found the variance was not substantial
c. Whether the essential character of the neighborhood would not be substantially
altered or whether adjoining properties would suffer a substantial detriment as a
result of the variance;
Staff found the essential character of the neighborhood would not be
substantially altered with the approval of this variance. Similar to the original
variance request, the applicant proposes to ensure that lighting meets the
functional and security needs of the structure, while minimizing impacts to
adjacent properties. Unlike the original submittal, the existing grade on this site
will naturally screen most of the first two levels from the public street, thus
creating much less of a visual impact.
d. Whether the variance would adversely affect the delivery of public services such as
water and sewer;
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Board of Adjustment – Special Meeting 4
September 1, 2015
Affected agencies expressed no concerns relating to public services for this
variance.
e. Whether the applicant purchased the property with knowledge of the requirement;
The applicant will lease this property from the Federal government.
f. Whether the applicant’s predicament can be mitigated through some method other
than a variance.
Given the highway and river location, the proposed structure location is the best
fit for the site.
3. No variance shall be granted if the submitted conditions or circumstances affecting the
applicant’s property are of so general or recurrent a nature as to make reasonably
practicable the formulation of a general regulation for such conditions or situations;
Staff found the conditions as submitted in this variance petition are not general or
recurrent in nature.
4. No variance shall be granted reducing the size of lots contained in an existing or
proposed subdivision if it will result in an increase in the number of lots…
Staff found the variance, if granted, will not reduce the size of the lot.
5. If authorized, a variance shall represent the least deviation from the regulations that
will afford relief.
Staff found the variance represents the least deviation from the regulations that will
afford relief. The applicant has shown good faith by adjusting the size and layout of
the structure in part to achieve code compliance.
6. Under no circumstances shall the Board of Adjustment grant a variance to allow a use
not permitted, or a use expressly or by implication prohibited…
As with the original proposal, a single use is proposed; Park and Ride Facility,
which is a Use-by-Right in the CD–Commercial Downtown district.
7. In granting such variance, the Board of Adjustment may require such conditions as
will, in its independent judgment, securre substantially the objectives of the standard
so varied or modified;
Should the variance be obtained, staff recommends that a registered land surveyor
verify building placement and height.
Planner Kleisler stated staff recommended approval with one condition, listed below.
Staff and Applicant Discussion
Greg Muhonen/Public Works Director for the Town of Estes Park stated a service road
will be built so the BOR can access the area for maintenance at the flume, and also serve
as an access for emergency vehicles. Adjustments will be made to the existing roadway
to accommodate the access. He stated the existing parking lot is roughly eight feet lower
than the highway.
There was lengthy discussion concerning the size of the parking stalls. Comments
included but were not limited to: cars coming to Estes Park are not getting any smaller;
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Board of Adjustment – Special Meeting 5
September 1, 2015
there are a lot of SUVs and pickups; following the development review at the August
Planning Commission meeting, where the Commission discussed allocating certain areas
for larger vehicles, the design team met and identified such spaces, taking spaces for
electric vehicles down and little and adding it on to other spaces; wall lighting is more
intrusive than pole lighting; Walker Parking Consultants hired a lighting consultant, and
the current proposal has the least impact of all the options investigated; wall lighting
would produce glare if you are looking down from above (Stanley Hotel, residences to the
south, etc.); the proposed lighting also enhances the level of security through photo
recognition, which would not work if wall lighting was used; lighting will be dimmed if the
structure is not being used; Member Moreau lives across the street from the fairgrounds,
and was concerned that similar light pollution would exist at the new parking structure;
Member Muhonen recognized the issue with light pollution and wasted energy when lights
are on unnecessarily, and would hope they could be on a timer. He will discuss the
fairgrounds situation with the utilities department.
Additional discussion occurred concerning the location of the entrance, and how traffic will
be affected during peak periods. Comments included but were not limited to: the Traffic
Impact Analysis identified long delays during peak periods; the worst case scenario would
be installing a traffic signal; the good news is that vehicle backups will be fully contained
on the site; long term, the Town may want to look into some form of intersection control,
e.g. a signal or roundabout; the entrance is geographically situated to the other two
stoplights in the area so a signal could be placed at the entrance; during peak periods the
Town could require a right turn or obtain assistance from the Police Department to direct
traffic; if a Do Not Block Intersection sign was installed, it would allow better movement of
traffic wanting to turn left out of the structure; a traffic signal could be installed, but only
activated during peak periods; no fees are currently proposed, and if fees were charged, a
revenue-sharing agreement would have to be in place with the BOR; guests will be
encouraged to park in the structure and take the shuttle or walk downtown; one idea is to
have free parking at the parking structure and possibly charge guests to park closer to
downtown in the smaller lots; no decisions have been made concerning paid parking;
encouraged the Town to fill the lower levels first to minimize the need for lighting the
upper level; at this time, there is only enough money to build the ground level plus one;
the applicant is requesting approval for the entire four-level structure so it doesn’t have to
be reviewed again and construction can move forward at a quicker pace; the Town has
not been allowed to design the details until all environmental clearances have been
granted; signage will be created to direct pedestrians to the underpass under Highway 36;
the lighting of the project has not been finalized for how it will be phased; if a particular
grant is awarded for the structure, it would pay for the entire project; if the Town is not
awarded the grant, lighting would probably be added in phases; the applicant will have a
three-year vesting period that goes with the development plan approval.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Board of Adjustment – Special Meeting 6
September 1, 2015
There was brief discussion concerning the vesting rights. Planner Kleisler stated the time
period would probably not be an issue because the Estes Valley Development Code was
amended to allow variances associated with development plans to have a three-year
vesting period. The time period for a variance approval without a development plan is one
year. It was determined that project vesting would lapse with the development plan
vesting.
There was additional discussion regarding lighting and the ability to have the lights
dimmed or turned off when not in use, especially during the winter when the parking lot
would less utilized. It was noted that these design questions were out of the purview of
the Board. Member Moreau reiterated his concern that the lighting would be similar to the
fairgrounds, and suggested some condition of approval to address a successful lighting
plan. Director Muhonen stated his desire is to close off the top level during snow season
to avoid the need for plowing, lighting, etc. He will think about the concept and discuss it
with other affected agencies.
Conditions of Approval
1. Setback and height certificates shall be required.
2. Project vesting shall lapse with the development plan vesting.
3. Exterior lighting shall be reduced; activated by motion sensor device, turned off, or
dimmed from midnight to dawn.
Planner Kleisler stated initial setback and height certificates will be required, based on the
location and height of the foundation. After a Certificate of Occupancy is issued, a second
height certificate will be required to verify the completed height.
It was moved and seconded (Moreau/ Lynch) to approve the requested variances as
written with the findings and conditions recommended by staff and the Board, and
the motion passed unanimously.
4. REPORTS
Planner Kleisler stated there will be no October meeting.
There being no other business before Board, the meeting was adjourned at 9:55 a.m.
___________________________________
Pete Smith, Chair
__________________________________
Karen Thompson, Recording Secretary
FINANCE DEPARTMENT
Memo
To: Honorable Mayor Pinkham
Board of Trustees
Town Administrator Lancaster
From: Steve McFarland, Finance Officer
Date: December 8, 2015
RE: 2015 Financial Audit Clifton Larson Allen Engagement Letter
Objective:
Staff seeks approval for the signing of the 2015 Financial Audit Engagement Letter with
CliftonLarsenAllen.
Present Situation:
The Town has completed year 3 of 5 of its engagement with CliftonLarsenAllen as the
Town’s independent auditor. The Audit Committee minutes of June 25, 2015,
subsequently approved by consent in the July 14, 2015, Board Meeting, recommended
that the Town continue its engagement with CliftonLarsenAllen for the 2015 audit and
Comprehensive Annual Financial Report.
With the engagement of CliftonLarsenAllen approved, the Engagement Letter needs to
be signed by the Mayor in order for work to commence.
Proposal:
Staff requests that the Mayor sign the 2015 Engagement Letter so that work may
commence on the 2015 Audit process.
Advantages:
The Town will be able to move forward with year 4 of 5 with CliftonLarsenAllen as its
auditors.
Disadvantages:
The Town would have to “RFP” its audit services for 2015. This would create a serious
time “crunch” finding a replacement at this late date.
Action Recommended:
Staff requests that the Mayor sign the 2015 Audit Engagement Letter, as the Board
approved the continuation of the CliftonLarsenAllen contract for the 2015 Audit process
at the July 14, 2015, Board meeting.
Budget:
The Audit work is divided between the General (Finance Department), Light & Power,
and Water Funds. Visit Estes Park also pays for its share of the Audit work performed,
as they appear in the Town’s Comprehensive Annual Financial Report as a component
unit.
Level of Public Interest
The public is probably pleased to know that the Town is independently audited in
accordance with State law. There is probably minor interest in which independent
auditing firm is used to accomplish this task.
Sample Motion:
N/A
Attachments:
2015 Engagement Letter is included with this memo.
Town Clerk Memo
1
To: Honorable Mayor Pinkham
Board of Trustees
Town Administrator Lancaster
From: Jackie Williamson, Town Clerk
Date: December 4, 2015
RE: Appointment of Reuben Bergsten to the Platte River Power Authority
Objective:
To reappoint Reuben Bergsten for an additional 4-year term on the Platte River Power
Authority (PRPA) Board of Directors.
Present Situation:
Utilities Director Bergsten was appointed by the Town Board to serve on the PRPA
Board of Directors for a 4-year term expiring on December 31, 2015.
Proposal:
Staff and Mayor Pinkham recommend the reappointment of Director Bergsten to the
PRPA Board of Directors for an additional 4-year term expiring on December 31, 2019.
Director Bergsten has served on the Board successfully and represented the Town
effectively.
Advantages:
To fill a Town of Estes Park vacancy on the PRPA Board of Directors.
The reappointment of Director Bergsten would allow a continuity of knowledge and
understanding of PRPA as the mayoral appointment changes in April with Mayor
Pinkham completing his second term as mayor.
Disadvantages:
None.
Action Recommended:
Reappointment of Reuben Bergsten to the PRPA Board of Directors for a 4-year term
expiring on December 31, 2019.
Budget: None.
Level of Public Interest Low.
Sample Motion:
I move to approve/deny the reappointment of Reuben Bergsten to the Platte River
Power Authority Board of Directors for a 4-year term expiring December 31, 2019.
TOWN CLERK Memo
To: Honorable Mayor Pinkham
Board of Trustees
Town Administrator Lancaster
From: Jackie Williamson, Town Clerk
Date: December 8, 2015
RE: Liquor Licensing: New Tavern Liquor License Application for La Cabana
Mexican Bar & Grill, LLC dba La Cabana Mexican Bar & Grill, 165 Virginia
Drive Unit 18-1 and 18-2, Estes Park, Colorado
Objective:
Approval of a new Tavern liquor license located at 165 Virginia Drive Units 18-1 and 18-
2, Estes Park, Colorado. Application filed by La Cabana Mexican Bar & Grill, LLC dba
La Cabana Mexican Bar & Grill.
Present Situation:
An application for a new Tavern liquor license was received by the Town Clerk’s office
on October 28, 2015. All necessary paperwork and fees were submitted; please see
the attached Procedure for Hearing on Application – New Liquor License for additional
information. The applicant is aware of the Town Board’s Training for Intervention
Procedures (TIPS) requirement and has not yet completed the training.
The liquor license application has been sent to the Colorado Department of Revenue
Liquor Enforcement Division (LED) for a concurrent review as requested by the
applicant. This allows the LED to review the application simultaneously with the Town
and expedites the issuance of the new liquor license.
Proposal:
Town Board review and consideration of the application for a new Tavern liquor license.
Advantages:
Approval of the license provides the business owner with the opportunity to operate a
liquor-licensed establishment in the Town of Estes Park.
Disadvantages:
The owner is denied a business opportunity to serve alcohol to patrons of the
restaurant.
Action Recommended:
Approval of the application for a new Tavern liquor license.
Budget:
The fee paid to the Town of Estes Park for a new Tavern Liquor license is $1319. The
fee covers the administrative costs related to processing the application, background
checks, and business licensing. In addition, the annual renewal fee payable to the
Town of Estes Park for a Tavern Liquor license is $869.
Level of Public Interest
Low
Sample Motion:
The Board of Trustees finds that the reasonable requirements of the neighborhood
are/are not met by the present liquor outlets in the neighborhood and that the desires of
the adult inhabitants are/are not for the granting of this liquor license. Based upon
these findings, I move that the application for a new Tavern Liquor license filed by La
Cabana Mexican Bar & Grill, LLC dba La Cabana Mexican Bar & Grill be
approved/denied.
Attachments:
1. Procedure for Hearing
1
July 2002
PROCEDURE FOR HEARING ON APPLICATION
NEW LIQUOR LICENSE
1. MAYOR.
The next order of business will be the public hearing on the application of La Cabana
Mexican Bar & Grill, LLC dba LA CABANA MEXICAN BAR AND GRILL for a New
Tavern Liquor License located at 165 Virginia Drive Units 18-1 and 18-2.
At this hearing, the Board of Trustees shall consider the facts and evidence
determined as a result of its investigation, as well as any other facts, the reasonable
requirements of the neighborhood for the type of license for which application has
been made, the desires of the adult inhabitants, the number, type and availability of
liquor outlets located in or near the neighborhood under consideration, and any other
pertinent matters affecting the qualifications of the applicant for the conduct of the type
of business proposed.
OPEN PUBLIC HEARING
2. TOWN CLERK. Will present the application and confirm the following:
The application was filed October 28, 2015.
At a meeting of the Board of Trustees on November 24, 2015, the public hearing
was set for 7:00 p.m. on Tuesday, December 8, 2015.
The neighborhood boundaries for the purpose of this application and hearing
were established to be 2.9 miles.
The Town has received all necessary fees and hearing costs.
The applicant is filing as an LLC.
The property is zoned CD – Downtown Commercial which allows this
type of business as a permitted use.
The notice of hearing was published on November 27, 2015 .
The premises was posted on November 16, 2015 .
2
There is a police report with regard to the investigation of the applicant.
Status of T.I.P.S. Training:
X Unscheduled ____ Scheduled Completed
There is a map indicating all liquor outlets presently in the Town of Estes Park
available upon request.
3. APPLICANT.
The applicants will be allowed to state their case and present any evidence they
wish to support the application.
4. OPPONENTS.
The opponents will be given an opportunity to state their case and present any
evidence in opposition to the application.
The applicant will be allowed a rebuttal limited to the evidence presented by the
opponents. No new evidence may be submitted.
5. MAYOR.
Ask the Town Clerk whether any communications have been received in regard
to the application and, if so, to read all communication.
Indicate that all evidence presented will be accepted as part of the record.
Ask the Board of Trustees if there are any questions of any person speaking at
any time during the course of this hearing.
Declare the public hearing closed.
6. SUGGESTED MOTION:
Finding and Motion. The Board of Trustees finds that the reasonable requirements
of the neighborhood are/are not met by the present liquor outlets in the neighborhood
and that the desires of the adult inhabitants are/are not for the granting of this liquor
license. Based upon these findings, I move that this license be granted/denied.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Memo
To: Honorable Mayor Pinkham
Board of Trustees
Town Administrator Lancaster
From: Audem Gonzales, Planner I
Date: December 8, 2015
RE: AMENDED PLAT, Lot 26, Little Prospect Mountain Addition;
531 Highland Lane; Robert Shipman/Owner
Objective:
Review of the Amended Plat application for compliance with the Estes Valley
Development Code (EVDC).
Present Situation:
A portion of Lot 26 is owned by Robert Shipman and is developed with a single -family
home. His property consists of two separate parcels zoned E Estate and is within the
Town of Estes Park limits.
The existing home straddles the common property line betwe en the two parcels. The
applicant wishes to build a detached garage west of the home. The Little Prospect
Mountain Subdivision was created in January 1938 by a plat of record. Since then, Lot
26 has been legally divided up several times. No new lots are being created with this
application.
Proposal:
This is a request to combine two (2) parcels into one legal lot. A building permit for a
detached garage was applied for in July of 2015. It was found that the property
consisted of two separate parcels. The proposed garage did not meet the 10 foot
setback requirement from the common property line, therefore a separate lot
determination was requested and it was found that the two parcels were legally created.
In order to build the garage at this location an amendment to the plat is needed.
Advantages:
Complies with EVDC.
Advances the purpose of subdivision standards by providing lots of reasonable utility
and livability.
Disadvantages:
None.
Action Recommended:
On November 17, 2015, the Estes Valley Planning Commission voted 7-0 to
recommend approval of the Amended Plat application with the findings and conditions
recommended by staff:
Relabel the preliminary and final plat from Lot 26 -A to a description not used
on any previous plat maps for this subdivision.
Note: condition has been satisfied
Budget:
N/A
Level of Public Interest:
Low. The Planning Commission received no comments for this item during the public
hearing and no written comments have been received (as of November 4, 2015). If
such comments are received they will be posted to www.estes.org/currentapplications.
Sample Motion:
I move to APPROVE (or deny) the Lot 26, Little Prospect Mountain Addition Amended
Plat application, with the findings and conditions recommended by the Planning
Commission.
Attachments:
1. Proposed Amended Plat
2. Planning Commission Staff Report
FINANCE DEPT Memo
To: Honorable Mayor Pinkham
Board of Trustees
Town Administrator Lancaster
From: Steve McFarland, Finance Officer
Date: December 8th, 2015
RE: Resolution #24-15, 2015 Supplemental Budget Appropriations
Background:
At the end of each calendar/fiscal year, the Town is required to assess and if necessary,
amend the current budget to account for any funds that have exceeded their originally
approved expenditure levels. Budget overages are often the result of Board-approved
opportunities taken throughout the year which did not exist at the time of the budget
creation. In many instances, the expenditures have revenue offset.
Accounting for Flood-related activity
This year’s actual data continues to be affected by the September 2013 Flood repair
work, but also by various projects and opportunities arising during 2015. There were 2
options in regards to displaying flood-related activity. The Town could have elected to
only show costs for the current year. The benefit to this option is that a more accurate
reporting of actual activity would occur. The downside is that it would only provide a
snapshot of the multiyear projects, without context of total multi-year project
expenditures. The Town therefore elected to report ALL of the projected flood-related
activity in one year. This knowingly inflated both revenues and expenditures (most of
which offset within 15% of one another), distorting the financial picture for 2015, but
providing full disclosure for the entire scope of projects. The downside of this strategy is
that 1) the 2015 Budget scope is overstated, and 2) costs not incurring in 2015 will need
to be restated in early 2016.
Explanation of proposed revenue/expenditure modifications
The following pages contain explanations for the proposed Supplemental Appropriations
to the 2015 Budget.
The attached spreadsheet is divided into two sections.
The first section of the document reports revenues/transfers in.
A. Column A reports 2015 “revenues/transfers in” as forecasted in the original 2015
budget, approved in November 2014.
B. Column B reports 2015 “revenues/transfers in” as estimated as of December 3,
2015.
C. Column C reports the variance between columns A and B.
Specific revenue (includes transfers in) comments:
a. General Fund revenue forecasts have been significantly adjusted due to
the following components.
i. Sales tax has been increased 10% ($840,000).
ii. MPEC revenues were reduced from $490,000 to ~ $75,000.
iii. With the extent and timing/duration of flood costs still in great flux,
Staff attempted to estimate ALL of the flood-related
reimbursement/assistant monies into 2015 midyear, regardless of
whether or not it was likely to occur in 2015. While this inflated both
revenues and expenditures for 2015, it did allow for an easier
review of the scope of flood-related activity, than if the projects had
been spread over multiple years. The flood-related activity
estimates totaled ~$5,400,000. More than 50% of these costs
(mainly construction costs on Fish Creek) and reimbursements will
NOT occur in 2015. Staff will restate 2016 Budgets as soon as
information becomes available on 2015.
b. The Community Reinvestment Fund (CRF) revenues are revised
upwards in excess of $3,100,000 because the Parking Structure and its
accompanying grants were extended from 2014 into 2015. This is not
new money; it is merely restated. Revenues were also increased due to
the $310,000 transfer from the General Fund to assist in completing the
Elm Road Landfill mitigation project.
c. Open Space Fund revenues have been revised upwards due primarily to
grants related to Scott Ponds ($850,000) and Hydroplant Riverbank
Restoration (~$235,000). Revenues were also increased $60,000
resulting from a forecasted increase in sales tax.
d. The 1A Funds (Emergency Response, Community Center, Trails, Streets)
all show revenue increases corresponding to the same percentage (10%)
as the General Fund sales tax increase. Trails also has a $100,000 grant
(Fall River Trail) that was moved from CRF. Streets is now housing the
$4,200,000 RAMP monies.
e. Light & Power revenues are expected to exceed original expectations.
Most of this is due to increased usage, but there is also a portion
(~$80,000) attributable to expected FEMA reimbursements.
f. Water revenues have been increased to reflect tap fees for the Falcon
Ridge project.
g. Medical Fund revenues have actually been restated downwards – Staff
overestimated by corresponding amounts, both revenues and expenses in
this fund. The net change to the Fund is ~$0.
h. IT Fund revenues have increased due to an increased estimate in
fiberoptic lease money.
The second section of the document reports expenditures. The columns include:
A) The original 2015 Budget as approved in November 2014,
B) The supplemental appropriation that occurred during the year (rollovers from
2014):
C) The sum of columns A and B (the 2015 Budget as revised to include the 2014
rollovers)
D) The projected final expenditures for 2015 (the grey column is the focal point of
the document, and is the revised total 2015 expenditures being requested for
approval),
E) Whether or not column D (new forecast) exceeds column C (original forecast).
Explanation of variances in expenditures – 2015 was an active year for financial activity
of the Town. Whereas there are usually 1 or 2 funds require additional appropriations, 7
out of 15 Funds will need additional appropriations for 2015. Explanations are as
follows:
a. The General Fund is forecasted to exceed the original 2015 Budget by
~$5,100,000. This amount is the companion piece to the aforementioned increased
revenue forecast for flood-related activity. At least half of this amount with NOT occur in
2015, and will be restated into 2016 as soon as the “dust settles” on 2015.
b. The Community Reinvestment Fund (CRF) budget has increased due to
finalized costs from the Elm Road Landfill mitigation project, and the restatement of the
Parking Structure project (lifted from 2014 and placed into 2015).
c. The Conservation Trust Fund will finish under budget due to the
discontinuation of the Ice Rink program.
d. The Open Space Fund may exceed budgeted expenditures due to the
aforementioned Scott Ponds and Hyrdoplant Riverbank stabilization projects. Both are
grant-funded.
e. The 1A Funds are in various stages of implementing collected sales tax
monies. The Emergency Response Fund took the opportunity to utilize the increase
sales tax collected to implement additional EOC features/programs. The Trails Fund
expenses increased due to moving the Fall River Trail grant from CRF. Street Fund
expenditures were actually decreased as the actual costs and timelines of projects
materialized throughout the year.
f. The Utility Funds (Light and Power, Water) actual expenditures are
both expected to be less than originally budgeted. The L&P Fund is deferring some
capital projects to 2016.
g. The Medical Insurance Fund was originally over-budgeted by roughly
$470,000 in both revenues and expenditures (no change to fund balance), and has
been adjusted according
h. The Vehicle Replacement Fund will exceed original budget by roughly
$180,000. This is due to several vehicle purchases made during the year that involved
costs changes from original estimates.
Important information
In the case of all Funds, the proposed modifications / supplemental appropriations do
not jeopardize a positive fund balance in any Fund, nor do they adversely affect
required ratios in any Funds. The General Fund fund balance attracts significant
scrutiny/attention during the budget process. Approval of the 2015 revisions will leave
the General Fund with an estimated unrestricted fund balance at the end of 2016 of
~$2,800,000, or 18%.
Proposal:
Staff is seeking approval of the amended 2015 Budget and its accompanying
Resolution.
Advantages:
The Town will be able to operate within the framework of financial compliance as per
the State Auditor and County Treasurer’s Offices.
Disadvantages:
The disadvantage to not approving the Supplemental Budget for 2015 is that the Town
would be in violation of State budgetary laws, and the County Treasurer could withhold
the Town’s property tax revenues.
Action Recommended:
Staff recommends approval of the 2015 Amended Budget and its accompanying
Resolution.
Budget:
The entire 2015 Budget is affected/implemented with approval.
Level of Public Interest
Various sections of the 2015 Budget are probably of moderate to significant interest to
different organizations and citizens.
Sample Motion:
“I recommend approval of Resolution #24-15 to amend the 2015 Budget.
Attachments:
The previously cited Resolution is attached. In addition, a spreadsheet outlining
revenue and expenditure changes is attached.
RESOLUTION TO APPROPRIATE SUMS OF MONEY NO. 24-15
A RESOLUTION ADJUSTING APPROPRIATIONS
TO THE VARIOUS FUNDS AND SPENDING AGENCIES
IN THE AMOUNTS AND FOR THE PURPOSES AS
SET FORTH BELOW FOR THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO
FOR THE BUDGET YEAR BEGINNING ON THE
FIRST DAY OF JANUARY 2015, AND
ENDING ON THE LAST DAY OF DECEMBER 2015.
WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees of the Town of Estes Park has adopted the
annual 2015 budget in accordance with the Local Government Budget Law on
November 25th, 2014; and
WHEREAS, over the course of the fiscal year ending December 31, 2015, the
estimates included in the adopted budget have been revised to more accurately
represent the actual revenues and expenditures necessary to operate the government;
and
WHEREAS, it is not only required by law, but also necessary to appropriate the
revenues provided in the budget to and for the purposes described below, so as not to
impair the operations of the Town of Estes Park.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF
THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO:
That the following attached sums are hereby appropriated from the revenue of
each fund, to each fund, for the purposes stated.
ADOPTED this 8th day of December, 2015.
TOWN OF ESTES PARK
Mayor
ATTEST:
Town Clerk
AB C2015 Budget H.T.E. (12/03/15) Increase/(2015 Approved Budget)2015 EOY Estimate(Decrease)101 General 13,843,422 20,440,088 6,596,666204 Community Reinvestment 909,709 4,045,011 3,135,302211 Conservation Trust 32,500 33,181 681220 Larimer Cty Open Space 290,500 1,439,657 1,149,157236 Emergency Response 52,553 57,803 5,250238 Community Center 525,525 579,110 53,585244 Trails Expansion 262,763 389,555 126,792260 Streets 1,696,260 6,031,287 4,335,027502 Light & Power 14,428,662 14,615,084 186,422503 Water 4,236,253 4,536,159 299,906606 Medical 2,410,750 1,932,970(477,780)612 Fleet 301,000 303,698 2,698625 Information Technology 559,427 610,152 50,725635 Vehicle Replacement608,821 635,229 26,408716 Theater 600 619 19 Total 40,158,745 55,649,603 15,490,858includes all sources of money inflow: revenues, proceeds from debt, transfers inABCDEOriginal 2015 Budgetsupplemental appropriations H.T.E. 2015 EOYDecrease/(Resolution #06‐15, 02/10/15) ('2015 budget')H.T.E 12/03/15(Increase)(A + B)Ending expenditures(C ‐ D)101 General 14,559,197 1,056,834 15,616,031 20,757,030(5,140,999)204 Community Reinvestment 2,214,782 1,097,622 3,312,404 7,166,874(3,854,470)211 Conservation Trust 66,936 0 66,936 48,678 18,258220 Larimer Cty Open Space 540,460 0 540,460 1,451,551(911,091)236 Emergency Response 60,000 0 60,000 75,684(15,684)238 Community Center 0 0 0 0 0244 Trails Expansion 0 0 0 347,048(347,048)260 Streets 2,899,064 0 2,899,064 693,418 2,205,646502 Light & Power 18,175,279 779,265 18,954,544 17,780,935 1,173,609503 Water 4,976,502 1,011,662 5,988,164 5,879,778 108,386606 Medical 2,406,250 0 2,406,250 1,935,116 471,134612 Fleet 413,291 0 413,291 400,515 12,776625 Information Technology 599,033 53,807 652,840 654,789(1,949)635 Vehicle Replacement765,752 432,834 1,198,586 1,377,174(178,588)716 Theater 0 0 0 0 0 Totals 47,676,546 4,432,024 52,108,570 58,568,590(6,460,020)all funds include total expenditures and transfers outINFORMATION FOR SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATION TO 2015 BUDGETREVENUES/TRANSFER INEXPENDITURES/TRANSFERS OUT
FIRST AMENDMENT TO LEASE AGREEMENT
THIS FIRST AMENDMENT TO LEASE AGREEMENT is effective the 1st day
of January, 2016, between the TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO (Lessor) and
ESTES VALLEY RECREATION AND PARK DISTRICT (Lessee).
RECITALS
1. The Lessor and Lessee are the parties to an Intergovernmental Agreement
dated April 26, 2005, First Amendment to Intergovernmental Agreement dated
June 8, 2010, and the Second Amendment to Intergovernmental Agreement
dated July 21, 2015 (collectively the “Intergovernmental Agreement”).
2. The Intergovernmental Agreement provides for the operation of the Youth
Center.
3. The term of the Intergovernmental Agreement expires December 31, 2015.
4. The Youth Center is located on the premises described in the Lease
Agreement.
5. The parties desire to incorporate certain provisions of the Intergovernmental
Agreement in the Lease Agreement upon the expiration of the
Intergovernmental Agreement.
NOW THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THE FOREGOING, the
Lessor and Lessee amend the Lease Agreement as follows:
1. Upon the expiration of the Intergovernmental Agreement, the Youth Center
shall be a recreational facility as provided in the Lease Agreement and
subject to the terms and conditions of the Lease Agreement.
2. Section 5 Building Insurance shall read as follows:
Lessor and Lessee shall provide the following insurance coverages:
a. Lessee shall maintain in full force and effect, at Lessee’s sole expense, a
policy or policies of general liability and auto liability insurance in the
amount of no less than Five Million Dollars ($5,000,000) per
claim/occurrence covering the premises, all structures thereon, and all
2
uses therein. Lessee shall have Lessor included as an “Additional
Insured” on said policy. Within thirty days after execution of this First
Amendment to Lease Agreement and annually thereafter within thirty days
of the renewal of said policy or policies, Lessee shall cause to be provided
to Lessor a Certificate of Insurance evidencing such coverage and such
“Additional Insured” status. Lessee shall also require any sublessee of the
premises, or of any structures thereon of any portion thereof, to meet the
requirements of this paragraph.
b. Lessee shall carry Property Coverage for all structures and contents within
the premises. Lessee shall include Lessor as a loss payee on such
coverage as the respective interests of Lessor and Lessee may appear.
Within thirty days after execution of this First Amendment to Lease
Agreement and annually thereafter, within thirty days of the renewal of
said policy or policies, Lessee shall cause to be provided to Lessor a
Certificate of Insurance evidencing such coverage and such loss payee
status. Lessee shall also require any sublessee within the Youth Center to
meet the requirements of this paragraph.
c. Lessee shall maintain workers’ compensation insurance coverage during
the term of this Agreement in compliance with the Colorado Workers’
Compensation Law. Lessee shall also require that all independent
contractors providing any labor or services with respect to the premises
and structures thereon maintain workers’ compensation insurance
coverage in accordance with the Colorado Workers’ Compensation Law.
3. Section 6 shall read as follows:
Indemnification. To the extent permitted by law, Lessee agrees to indemnify,
hold harmless, and defend Lessor, its officers, agents and employees, from
and against all liability for any and all claims, liens, suits, demands or action
for damages, injuries to persons, including death, property damage, including
loss of use, and expenses, including court costs and reasonable attorneys’
fees arising out of or resulting from Lessee’s intentional or negligent actions
and/or omissions with respect to the premises and structures thereon and/or
uses thereof under the terms and conditions of this Agreement. Lessee shall
include in any sublease of any portion of the premises or structures thereof or
portions thereof an indemnification requirement reflecting the requirements of
this paragraph.
4. All other terms and conditions of the Lease Agreement shall remain in full
force and effect.
3
LESSOR:
TOWN OF ESTES PARK
___________________________
By: Mayor
ATTEST
__________________________
Town Clerk,
STATE OF COLORADO )
)ss.
COUNTY OF LARIMER )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ______ day of
_______________, 20___, by William Pinkham, Mayor of the Town of Estes Park.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
My commission expires: ______________________
_______________________
Notary Public
4
LESSEE:
ESTES VALLEY RECREATION AND PARK
DISTRICT
___________________________
By: Executive Director
STATE OF COLORADO )
)ss.
COUNTY OF LARIMER )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ______ day of
_______________, 20____, by ______________________, Executive Director of the
Estes Valley Recreation and Park District.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
My commission expires: ______________________
_______________________
Notary Public
ADMINISTRATION Memo
To: Honorable Mayor Pinkham
Board of Trustees
Frank Lancaster, Town Administrator
From: Travis Machalek, Assistant Town Administrator
Date: December 8, 2015
RE: 2016 Intergovernmental Agreement between Visit Estes Park and the
Town of Estes Park
Objective:
To obtain approval for the Town to enter into an intergovernmental agreement (IGA)
with Visit Estes Park.
Present Situation:
The IGA between the Town of Estes Park and Visit Estes Park is reviewed on an annual
basis. While the IGA does not need to be renewed each year, any proposed changes
that come out of the annual review must be approved by both Boards
This year, representatives from each organization met to discuss how the IGA could be
improved. Three major changes emerged from this conversation:
1) Instead of meeting “periodically” the Destination Leadership Group will meet on a
quarterly basis;
2) The Town will formally take responsibility for the management of the brochure
rack physical restocking process for 2016; and
3) The Town and Visit Estes Park will meet annually to review the Service Level
Agreement currently under development.
Advantages:
Defines responsibilities and clarifies roles of the Town and Visit Estes Park
Provides for quarterly meetings of the Destination Leadership group
Disadvantages:
None
Budget:
There is no direct budget impact from this item.
Level of Public Interest:
Staff expects a low level of public interest in this issue from the general community.
Recommended Motion:
I move to approve/not approve the 2016 intergovernmental agreement between the
Town of Estes Park and Visit Estes Park.
Attachments:
2016 Town – Visit Estes Park IGA
2016 Town – Visit Estes Park IGA (Copy with changes redlined)
1
INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE ESTES PARK LOCAL
MARKETING DISTRICT AND THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK
THIS INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT by and between the Estes Park
Local Marketing District (also known as Visit Estes Park), a Colorado Local Marketing District,
hereinafter referred to as the “LMD” and the TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO, a
Colorado statutory town, hereinafter referred to as “The Town”, is effective the 1st day of
January, 2016.
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, the LMD is a local marketing district organized to provide the services set
forth in Section 29-25-111 (1)(e)(I)(A), (B) and (C), C.R.S.; and
WHEREAS, the LMD was created pursuant to the provisions of Section 29-25-101 et
seq. C.R.S. and the Intergovernmental Agreement dated August 26, 2008 and all amendments
thereto between the Town and the Board of County Commissioners, Larimer County; and
WHEREAS, applicable provisions of the Colorado Constitution and the statutes of the
State of Colorado, specifically Section 29-20-101 et seq. C.R.S., authorize the LMD and the
Town to enter into mutually binding and enforceable agreements, including agreements
addressing the subject matter of this Agreement; and
WHEREAS, the Town and the LMD have determined that it is in the best interest of
both entities to accomplish the efficient provision of destination marketing as set forth in the
Operating Plan by the terms of this Intergovernmental Agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS UNDERSTOOD AND AGREED BETWEEN
THE PARTIES AS FOLLOWS:
1. Preamble. The Parties acknowledge that the recitals set forth above are true and correct,
and those recitals are hereby incorporated into this Agreement.
2. Effective Date. The Agreement shall be effective January 1, 2016.
3. LMD Employees Benefits Plan. To the extent permitted by law and the terms of
third party provider agreements, the Town shall allow LMD employees to be covered for
all current Town benefits (medical, dental, vision, EAP, health club, flex plans, life
insurance, AirMedCare, Teladoc, etc.). The LMD shall have the option to select the
individual Town benefit plans in which its employees shall be covered. This selection
shall be on an annual basis with the LMD providing the Town its selection of benefit
plans concurrent with the Town’s open enrollment period of each year to be effective
January 1 of the next year. The selection of individual benefit plans shall be subject to
the written approval of the Town, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld.
2
The parties agree that no retirement benefit plans for LMD employees are provided by
the Town to the LMD in this Agreement.
LMD employees shall only mean employees of the LMD and not members of the
LMD’s governing board.
The LMD shall pay to the Town an administrative fee equal to three percent (3%) of the
monthly cost of medical insurance premiums for the LMD employees.
In administering the benefit plans for the LMD, the Town shall pay the appropriate
sums for covered LMD employees to its third party providers at the beginning of each
calendar month. The Town will invoice the LMD for those payments. The LMD agrees
to reimburse the Town for those payments, plus the 3% administrative fee, within thirty
(30) days of receipt of the reimbursement invoice from the Town. It is specifically
understood by the LMD, that in the event that the reimbursement payment and the
administrative fee is not made to the Town within said thirty (30) day period, the Town
shall have the right to provide the LMD with a twenty (20) day notice of its intent to
terminate LMD employees from participation in the applicable benefit plans. If the
LMD does not pay the reimbursement amount and fee within the twenty (20) day notice
period, the Town shall have the right to immediately terminate participation of the LMD
employees from all benefit plans administered by the Town for the LMD pursuant to the
terms of this Agreement.
The LMD understands and agrees that the Town shall not be responsible for any human
resource/personnel matters as part of its benefit administration. Neither the LMD nor
its employees shall seek advice or counsel from the Town with regard to any human
resource/personnel issues concerning LMD employees. The LMD specifically waives
any claim against the Town and any individual employee, consultant, agent, or volunteer
of the Town for any act or omission in the performance or non-performance of its
benefit administration for LMD employees. In the event that any third party, including
any employee, agent or volunteer of the LMD, makes any claim, demand, lawsuit, or
takes any other action against the Town for an act or omission in performing its benefit
administration, the LMD agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the Town, its officers,
agents, volunteers and employees from and against any and all liability for any and all
claims, liens, suits, demands, actions for damages, including court costs and reasonable
attorney’s fees, arising out of or resulting from acts or omissions of the Town in the
benefit administration for LMD employees.
4. Destination Leadership. To facilitate effective and efficient marketing operations and
destination development, which are mutually beneficial to both parties, quarterly
meetings of two LMD Board members, two Town Board members, the LMD’s
President & CEO or designee and the Town Administrator or designee shall take place .
The Town and the LMD will alternate preparing the agenda for this meeting. The Town
will prepare the agenda for the Q1 and Q3 meetings, and the LMD will prepare the
agenda for the Q2 and Q4 meetings. The purpose of these meetings is to increase the
3
strategic-level communication between the LMD and the Town for the mutual goal of
advancing the destination for tourism and the economic vitality of the community.
5. Service Level Agreement. The parties agree to meet annually and negotiate in good
faith for the purposes of reaching an agreement regarding the minimum level of service
to visitors at the Visitors Center, including without limitation such topics as staffing,
hours of operation, Call Center operations, training on delivering the Estes Park brand
promise, and other topics of mutual concern to the parties.
6. Advertising Products. As Estes Park’s official destination marketing organization the
LMD is responsible for launching and managing marketing programs such as
VisitEstesPark.com web listings, Visit Estes Park social media, leads, etc. This includes
research, new product development, promotion, sales, servicing, fulfillment, invoicing,
and collections. Should advertising sale opportunities become present through the
shuttle system, which is a service provided by the Town of Estes Park, the Town if it so
chooses, may sell advertising to local businesses. The Town will advise the LMD of the
intent, and agrees that all advertisers must be located within the Marketing District
boundaries. Any deviation to this must be approved by the LMD Board of Directors.
7. Brochure Rack Display Management. The Town will manage the physical restocking
process for the brochure rack display until touch screens are installed in the Visitor
Center, or until the end of the 2016. If touch screens have not been installed in the
Visitor Center by the end of 2016, the Town and the LMD shall meet to reassess the
management of this process.
8. Photography. The LMD shall have authority to use all photographs collected, archived
and created by the Town of Estes Park prior to January 1, 2010 for uses related to
marketing and promotion and the LMD shall retain possession of said photographs for
those purposes. However, the Town of Estes Park shall have the ability to use and retain
possession of said photographs at their discretion. The LMD understands and agrees
that the use of any of the photographs may be subject to a copyright, trademark or other
restriction by the original owner/photographer of such photographs.
9. Annual Audit. If the Town determines, pursuant to applicable GASB Standards, that
the Town’s audit requires the inclusion of the LMD as part of the audit, the LMD shall
pay for the cost of the LMD’s portion of the Town’s audit expense. In return, the LMD
will receive a formal letter of compliance from the Town of Estes Park via their auditor.
10. Effective Date and Termination.
a. This Intergovernmental Agreement shall take effect on January 1, 2016, and shall
remain in full force and effect unless terminated earlier by mutual agreement of the
parties or as provided in subsection c. below. The parties agree that they shall review
the terms and conditions of this Agreement annually in anticipation of the
preparation of the annual Operating Plan by the LMD.
4
b. If, through any cause, either party fails to fulfill its obligations under this Agreement
in a timely and proper manner, violates any provision of this Agreement, or violates
any applicable law, the non-breaching party shall give the breaching party written
notice of said breach. The breaching party shall have thirty (30) days to correct the
breach. If the breaching party fails to correct the breach within said thirty (30) day
period, the non-breaching party shall have the right to terminate this Agreement for
cause.
c. Either party may terminate this Agreement upon ninety (90) days written notice prior
to the end of any calendar year. Said termination shall be effective as of the last day
of the applicable calendar year. If the Town terminates this Agreement, the Town
shall, to the extent permitted by law and the terms of its agreement(s) with third party
providers, allow the LMD to purchase Town benefits for the Employees for an
additional 180 days following the date of termination, as stated in Section 3.
11. Annual Appropriation. Nothing herein shall constitute a multiple fiscal year
obligation pursuant to the Colorado Constitution, Article X, Section 20.
Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, either Party’s obligations
under this Agreement are subject to annual appropriation by the Party. Any failure of
a Party to annually to appropriate adequate monies to finance the Party’s obligations
under this Agreement shall terminate this Agreement at such time as such then-
existing appropriations are depleted. Written notice shall be given by the non-
appropriating Party promptly to the other Party of the failure to appropriate adequate
monies.
12. Notices. All notices or other communication hereunder shall be deemed given when
personally delivered or after the lapse of five (5) business days following mailing by
certified mail, postage prepaid, address as follows:
ESTES PARK LOCAL MARKETING DISTRICT
Attn: Chairperson
Post Office Box 4426
Estes Park, CO 80517
TOWN OF ESTES PARK
Attn: Town Administrator
Post Office Box 1200
Estes Park, CO 80517
11. Relationship of the Parties. The Parties enter into this Intergovernmental Agreement
as separate and independent entities and shall maintain such status throughout the term
of this Intergovernmental Agreement.
5
12. Governmental Immunity. Nothing contained herein shall be construed as a waiver or
modification of the rights afforded to the LMD and/or the Town under the Colorado
Governmental Immunity Act and subsequent amendments thereto.
13. Governing Law in Effect. This Intergovernmental Agreement shall be governed by
and construed under the laws of the State of Colorado.
14. Venue. Venue for all purposes shall be deemed proper in the District Court of Larimer
County, Colorado.
15. Entire Agreement of the Parties. The recitals contained herein represent the entire
agreement of the Parties, and shall be binding upon the parties hereto and their
successors.
16. Amendment. No amendment or other modification of this Intergovernmental
Agreement shall be valid unless pursuant to a written instrument signed by both parties.
17. Assignment. The benefits and burdens under this Intergovernmental Agreement may
not be assigned by either party without the written consent of the other.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have caused this Intergovernmental
Agreement to be executed.
ESTES PARK LOCAL MARKETING
DISTRICT
By: _______________________________
Chairperson
ATTEST:
__________________________
TOWN OF ESTES PARK
By: _______________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________
6
Town Clerk
1
INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE ESTES PARK LOCAL
MARKETING DISTRICT AND THE TOWN OF ESTES PARK
THIS INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT by and between the Estes Park
Local Marketing District (also known as Visit Estes Park), a Colorado Local Marketing District,
hereinafter referred to as the “LMD” and the TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO, a
Colorado statutory town, hereinafter referred to as “The Town”, is effective the 1st day of
January, 2016.
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, the LMD is a local marketing district organized to provide the services set
forth in Section 29-25-111 (1)(e)(I)(A), (B) and (C), C.R.S.; and
WHEREAS, the LMD was created pursuant to the provisions of Section 29-25-101 et
seq. C.R.S. and the Intergovernmental Agreement dated August 26, 2008 and all amendments
thereto between the Town and the Board of County Commissioners, Larimer County; and
WHEREAS, applicable provisions of the Colorado Constitution and the statutes of the
State of Colorado, specifically Section 29-20-101 et seq. C.R.S., authorize the LMD and the
Town to enter into mutually binding and enforceable agreements, including agreements
addressing the subject matter of this Agreement; and
WHEREAS, the Town and the LMD have determined that it is in the best interest of
both entities to accomplish the efficient provision of destination marketing as set forth in the
Operating Plan by the terms of this Intergovernmental Agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS UNDERSTOOD AND AGREED BETWEEN
THE PARTIES AS FOLLOWS:
1. Preamble. The Parties acknowledge that the recitals set forth above are true and correct,
and those recitals are hereby incorporated into this Agreement.
2. Effective Date. The Agreement shall be effective January 1, 2016.
3. LMD Employees Benefits Plan. To the extent permitted by law and the terms of
third party provider agreements, the Town shall allow LMD employees to be covered for
all current Town benefits (medical, dental, vision, EAP, health club, flex plans, life
insurance, AirMedCare, Teladoc, etc.).
The LMD shall have the option to select the individual Town benefit plans in which its
employees shall be covered. This selection shall be on an annual basis with the LMD
providing the Town its selection of benefit plans concurrent with the Town’s open
enrollment period of each year to be effective January 1 of the next year. The selection
Deleted: 4
Deleted: and promotional services
2
of individual benefit plans shall be subject to the written approval of the Town, which
approval shall not be unreasonably withheld.
The parties agree that no retirement benefit plans for LMD employees are provided by
the Town to the LMD in this Agreement.
LMD employees shall only mean employees of the LMD and not members of the
LMD’s governing board.
The LMD shall pay to the Town an administrative fee equal to three percent (3%) of the
monthly cost of medical insurance premiums for the LMD employees.
In administering the benefit plans for the LMD, the Town shall pay the appropriate
sums for covered LMD employees to its third party providers at the beginning of each
calendar month. The Town will invoice the LMD for those payments. The LMD agrees
to reimburse the Town for those payments, plus the 3% administrative fee, within thirty
(30) days of receipt of the reimbursement invoice from the Town. It is specifically
understood by the LMD, that in the event that the reimbursement payment and the
administrative fee is not made to the Town within said thirty (30) day period, the Town
shall have the right to provide the LMD with a twenty (20) day notice of its intent to
terminate LMD employees from participation in the applicable benefit plans. If the
LMD does not pay the reimbursement amount and fee within the twenty (20) day notice
period, the Town shall have the right to immediately terminate participation of the LMD
employees from all benefit plans administered by the Town for the LMD pursuant to the
terms of this Agreement.
The LMD understands and agrees that the Town shall not be responsible for any human
resource/personnel matters as part of its benefit administration. Neither the LMD nor
its employees shall seek advice or counsel from the Town with regard to any human
resource/personnel issues concerning LMD employees. The LMD specifically waives
any claim against the Town and any individual employee, consultant, agent, or volunteer
of the Town for any act or omission in the performance or non-performance of its
benefit administration for LMD employees. In the event that any third party, including
any employee, agent or volunteer of the LMD, makes any claim, demand, lawsuit, or
takes any other action against the Town for an act or omission in performing its benefit
administration, the LMD agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the Town, its officers,
agents, volunteers and employees from and against any and all liability for any and all
claims, liens, suits, demands, actions for damages, including court costs and reasonable
attorney’s fees, arising out of or resulting from acts or omissions of the Town in the
benefit administration for LMD employees.
4. Destination Leadership. To facilitate effective and efficient marketing operations and
destination development, which are mutually beneficial to both parties, quarterly
meetings of two LMD Board members, two Town Board members, the LMD’s
President & CEO or designee and the Town Administrator or designee shall take place .
The Town and the LMD will alternate preparing the agenda for this meeting. The Town
Deleted: periodic
3
will prepare the agenda for the Q1 and Q3 meetings, and the LMD will prepare the
agenda for the Q2 and Q4 meetings. The purpose of these meetings is to increase the
strategic-level communication between the LMD and the Town for the mutual goal of
advancing the destination for tourism and the economic vitality of the community.
5. Service Level Agreement. The parties agree to meet annually and negotiate in good
faith for the purposes of reaching an agreement regarding the minimum level of service
to visitors at the Visitors Center, including without limitation such topics as staffing,
hours of operation, Call Center operations, training on delivering the Estes Park brand
promise, and other topics of mutual concern to the parties.
6. Advertising Products. As Estes Park’s official destination marketing organization the
LMD is responsible for launching and managing marketing programs such as
VisitEstesPark.com web listings, Visit Estes Park social media, leads, etc. This includes
research, new product development, promotion, sales, servicing, fulfillment, invoicing,
and collections. Should advertising sale opportunities become present through the
shuttle system, which is a service provided by the Town of Estes Park, the Town if it so
chooses, may sell advertising to local businesses. The Town will advise the LMD of the
intent, and agrees that all advertisers must be located within the Marketing District
boundaries. Any deviation to this must be approved by the LMD Board of Directors.
7. Brochure Rack Display Management. The Town will manage the physical restocking
process for the brochure rack display until touch screens are installed in the Visitor
Center, or until the end of the 2016. If touch screens have not been installed in the
Visitor Center by the end of 2016, the Town and the LMD shall meet to reassess the
management of this process.
8. Photography. The LMD shall have authority to use all photographs collected, archived
and created by the Town of Estes Park prior to January 1, 2010 for uses related to
marketing and promotion and the LMD shall retain possession of said photographs for
those purposes. However, the Town of Estes Park shall have the ability to use and retain
possession of said photographs at their discretion. The LMD understands and agrees
that the use of any of the photographs may be subject to a copyright, trademark or other
restriction by the original owner/photographer of such photographs.
9. Annual Audit. If the Town determines, pursuant to applicable GASB Standards, that
the Town’s audit requires the inclusion of the LMD as part of the audit, the LMD shall
pay for the cost of the LMD’s portion of the Town’s audit expense. In return, the LMD
will receive a formal letter of compliance from the Town of Estes Park via their auditor.
10. Effective Date and Termination.
a. This Intergovernmental Agreement shall take effect on January 1, 2016, and shall
remain in full force and effect unless terminated earlier by mutual agreement of the
parties or as provided in subsection c. below. The parties agree that they shall review
Deleted: open up communication channels
Deleted: new
Deleted: has been
Deleted: advertising
Deleted: for local stakeholder businesses
Deleted: , brochure rack display in the Visitor Center
Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.5", No bullets or numbering
Formatted: Font: Bold, Underline
Formatted: Font: Bold, Underline
Deleted: 2014
4
the terms and conditions of this Agreement annually in anticipation of the
preparation of the annual Operating Plan by the LMD.
b. If, through any cause, either party fails to fulfill its obligations under this Agreement
in a timely and proper manner, violates any provision of this Agreement, or violates
any applicable law, the non-breaching party shall give the breaching party written
notice of said breach. The breaching party shall have thirty (30) days to correct the
breach. If the breaching party fails to correct the breach within said thirty (30) day
period, the non-breaching party shall have the right to terminate this Agreement for
cause.
c. Either party may terminate this Agreement upon ninety (90) days written notice prior
to the end of any calendar year. Said termination shall be effective as of the last day
of the applicable calendar year. If the Town terminates this Agreement, the Town
shall, to the extent permitted by law and the terms of its agreement(s) with third party
providers, allow the LMD to purchase Town benefits for the Employees for an
additional 180 days following the date of termination, as stated in Section 3.
11. Annual Appropriation. Nothing herein shall constitute a multiple fiscal year
obligation pursuant to the Colorado Constitution, Article X, Section 20.
Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, either Party’s obligations
under this Agreement are subject to annual appropriation by the Party. Any failure of
a Party to annually to appropriate adequate monies to finance the Party’s obligations
under this Agreement shall terminate this Agreement at such time as such then-
existing appropriations are depleted. Written notice shall be given by the non-
appropriating Party promptly to the other Party of the failure to appropriate adequate
monies.
12. Notices. All notices or other communication hereunder shall be deemed given when
personally delivered or after the lapse of five (5) business days following mailing by
certified mail, postage prepaid, address as follows:
ESTES PARK LOCAL MARKETING DISTRICT
Attn: Chairperson
Post Office Box 4426
Estes Park, CO 80517
TOWN OF ESTES PARK
Attn: Town Administrator
Post Office Box 1200
Estes Park, CO 80517
11. Relationship of the Parties. The Parties enter into this Intergovernmental Agreement
as separate and independent entities and shall maintain such status throughout the term
of this Intergovernmental Agreement.
5
12. Governmental Immunity. Nothing contained herein shall be construed as a waiver or
modification of the rights afforded to the LMD and/or the Town under the Colorado
Governmental Immunity Act and subsequent amendments thereto.
13. Governing Law in Effect. This Intergovernmental Agreement shall be governed by
and construed under the laws of the State of Colorado.
14. Venue. Venue for all purposes shall be deemed proper in the District Court of Larimer
County, Colorado.
15. Entire Agreement of the Parties. The recitals contained herein represent the entire
agreement of the Parties, and shall be binding upon the parties hereto and their
successors.
16. Amendment. No amendment or other modification of this Intergovernmental
Agreement shall be valid unless pursuant to a written instrument signed by both parties.
17. Assignment. The benefits and burdens under this Intergovernmental Agreement may
not be assigned by either party without the written consent of the other.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have caused this Intergovernmental
Agreement to be executed.
ESTES PARK LOCAL MARKETING
DISTRICT
By: _______________________________
Chairperson
Date:______________________________
ATTEST:
__________________________
TOWN OF ESTES PARK
By: _______________________________
Mayor
Date:______________________________
Formatted: Underline
6
ATTEST:
____________________________
Town Clerk
Page 1 of 2
ADMINISTRATION Memo
To: Honorable Mayor Pinkham
Board of Trustees
Frank Lancaster, Town Administrator
From: Travis Machalek, Assistant Town Administrator
Date: December 8, 2015
RE: Contract for Business Incubator Business Plan
Objective:
To obtain authorization for the Mayor to sign the consultant contract for the Federal
Economic Development Administration (EDA) grant to develop a business plan for a
business incubator.
Present Situation:
On September 16, 2015, the Town and the Estes Park Economic Development
Corporation (EDC) issued a request for proposals (RFP) to develop a business plan for
a business incubator. A total of nine proposals were submitted in response to this RFP.
These proposals were reviewed by an RFP Review Committee composed of
entrepreneurs, businesspeople, individuals with incubator project experience, Town
staff, and EDC staff. For details of this review please see the memo prepared by Jon
Nicholas, EDC President and CEO (included in this packet).
After a rigorous process, the RFP Review Committee made a unanimous decision to
recommend ATP Management Company, LLC as the consultant for this project. This
recommendation was approved by the EDC Board of Directors on November 19, 2015.
For this project the consultant has been asked to broadly define an incubator to include
any of the following: an incubator, an accelerator, a co-working space, or a mix of such
services. The consultant will be responsible for a final report that will provide guidance
on the need for facilities, financing, and programming necessary for a successful
incubator project. The consultant will also be expected to assist in identifying potential
sources of start-up capital and partial operating assistance.
Advantages:
Leverages an EDA grant to explore the feasibility of an incubator for the Estes
Park community
Utilizes consultants with extensive relevant experience in incubator projects
Page 2 of 2
Disadvantages:
None
Budget:
The proposed contract of $62,000 will utilize the balance of the financial grant award
from the Federal Economic Development Administration.
Level of Public Interest:
Staff expects a moderate level of public interest in this issue.
Recommended Motion:
I move to authorize the Mayor to sign the consultant contract with ATP Management
Company, LLC for the EDA grant to develop a business plan for a business incubator.
Attachments:
Incubator RFP Review Committee Memo from Jon Nicholas
Draft Incubator Contact
ATP Proposal
MEMORANDUM
From: Jon Nicholas
To: Incubator RFP Review Committee
Date: November 9, 2015
Re: Business Incubator RFP Review Process and Final Recommendation
The Business Incubator RFP Submission Review Committee (the “Committee”) reviewed
proposals from 9 different firms. This memorandum makes a final recommendation and
summarizes the review process used to arrive at our recommendation.
Background. Responses to the RFP were due on October 9. To ensure an effective
study, the RFP defined an incubator in its broadest sense to mean an incubator program,
accelerator program, or co‐working space. We therefore expect the business plan developed
under this award to consider a number of options for a sustainable business model including a
traditional incubator, a business accelerator, a co‐working space, or a mix of such programs and
services.
A final report will be required and it is anticipated that the report will provide guidance
on the need for facilities, financing, and programming necessary for a successful project. It is
also expected that the successful consultant will assist in identifying potential sources of start‐
up capital and partial operating assistance. The programming of the incubator could be
achieved independently or through a partnership, whether with a university, corporate sponsor
or with an existing incubator or accelerator program. Such a partnership could be
implemented through a service agreement, franchise agreement, or through the creation of a
satellite office.
The proposed contract will be for $62,000, the balance of the financial award from U.S.
EDA. The contract will be based upon Town of Estes Park contracting practices, and will also
need to be approved by U.S. EDA.
Final Recommendation. The Committee is recommending retaining ATP Management
Company, LLC to perform the contract. ATP consists of five team members who will each
contribute their experience and expertise. The ATP team has experience with successful
activities in Texas, including the Austin Technology Incubator (headed by Isaac Barchas),
venture capital experience (Kyle Cox leads the ATP Fund, and Ryan Field is heavily involved in
screening companies), and launching an angel investor network (Jamie Fields). ATP’s team also
includes Mike Freeman, CEO of the Innosphere in Fort Collins. Freeman is highly
knowledgeable concerning potential partnerships, has launched two added locations for the
Innosphere and understands Colorado. We believe this team is best equipped to devise a
business plan whether for a physical incubator, co‐working space, or a set of programs and
services that will ensure growth toward such an outcome.
Business Incubator RFP Review Process and Final Recommendation
November 18, 2015
2
Initial Review. The Committee received copies of all the submissions on Friday October
9, as well as scoring sheets to help rank each firm. On October 13, the Committee met to
discuss and review the individual rankings of each submission, and then agree on how to
proceed with interviews. Attending that meeting were Mike Abbiatti, Josh Cramer, Christy
Crosser (to observe), Ren Gobris, Travis Machalek, Jon Nicholas, Kelly Peters (by phone) and Jim
Pickering. Jim McGibney and Eric Throne also submitted full scoring sheets. The Committee
used the following approach to the selection process.
Step 1: Summarize and discuss the initial scoring sheets completed by each Committee
member and identify finalists.
Step 2: Conduct interviews of the finalists to address questions concerning the written
proposals, and to further assess each finalist firm’s capabilities and proposals.
Step 3: After interviews, meet to discuss finalists, and proceed on direct reference
checks for finalists as appropriate.
The Committee discussed each proposal, and noted that some produced wildly different
rankings due to assumptions such as whether a co‐working space proposal from Creative
Density would qualify, when three other reviewers ranked them in the top two. Discussion
revealed that there was not a strong consensus on two or even three leading candidates, so the
group decided to conduct initial interviews of five firms: 1) ATP; 2) Axcel; 3) Claggett Wolfe; 4)
Creative Density; and 5) Greenwood. The Committee felt that conducting a wider number of
initial interviews would allow a fair assessment of the proposals that were the strongest. The
Committee agreed to decide on next steps after the initial interviews.
Initial Interviews. On October 22 and 23, the Committee held interviews with the five
selected firms. Creative Density came to Estes Park on October 23. The rest of the interviews
were held by teleconference. Participants in the initial interviews included David Batey (on
behalf of Strategic Planning Committee), Josh Cramer, Ren Gobris, Jim McGibney, Morgan
Mulch, Jon Nicholas, Kelly Peters, Jim Pickering, and Eric Throne.
On October 23, the Committee participants identified ATP and Claggett Wolfe as their
two finalists. Claggett Wolfe was identified as the most highly experienced of the consultants,
and ATP was seen as the strongest quality team. Committee members felt that these two
candidates presented contrasting approaches or experience, but that both would be excellent
selections. The next step was to interview both finalists, preferably in person.
Final Interviews; Reference Check. The Committee interviewed ATP on Monday
morning, November 2, and Claggett Wolfe on the afternoon of Thursday, November 6. The
interviews demonstrated that both firms were highly capable and experienced.
In the case of ATP, there are five team members who will each contribute their
experience and expertise. The ATP team has experience with successful activities in Texas,
Business Incubator RFP Review Process and Final Recommendation
November 18, 2015
3
including the Austin Technology Incubator, ATP’s team includes Mike Freeman, CEO of the
Innosphere in Fort Collins, which will ensure that the team is knowledgeable concerning
potential Colorado partnerships. ATP also clarified some aspects of its proposal. The
interviewers concluded that Charles Wolfe is a highly capable consultant, but that he is
essentially a one‐man team.
There was unanimity in recommending ATP, and a committee member completed and
memorialized reference checks on some of the key team members. The reference checks were
excellent, and affirm that ATP consists of a team of highly capable, experienced and
knowledgeable operators.
1
[Final must include Town Logo]
SAMPLE CONTRACT
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACT
This Professional Services Contract (this “Contract”) is entered into this ____ day of
__________________, 20 , by and between the Town of Estes Park, Colorado (the
“Town”), Larimer County, State of Colorado, the Estes Park Economic Development
Corporation (the “Estes Park EDC”) and ATP Management Company, LLC (“Consultant”).
Whereas, the Town and the Estes Park EDC requires professional services; and
Whereas, this project is being supported with federal funds from the U.S. Department of
Commerce, Economic Development Administration (the “EDA Grant” and the “EDA”) and
therefore is subject to the federal laws and regulations associated with that program as well as
state and local laws; and
WHEREAS, the Estes Park EDC is a co-applicant and co-recipient of the EDA Grant; and
Whereas, by the terms of the EDA Grant’s Financial Assistance Award, both the Town and Estes
Park EDC have accepted the terms and conditions of the EDA Grant’s Special Award
Conditions, Financial Assistance Award Number 05-69-05624; and
Whereas, the Town requires professional consulting services related to the EDA Grant’s Scope
of Work and the related Request for Proposal for “PROJECT 3: Develop Business Plan for
Business Incubator” (“Project 3 RFP”); and
Whereas, ATP Management Company, LLC has the requisite expertise and experience to
perform required professional services; and
Whereas, the parties desire to contract with one another to complete the following project:
Develop Business Plan for Business Incubator
Now, therefore, in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements contained herein, the
parties agree to the following.
I. Scope of Services
A. The Consultant shall perform the services set forth in the Request for Proposals,
(Exhibit A), attached hereto. The Town and Estes Park EDC reserve the right to
remove any of the services from Exhibit A upon written notice to Consultant. In the
2
event of any conflict between this Contract and the RFP in Exhibit A, the provisions
of this Contract shall prevail and in all instances of any conflict the EDA Grant’s
Special Award Conditions, including the Scope of Work, shall prevail.
B. Consultant shall furnish all labor and materials required for the complete and prompt
execution and performance of its duties, obligations, and responsibilities which are
described or reasonably implied in the RFP and Scope of Work.
C. No material change to the Contract, including any additional compensation, shall be
effective or paid unless authorized by written amendment executed by the Town. If
Consultant proceeds without such written authorization, then Consultant shall be
deemed to have waived any claim for additional compensation, including a claim
based on the theory of unjust enrichment, quantum merit or implied contract. Except
as expressly provided herein, no agent, employee, or representative of the Town or
Estes Park EDC is authorized to modify any term of this Contract, either directly or
implied by a course of action.
II. Price
The Town shall pay the Consultant a sum not to exceed $62,000.00. The Town shall
make payments within thirty days of receipt and approval of monthly invoices, which
shall identify the specific services performed for which payment is requested. The
amount specified herein shall include the fees and expenses anticipated to be incurred by
Consultant in performing all services hereunder, as described in Scope of Services.
III. Invoices and Invoicing
The Consultant shall invoice the Town monthly in accordance with Town and EDA
requirements. Invoices and supporting documentation with each invoice shall be
sufficiently detailed for work performed within the time frame of the invoice period and
the Town Purchase Order Number. Documentation shall include a statement of the time
that the Consultant employees worked since the previous invoice, a brief description of
the services provided by each such employee and an itemization of direct expenses for
each task.
As this is a federal grant, every effort must be made to reasonably follow federal travel
guidelines. The Town understands that lodging exceptions may be considered; however,
reasonably priced accommodations must be obtained. The Town prefers to use a per diem
for meals and incidental expenses. For more information on federal travel allowances
please refer to http://www.gsa.gov/portal/category/26429.
If, on the basis of the Town’s observation of the Work and the Town's review of the final
invoice and accompanying documentation as required by this Contract, the Town is
satisfied that the services have been completed and Consultant’s other obligations under
this Contract have been fulfilled, the Town will pay the amount due. Otherwise, the
Town will return the invoice to Consultant, indicating in writing the reasons for refusing
3
to schedule final settlement, in which case Consultant shall make the necessary
corrections and resubmit the invoice.
IV. Term
This Contract shall be effective from __________, 2015 through __________, 20__. This
Contract may be extended or renewed by written agreement of the parties.
V. Appropriation
To the extent this Contract constitutes a multiple fiscal year debt or financial obligation
of the Town, it shall be subject to annual appropriation pursuant to the Town’s annual
budgeting process and Article X, Section 20 of the Colorado Constitution. The Town
shall have no obligation to continue this Contract in any fiscal year in which no such
appropriation is made.
To the extent this Contract is being supported with grant funds, it shall be subject to the
Town’s success at securing and maintaining these funds for continued support. If for any
reason the grant funds do not continue supporting this contract, such as due to
cancellation by EDA or expiration of the Special Awards agreement, the Town shall have
no obligation to continue this Contract.
VI. Independent Consultant
The parties agree that the Consultant is an independent Consultant and is not an employee
of the Town. The Consultant is not entitled to workers’ compensation benefits from the
Town and is obligated to pay federal and state income tax on any money earned pursuant
to this Contract. Consultant shall make no representation that it is a Town employee for
any purposes.
VII. Insurance Requirements
A. Policies. The Consultant and its sub-consultants, if any, shall procure and maintain at
their own cost, for the duration of this Contract the following insurance policies and
shall provide the Town with a certificate of insurance evidencing such upon execution
of this Contract:
1. Comprehensive general liability insurance insuring the Consultant and naming the
Town as an additional insured with minimum combined single limits of
$2,000,000 each occurrence and $1,000,000 aggregate. The policy shall be
applicable to all premises and operations. The policy shall include coverage for
bodily injury, broad form property damage (including completed operations),
personal injury (including coverage for contractual and employee acts), blanket
contractual, independent consultants, products, and completed operations. The
policy shall contain a severability of interests provision. No additional insured
endorsement shall contain any exclusion for bodily injury or property damage
arising from completed operations.
2. This is optional Comprehensive automobile liability insurance insuring the
Consultant and naming the Town as an additional insured against any liability for
4
personal injury, bodily injury, or death arising out of the use of motor vehicles
and covering operations on or off the site of all motor vehicles controlled by the
Consultant which are used in connection with this Contract, whether the motor
vehicles are owned, non-owned, or hired, with a combined single limit of at least
$1,000,000.
3. Professional liability insurance insuring the Consultant against any professional
liability with a limit of at least $1,000,000 per claim and annual aggregate. (Note:
this policy shall only be required if the Consultant is an architect, engineer,
surveyor, appraiser, physician, attorney, accountant, or other licensed
professional.)
4. Consultant shall adhere to Colorado laws for Workers’ Compensation insurance.
5. Failure on the part of the Consultant to procure or maintain the insurance required
here in shall constitute a material breach of this Contract upon which the Town
may terminate this Contract, or at its discretion, the Town may procure or renew
any such policy or any extended reporting period thereto and may pay any and all
premiums in connection therewith, and all monies so paid by the Town shall be
repaid by Consultant to the Town upon demand, or the Town may offset the cost
of the premiums against any monies due to Consultant from the Town.
B. Requirements. Required insurance policies shall be with companies qualified to do
business in Colorado with a general policyholder’s financial rating acceptable to the
Town. Said policies shall not be cancelable or subject to reduction in coverage limits
or other modification except after thirty days prior written notice to the Town. The
Consultant shall identify whether the type of coverage is “occurrence” or “claims
made.” If the type of coverage is “claims made,” which at renewal the Consultant
changes to “occurrence,” the Consultant shall carry a six-month tail. Comprehensive
general and automobile policies shall be for the mutual and joint benefit and
protection of the Consultant and the Town. Such policies shall provide that the Town,
although named as an additional insured, shall nevertheless be entitled to recover
under said policies for any loss occasioned to it, its officers, employees, and agents by
reason of negligence of the Consultant, sub-consultants, or business invitees. Such
policies shall be written as primary policies not contributing to and not in excess of
coverage the Town may carry.
VIII. Indemnification. The Consultant agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the Town and
Estes Park EDC, their officers, employees, and agents from and against all liability,
claims, and demands on account of any injury, loss, or damage, including court costs and
attorneys’ fees, arising out of or connected with the services, if such injury, loss, or
damage, or any portion thereof, is caused by, or claimed to be caused by, the negligent
act, omission, or other fault of the Consultant or any sub-consultant of the Consultant, or
any officer, employee, or agent of the Consultant or any other person for whom the
Consultant is responsible. The Consultant’s indemnification obligation shall not be
construed to extend to any injury, loss, or damage to the extent caused by the act,
5
omission, or other fault of the Town or Estes Park EDC. This paragraph shall survive the
termination or expiration of this Contract.
IX. Professional Responsibility.
A. Consultant hereby warrants that it is qualified to perform the services, holds all
professional licenses required by law to perform the services, and has all requisite
corporate authority to enter into this Contract.
B. The services shall be performed by Consultant in accordance with generally accepted
professional practices and the level of competency presently maintained by other
practicing professional consultants and firms performing the same or similar type of
work in the Denver metro area. The services shall be done in compliance with
applicable federal, state and local laws, ordinances, rules and regulations.
C. Consultant shall be responsible for the professional quality, technical accuracy, timely
completion, surveys and the coordination of all designs, drawings, specifications,
reports, and other services furnished by Consultant under this Contract.
D. Consultant shall, without additional compensation, correct or resolve any errors or
deficiencies in its designs, drawings, specifications, reports and other services, which
fall below the standard of professional practice, and reimburse the Town and/or Estes
Park EDC for costs caused by errors and omissions which fall below the professional
practice standards.
E. Approval by the Town and/or Estes Park EDC of drawings, designs, specifications,
reports and incidental work or materials furnished hereunder shall not in any way
relieve Consultant of responsibility for technical adequacy of its services. Neither the
Town's or Estes Park EDC’s review, approval or acceptance of nor payment for any
of the Consultant’s services shall be construed to operate as a waiver of any rights
under this Contract or of any cause of action arising out of the performance of this
Contract.
F. Consultant hereby agrees that Consultant, including but not limited to, any employee,
principal, shareholder or affiliate of Consultant shall not have a financial relationship
with or an ownership interest with any person and/or entity which shall be the
recipient of any contract or work for the services provided by Consultant pursuant to
the terms and conditions of this Contract. Consultant understands and agrees that the
purpose of this provision is to prevent any information created as a result of
Consultant’s services herein being used by any person and/or entity in the preparation
of any proposal or performance of any work for the Town.
G. The Consultant shall disclose any personal or private interest related to property or
business within the Town. Upon disclosure of any such interest, the Town shall
determine if the interest constitutes a conflict of interest. If the Town determines that
a conflict of interest exists, the Town may treat such conflict of interest as a default
and terminate this Contract.
6
H. Upon execution of this Contract, Consultant shall furnish to the Town a list of
proposed sub-consultants, and Consultant shall not employ a sub-consultant to whose
employment the Town reasonably objects. All contracts between Consultant and sub-
consultants shall conform to this Contract.
I. Consultant shall allow access by the Town, Estes Park EDC, and funding entities’
duly authorized representatives to any books, documents, papers and records of the
Consultant which are directly pertinent to this Contract for the purpose of audits,
examinations, excerpts and transcripts. Consultant shall retain all required records for
three (3) years after the Town makes final payments and all other pending matters are
closed.
X. Governmental Immunity Act. No term or condition of this Contract shall be construed or
interpreted as a waiver, express or implied, of any of the notices, requirements,
immunities, rights, benefits, protections, limitations of liability, and other provisions of
the Colorado Governmental Immunity Act, C.R.S. § 24-10-101 et seq. and under any
other applicable law.
XI. Compliance with Applicable Laws.
A. Generally. The Consultant shall comply with all applicable federal, state and local
laws, including the ordinances, resolutions, rules, and regulations of the Town. The
Consultant shall solely be responsible for payment of all applicable taxes and for
obtaining and keeping in force all applicable permits and approvals.
B. During the performance of this contract, the contractor agrees as follows:
(1) The contractor will not discriminate against any employee or applicant for
employment because of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. The
contractor will take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed, and
that employees are treated during employment without regard to their race, color,
religion, sex, or national origin. Such action shall include, but not be limited to the
following: Employment, upgrading, demotion, or transfer; recruitment or
recruitment advertising; layoff or termination; rates of pay or other forms of
compensation; and selection for training, including apprenticeship. The contractor
agrees to post in conspicuous places, available to employees and applicants for
employment, notices to be provided setting forth the provisions of this
nondiscrimination clause.
(2) The contractor will, in all solicitations or advertisements for employees placed by
or on behalf of the contractor, state that all qualified applicants will receive
considerations for employment without regard to race, color, religion, sex, or
national origin.
(3) The contractor will send to each labor union or representative of workers with
which he has a collective bargaining agreement or other contract or
understanding, a notice to be provided advising the said labor union or workers’
7
representatives of the contractor’s commitments under this section, and shall post
copies of the notice in conspicuous places available to employees and applicants
for employment.
(4) The contractor will comply with all provisions of Executive Order 11246 of
September 24, 1965, and of the rules, regulations, and relevant orders of the
Secretary of Labor.
(5) The contractor will furnish all information and reports required by Executive
Order 11246 of September 24, 1965, and by rules, regulations, and orders of the
Secretary of Labor, or pursuant thereto, and will permit access to his books,
records, and accounts by the administering agency and the Secretary of Labor for
purposes of investigation to ascertain compliance with such rules, regulations, and
orders.
(6) In the event of the contractor’s noncompliance with the nondiscrimination clauses
of this contract or with any of the said rules, regulations, or orders, this contract
may be canceled, terminated, or suspended in whole or in part and the contractor
may be declared ineligible for further Government contracts or federally assisted
construction contracts in accordance with procedures authorized in Executive
Order 11246 of September 24, 1965, and such other sanctions may be imposed
and remedies invoked as provided in Executive Order 11246 of September 24,
1965, or by rule, regulation, or order of the Secretary of Labor, or as otherwise
provided by law.
(7) The contractor will include the portion of the sentence immediately preceding
paragraph (1) and the provisions of paragraphs (1) through (7) in every
subcontract or purchase order unless exempted by rules, regulations, or orders of
the Secretary of Labor issued pursuant to section 204 of Executive Order 11246
of September 24, 1965, so that such provisions will be binding upon each
subcontractor or vendor. The contractor will take such action with respect to any
subcontract or purchase order as the administering agency may direct as a means
of enforcing such provisions, including sanctions for noncompliance: Provided,
however, That in the event a contractor becomes involved in, or is threatened
with, litigation with a subcontractor or vendor as a result of such direction by the
administering agency the contractor may request the United States to enter into
such litigation to protect the interests of the United States.
XII. Termination.
A. This Contract shall terminate at such time as the Services are completed and the
requirements of this Contract are satisfied, upon termination of the EDA grant, or
upon the Town's providing Consultant with advance written notice, whichever occurs
first. If the Contract is terminated by the Town's issuance of written notice of intent
8
to terminate, the Town shall pay Consultant the reasonable value of all work
previously authorized and completed prior to the date of termination. If the Contract
is terminated for any reason other than cause prior to completion of the services, any
use of documents by the Town or Estes Park EDC thereafter shall be at the Town's
and Estes Park EDC’s sole risk, unless otherwise consented to by Consultant.
B. Without Cause. Either party may terminate this Contract without cause upon thirty
(30) days prior written notice to the other. The Town shall be liable to pay the
Consultant for Services performed as of the effective date of termination, but neither
the Town nor Estes Park EDC shall be liable to the Consultant for anticipated profits.
C. For Default. Each and every term and condition hereof shall be deemed to be a
material element of this Contract. In the event either party fails to perform according
to the terms of this Contract, such party may be declared in default. If the defaulting
party does not cure said breach within ten (10) days of written notice thereof, the non-
defaulting party may terminate this Contract immediately upon written notice of
termination to the other. In the event of termination of this Contract, the non-
defaulting party shall be entitled to recover all damages caused by said default. In the
event that Consultant is in default, the Town may withhold payment to the Consultant
for the purposes of setoff until such time as the amount of damages is determined.
D. The EDA Special Award Conditions agreement, Financial Assistance Award Number
05-69-05624 is effective through December 30, 2015. The Parties acknowledge that
extension of this Project, if any, beyond December 30, 2015 is subject to U.S.
Economic Development Administration review and approval. An extension request
has been submitted to EDA.
XIII. Notices. Written notices shall be directed as follows and shall be deemed received when
hand-delivered or emailed, or three days after being sent by certified mail, return receipt
requested:
Town of Estes Park Consultant
Frank Lancaster, Town Administrator
Administration
Town of Estes Park
PO Box 1200
Estes Park CO 80517
flancaster@estes.org
970-577-3507
Kyle A. Cox, Managing Partner
1108 Lavaca Street
Suite 110-115
Austin, TX 78701
678.612.9553
kcox@atpfund.com
Jon Nicholas, President/CEO
Estes Park EDC
533 Big Thompson Avenue
Suite 103
Estes Park, CO 80517
(970) 577-1031
info@estesparkedc.com
9
XIV. Special Provisions.
The Consultant agrees to perform services as specified in Exhibit A for the project as
requested by the Town. This is a not to exceed contract with an established maximum
payment of $62,000.00. The hourly rates are to be based on the Fee Schedule that was
provided by the Consultant in their proposal.
The Contract work shall be completed according to the appropriate schedule in Exhibit A,
unless otherwise modified in writing with a subsequent Amendment to this Contract.
XV. Other Provisions.
A. Time of the Essence. Time is of the essence in performance of the services and is a
significant and material term of this Contract.
B. Entire Contract. This Contract contains the entire agreement of the parties relating to
the subject matter hereof and, except as provided herein, may not be modified or
amended except by written agreement of the parties. In the event a court of competent
jurisdiction holds any provision of this Contract invalid or unenforceable, such
holding shall not invalidate or render unenforceable any other provision of this
Contract.
C. Assignment. The Consultant shall not assign this Contract without the Town’s prior
written consent.
D. Governing Law. This Contract shall be governed by the laws of the State of
Colorado, and venue shall be in the County of Larimer.
E. Instruments of Service. Drawings, models, specifications, research, reports, surveys,
studies, data, photographs and other documents, including those in electronic form,
prepared by Consultant and its sub-consultants in the performance of obligations
under this Contract are Instruments of Service for use solely with respect to the
project identified in this Contract. Consultant and its sub-consultants shall be deemed
the authors and owners of their respective Instruments of Service and shall retain all
common law, statutory and other reserved rights, including copyrights; except that,
upon execution of this Contract, the Consultant grants to the Town, Estes Park EDC,
and the EDA a non-exclusive, perpetual, fully-paid, non-revocable license to
reproduce and use the Consultant's Instruments of Service in connection with the
above-referenced project, including the project's further development by the Town,
Estes Park EDC and others retained for such purposes. The Consultant shall obtain
similar licenses from its sub-consultants consistent with this Contract. Consultant
shall, during the term of this Contract provide the Town and Estes Park EDC with
copies of all Instruments of service prepared by Consultant or its sub-consultants
contemporaneous with such preparation, and shall provide them in electronic format
or any other format requested by the Town or Estes Park EDC.
10
F. Work Products. The Town and Estes Park EDC shall provide Consultant with reports
and other data as may be available to and reasonably required by Consultant to
perform the work. All documents provided by the Town to Consultant shall be
returned to the Town or Estes Park EDC respectively. Consultant is authorized by the
Town to retain copies of such data and materials at Consultant’s expense.
G. Information Disclosed. Other than sharing information with designated third parties
as previously directed by the Town or Estes Park EDC, no project information shall
be disclosed by Consultant to third parties without prior written consent of the Town
and Estes Park EDC or pursuant to a lawful court order directing such disclosure.
H. Attorney’s Fees and Costs. In the event it becomes necessary for any party to bring
any action to enforce any provision of this Contract or to recover any damages from
another party as a result of the breach of this Contract, including, but not limited to,
defective work, and the party that prevails in such litigation, the other party shall pay
the prevailing party its reasonable attorney’s fees and costs as determined by the
court.
I. Electronic Signature. This Contract may be executed by electronic signature in
accordance with C.R.S. § 24-71.3-101 et seq.
J. No Waiver. Delays in enforcement or the waiver of any one or more defaults or
breaches of this Contract by the Town or Estes Park EDC shall not constitute a
waiver of any of the other terms or obligation of this Contract.
K. Third Parties. There are no intended third-party beneficiaries to this Contract.
L. Severability. If any provision of this Contract is found by a court of competent
jurisdiction to be unlawful or unenforceable for any reason, the remaining provisions
hereof shall remain in full force and effect.
M. PERA Retirees. It is the Consultant’s responsibility to inform the Town if they are a
PERA retiree.
11
Signature page
Town of Estes Park, Colorado
Print name and title: Frank Lancaster, Town Administrator
Signature:
Date:
Estes Park Economic Development Corporation
Print name and title: Jon Nicholas, President/ CEO
Signature:
Date:
ATP Management Company, LLC
Print name and title: Kyle A. Cox, Managing Partner
Signature:
Date:
ATTEST:
Town Clerk
12
Exhibits and Attachments
Exhibit A – Request for Proposals
Exhibit B – Consultant fee schedule (hourly rates of employees working on this project)
Exhibit C – Town Board of Trustees Approval of Contract
W-9 form
1
ATP Management Company, LLC
Planning a Sustainable Business Incubator to Leverage and Build
Estes Park’s Human Capital
October 9, 2015
Response to:
Request for Proposal
Economic Development Consulting Services
PROJECT 3:
DEVELOP BUSINESS PLAN FOR BUSINESS INCUBATOR
2
Contents
Letter of Transmittal
Proposed approach to Scope of Work
Statement of Team Qualifications, Resumes
Description of Past Projects
3
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL
FIRM
ATP Management Company, LLC
PRINCIPAL / PRIMARY CONTACT
Kyle A. Cox, Managing Partner
1108 Lavaca Street
Suite 110-115
Austin, TX 78701
678.612.9553
kcox@atpfund.com
FIRM DESCRIPTION
ATP Management Company, LLC is a Delaware incorporated Limited
Liability Company and Kyle A. Cox is the Managing Partner.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
We acknowledge receipt of the RFP and Addenda
SIGNED
Kyle A. Cox
4
PROPOSED APPROACH TO SCOPE OF WORK
Our understanding of your needs
Estes Park will create an incubator to support the economic diversification program
developed by the Town of Estes Park and the Estes Park Economic Development
Corporation based on work done with Avalanche Consulting, as reflected in the
Regional Strategic Economic Plan. The Town of Estes Park and the EDC recognize
that the term, “incubator,” can cover a variety of infrastructure, programming, and
value-delivery models. The RFP asks for a business plan for an incubator that is
customized to the strengths and gaps of the region. This incubator should:
Support the growth of local business and entrepreneurship, with particular
focus on the target sectors of professional services (especially IT), craft
goods, and outdoor recreation;
Leverage the overwhelmingly supported competitive broadband plan, to be
implemented by NEO Fiber, that should lead to an order-of-magnitude
decrease in cost/bandwidth for Estes Park businesses and residents;
Connect Estes Park to relevant economic development initiatives and
capabilities in the rest of the State;
Have sustainable economics and a solid operating model.
Constraints to which the incubator business plan should respond include:
A small population in the Estes Park catchment area, driven by a highly
seasonal, largely tourism-based economy;
Geographical separation from “traditional” sources of incubated innovation,
such as universities and population-dense geographies;
Lack of obviously available space to house a traditional incubator facility;
An economic base in which risk investors (primarily venture capital firms)
are not prominent;
A probable mindshare deficit among potentially relocating entrepreneurs;
Competition from other geographies in the Front Range region and
nationally;
A need to match any subsidy provided to the incubator with the realities of
the Estes Park tax base.
5
About us
This team has come together specifically to respond to this RFP. We are not
economic development professionals. Rather, we are executives with established
careers in incubation, investing, entrepreneurship, and startup support who have
worked together in the past and who come together for this project because of the
unique nature of the challenge and the significant potential for impact if the project
is planned and executed correctly.
Our full bios appear in the “Team Qualifications” section of this response. We
provide thumbnails here, so that you may better understand the approach and
perspectives that we outline in the rest of this proposal. These thumbnails also call
out the primary roles that each of us will play in the Estes Park engagement.
Isaac Barchas
Isaac runs the Austin Technology Incubator. The Austin Technology Incubator,
associated with The University of Texas, is the longest-established venture
incubator in the nation. It has been recognized by the State of Texas, the U.S.
Department of Energy, and a major entrepreneurship support foundation as one of
America’s most successful and best-practice defining incubators – paid by the Texas
State Comptroller’s office to create and coordinate incubators throughout the state;
one of three “best practices” in the nation according to DOE; top 2.5% out of 312
incubators according to a leading private foundation. Members and graduates of the
Austin Technology Incubator have raised almost $700 million in investor capital
since Isaac assumed leadership; the same period has seen more than $700 million in
exits and $1-1.5 billion in value still on the table. A former McKinsey & Company
associate partner, Isaac holds degrees from Stanford and Chicago. Isaac is
accountable for the strategy, talent, and sustainability portions of this engagement,
as well as for formulating operational best practices for the Estes Park incubator.
Kyle Cox
Kyle is Managing Director of ATP Fund, a seed-stage venture capital firm based in
Austin, Texas. ATP Fund’s investment thesis revolves around “incubator stage”
companies. Kyle has managed 2 exits over the past year, and returns to ATP Fund’s
investors exceed 355%. Kyle worked with Isaac at the Austin Technology Incubator
prior to founding ATP Fund, leading the software portfolio and the pre-seed
portfolio. Kyle also has extensive experience in mobilizing communities to support
entrepreneurship and in building startup ecosystems. Before moving to Ausitn, Kyle
was an investor and entrepreneur in Atlanta and New York City. He graduated from
Emory and Georgia Tech. On this engagement, Kyle will specialize in institutional
investor and corporate partnerships and in community engagement.
Ryan Field
Ryan manages Research at the Austin Technology Incubator, supporting companies,
investors, and academic projects. Ryan coordinates grant funding efforts, tracks and
reports on ATI’s metrics and key performance indicators, and facilitates research in
6
core areas of interest to the incubator. He has also co-authored and driven the
publication of two major white papers and actively engages with the UT research
community focused on entrepreneurship. Ryan also acts as lead researcher for
LiveOak Venture Partners, the largest active early-stage technology-focused venture
fund in Texas. Since joining LiveOak part time, Ryan has conducted due diligence on
nearly 100 companies, leading to 12 successful investments. Ryan’s undergraduate
degree is from Illinois; his two masters’ are from Texas. Ryan will own the team’s
competitive heat-map and opportunity/practices scans on this project.
Mike Freeman
Mike is CEO of the Rocky Mountain Innosphere, a leading, state-wide incubator
based in Ft. Collins and associated with Colorado State University, with operations
in Fort Collins and Denver. Previously, Mike served as Chief Financial Officer for the
City of Fort Collins, Colorado; prior to joining the City of Fort Collins, Mike led the
Local Government Solutions Group and was regional director of HDR’s Rocky
Mountain region. Mike also served as city manager of Ashland, Oregon, and held
numerous positions with the City of Thornton, Colorado. Mike will bridge the Estes
Park incubator into the broader state startup and entrepreneurship support
programs in Colorado, including at Colorado universities and colleges, and will work
with Isaac on strategy, sustainability, talent modeling, and operational best
practices.
Jamie Rhodes
Jamie founded both the Central Texas Angel Network (now the third most active
angel network in the United States by dollar volume) and the Association of Texas
Angel Networks, and serves as vice president of the North American Angel Capital
Association. Jamie has helped establish angel investor groups in more than 8 cities
and regions. Jamie is an active angel investor, and has history as an entrepreneur
and technology executive. Jamie ran the startup commercialization programs at
Texas A&M University; he also serves on the Board of The University of Texas at
Austin’s IC2 Institute. Jamie has two degrees from UT-Austin. On this project, Jamie
will be accountable for working with members of the Estes Park community to form
and launch the Estes Park Angel Network.
7
Our approach and ingoing hypotheses
We take an assets- and-capabilities-based approach to incubator planning. We
believe that Estes Park has unique, untapped assets and capabilities on which to
build an incubator program with national draw, namely a population that is over-
weighted with experienced, successful, highly-networked executives and leaders,
and an environment that can attract and retain entrepreneurs. Our approach will
design an incubator that will complement and reinforce these assets and
capabilities, support the businesses that grow from it, and market the resulting
Estes Park ecosystem nationally and internationally.
Estes Park differs from the parts of the country that usually participate in incubation
discussions. As a result, it needs a custom incubation program. Our perspective is
that building a generic incubator based on “incubation best practices” would be
unlikely to deliver value to the Estes Park community. The incubation program that
fully leverages Estes Park’s assets and capabilities – that plays the hand Estes Park
has been dealt – look very different from (and should complement) successful
incubation programs in Boulder, Denver, and elsewhere.
In planning for this engagement, we have broken down the key inputs for startup
success and plotted our understanding of where Estes Park stands against them
today, how we see an the incubation capability addressing those factors, and where
we believe Estes Park should be positioned in terms of its competitive value
proposition if the incubation capability is designed and executed well. (We use a
“superiority/parity/gap” rating against these factors.) Our pre-engagement
perspectives:
TABLE 1 – Likely incubator role in Estes Park entrepreneurial ecosystem
Key success factor
Likely role of Estes Park
incubator
Estes Park should be able to
claim …
Environment Create physical locus for
entrepreneurial talent
Enable high-quality, low-
cost access to professional
services, other
entrepreneurial support
Superiority especially on
lifestyle dimensions, enabled
by broadband investments
Entrepreneurs Analyze entrepreneur
population nationally and
market to segments with
lifestyle affinity
Actively cultivate major
Front Range universities,
SBDC, Front Range
community college
Provide training and
Parity generally for target
subpopulations
Superiority for
entrepreneurs in target
industries
8
coaching
Innovation Bridge innovation from
Colorado universities,
incubators, national lab,
major metros into Estes
Park
Parity in target industries
Gap in technology-driven
innovation
Expertise/mentor
talent
Catalyze creation of
mentor/advisor network,
leveraging Estes Park
residents and their
networks
Superiority, especially
versus locations with similar
lifestyle claims
Gap versus major metros
Capital Create and manage Estes
Park Angel Network
Build bridges to angel
networks and institutional
capital in Colorado, other
population centers
Superiority, especially
versus regions with similar
lifestyle claims
Scaling resources Partner with institutions
with proven scaling
resources
Facilitate engagement of
large corporates focused
on target industries, with
goal of bringing “anchor
tenant” into incubator
Superiority if anchor tenant
in target industry secured;
gap if not
Based on these ingoing perspectives, our project approach invests heavily in
cultivating Estes Park’s residents as experts/mentors and angel investors. To this
end, our project has a deliverable the formation of an Estes Park angel investor
group, in addition to a business plan. These people will form the nucleus of both the
mentor and investor networks. They will be instrumental in carrying forward any
recommendations in the plan, and in recruiting staff (especially the director) for the
Estes Park incubator.
Our goal is to work with you to plan a nationally competitive incubation program,
based in Estes Park, and drawing on assets and capabilities owned exclusively by
Estes Park.
9
Preliminary workplan (to be refined in discussions with Estes Park EDC
regarding calendar and availability of key stakeholders)
We envision that three months of work will be required to deliver the proposed
end-products, along with supporting documentation. However, the speed with
which we complete the work will depend on the availability of key stakeholders and
the timeliness of our interactions. As a result, we will leave the exact timing and
final calendaring to be determined in collaboration with you, but assume that the
project will last three to five months to allow time for syndication, iteration, and
buy-in. Regardless of other factors, however, we believe that it is essential that the
project be completed and accepted before the start of the summer tourism season
(May/June).
We propose the following deliverables:
An Estes Park-specific business plan, pre-syndicated with key stakeholders,
including sustainability plans. This will include the value proposition of the
incubator; how to market that value proposition; and the key success factors
for implementing it effectively;
Operational templates, such as sample contracts, reporting tools, metrics,
etc., for the incubator;
The preliminary membership and operational tools of the Estes Park Angel
Network. This will require that the Town and EDC are able to help us
engage the community in a sustained manner;
A preliminary staffing plan for the Estes Park incubator, including
recommendations for the governing board and the job description for the
incubator manager (if one should be necessary.)
Start date and concluding date will depend in large part on you. Our approach is
heavy on stakeholder engagement. Given the limited resources available and the
fact that the contract will be approved late in the calendar year, this means that we
will need to coordinate our visits to Estes Park at times when we will be able to
meet the right people, including people who are potential members of the angel
group. We will need your guidance on this. We suspect that an early December
kick-off, followed by a research-focused hiatus over the Winter Break, engaging
mid/late January with completion in the March/April timeframe would be likely.
Again, should we be awarded the contract, we would work with you to determine
timing, visit dates, etc.
In terms of how we would interact with you: we request that we have 1 hour check-
in meetings, via phone or video, bi-weekly. This would complement electronic
interaction as needed. We request that the combined Estes Park/ATP team use
cloud-based document sharing resources, such as Dropbox, to facilitate interaction.
We would visit Estes Park in person three times: at kick-off, at mid-point, and for a
final review. We also invite you to visit our incubators at Innosphere/Ft. Collins and
10
ATI/Austin, although that travel is not budgeted in this proposal. (This invitation
stands regardless of whether we work with you formally on this engagement, or
not.)
The table below outlines our current thinking regarding the workplan’s activities
and deliverables. Each phase will take roughly one working month to complete.
Again, we would expect to modify this based on our discussions with you, as our
understanding of your needs deepens.
Based on our reading of the RFP and our preliminary research, we hypothesize that
the following issues are top of mind for the Estes Park community, and will need to
be addressed in Phases I and II (after which we will present preliminary answers)
and refined in Phase III:
Programming. What should be the incubator’s core set of programmatic
offerings, in order for it to act most effectively as Estes Park’s hub for
entrepreneurs, small businesses, and freelancers? What should be the
curricula for those programs? (We would help design/outline the curricula,
but we suggest that the incubator director finalize them based on his/her
skills and networks.) What programs should the incubator import/with
whom should the incubator partner in order to stimulate entrepreneurship
and raise the profile of Estes Park as a startup destination? These could
11
include national/international programs such as 1 Million Cups, Techstars, 3
Day Startup, or others.
Operations planning. What operational gearing will best support this
incubator, given its impact goals and Estes Park’s economic constraints?
Operations should be efficient and low cost – leveraging standard contracts,
reporting tools, etc. – but operational administration should not be the
primary focus of the incubator director. What does the incubator’s staffing
plan look like? (Cost and economic sustainability are addressed in a separate
note, below.)
Connectivity. Estes Park’s incubator cannot work as an island. How to
connect with the three major Front Range universities, SBDC, and Front
Range Community college? What is the right linkage with Denver, Fort
Collins, and Boulder – how can the Estes Park incubator complement and
benefit from their initiatives? What relationships should Estes Park’s
incubator form with state and federal government?
Segmentation and targeting. Estes Park’s primary economic development
targets are professional services (including software/IT, education,
freelancers, wellness), craft goods (including fine arts, artisan food, and
spirits production), and outdoor recreation (such as equipment design,
manufacturing, and training.) On which of these targets can the incubator
have the greatest impact? Software/IT is “easy” given the investment in
broadband, but how should the incubator be structured to support additional
target sectors? (E.g., through a maker space? Through coordinated
approaches to apparel/equipment manufacturers – such as Nike/Under
Armour or Colorado-based firms such as Osprey or Gaiam – to establish
satellite design offices as anchor tenants for the incubator? Through hosting
national conferences on high-altitude performance training and health?)
Marketing and demand stimulation. Our experience strongly suggests that “if
you build it, they will come” does not work for incubators. The incubator will
need a robust marketing strategy to ensure that the Estes Park value
proposition, and the value proposition of the incubator in particular, reaches
entrepreneurs in the Front Range and beyond. Using “narrowcast” channels
– such as word-of-mouth messaging via networks of other incubators and
university entrepreneurship programs, presentations at events attended by
target sector entrepreneurs, and earned media – can be more cost- and time-
effective than broadcast marketing campaigns.
A note about broadband
One of the reasons that we are proposing on this project is the overwhelming
support that the Estes Park community provided for reclaiming local authority to
establish a telecommunications utility, which will enable broadband
implementation. It is rare that 92% of a community agrees on anything, much less
an investment in the future. This consensus, as much as the broadband initiative
12
itself, inspires us and makes us believe that the Estes Park incubator – which will
also require sustained community engagement – can succeed.
The broadband investment will be critical to that success. Obviously, bandwidth
shrinks distance. It is a foundational enabler for the kinds of industries and
economic diversification that you are targeting. The ability to “be anywhere, from
the most beautiful place on Earth” will clearly form an underlying message for the
Estes Park incubator’s outreach campaign.
Beyond that, though, we want to highlight the importance of low cost broadband for
the incubator’s own operations. The incubator w ill function as the locus of an
extended mentor/advisor/investor network for Estes Park. Many of the members
of that network will be Estes Park residents. However, the incubator will also need
to reach beyond Estes Park to ensure that local entrepreneurs have access to the
best minds and the right wallets. Over the past two years at the Austin Technology
Incubator, we have been partnering with Google Fiber to bring national and global
mentors to a select set of our companies, and to allow those companies to “pitch” to
national and global audiences, using high-bandwidth connections. The difference
between having these “meetings” via gig fiber and gig-enabled conferencing tools,
versus standard internet and Skype, is dramatic. We have not quantified the
increase in effectiveness, but, subjectively, it is huge. We will be drawing on these
learnings in our engagement with Estes Park. (Our colleagues at Google Fiber
declined to join this proposal as paid team members, but have agreed to consult to
our team informally on non-competitive issues.)
A note about financial sustainability
It would be wonderful if the Estes Park incubator could pay for itself out of
operating cash flows. Unfortunately, unless it is run purely as a real estate play
without value-added services or marketing, it almost certainly will not be able to do
so.
Good incubators can create a lot of value for their clients and for their communities.
However, even the best incubators have a hard time capturing a “fair share” of the
value that they help to create. The problem is that their clients – startups – have no
money. As a result, value is usually captured downstream by other stakeholders.
This can be through taxes (Austin Technology Incubator companies paid over $20
million in taxes over the decade from 2003-2012, roughly 4X the City’s contribution
to the Incubator); through jobs and wealth enjoyed by community members; and/or
through financial returns for investors.
In our experience, the key to incubator sustainability is to match the value
proposition needed by the community to the economics of the incubator, and then
diversify incubator funding sources to the point where the cash flow burden on the
community is acceptable relative to the benefits that the community enjoys. The
Austin Technology Incubator and Rocky Mountain Innosphere, for example,
13
between them receive funding from the following sources as well as from the cities
of Austin and Ft. Collins: incubated companies (rent, services fees, and equity), the
local university, the local college, the local utility company, state government
(multiple sources), the United States government (multiple sources), corporate
partnerships, event sponsorships and event margin, charitable foundations,
investors, and charitable donations.
We will work with Estes Park to determine the likely mix of and level of sustainable
funding for this incubator. The workplan impounds discussions with some potential
funders, in order to test funding hypotheses as they develop.
A note about real estate
We will work with the Town and EDC to generate perspectives on real estate that
could be used or repurposed for the incubator. However, we are not approaching
this engagement as being primarily real estate focused. In fact, whether building an
incubation capability in Estes Park will require a dedicated building, is an open
question for us at this point. If your team has made up its mind on this issue and
would like to receive significant real estate consulting services as part of this study,
then we are probably not the right group to serve you. Although we will have strong
perspectives on the kind of space (if any) that is likely to be most effective to deliver
the value that the Estes Park incubator needs to deliver, our expertise is in
incubation and entrepreneurial ecosystem development.
14
STATEMENT OF TEAM QUALIFICATIONS, RESUMES
Summaries below, individual CV’s follow.
Isaac Barchas
Isaac runs the Austin Technology Incubator. The Austin Technology Incubator,
associated with The University of Texas, is the longest-established venture
incubator in the nation. It has been recognized by the State of Texas, the U.S.
Department of Energy, and a major entrepreneurship support foundation as one of
America’s most successful and best-practice defining incubators – paid by the Texas
State Comptroller’s office to create and coordinate incubators throughout the state;
one of three “best practices” in the nation according to DOE; top 2.5% out of 312
incubators according to a leading private foundation. Members and graduates of the
Austin Technology Incubator have raised almost $700 million in investor capital
since Isaac assumed leadership; the same period has seen more than $700 million in
exits and $1-1.5 billion in value still on the table. A former McKinsey & Company
associate partner, Isaac holds degrees from Stanford and Chicago.
Isaac has worked with delegations from around the world on topics of incubation
best practices, strategy for local market conditions, and sustainability. Isaac is
accountable for the strategy, talent, and sustainability portions of this engagement,
as well as for formulating operational best practices for the Estes Park incubator.
Kyle Cox
Kyle is Managing Director of ATP Fund, a seed-stage venture capital firm based in
Austin, Texas. ATP Fund’s investment thesis revolves around “incubator stage”
companies. Kyle has managed 2 exits over the past year, and returns to ATP Fund’s
investors exceed 355%. Kyle worked with Isaac at the Austin Technology Incubator
prior to founding ATP Fund, leading the software portfolio and the pre-seed
portfolio. Kyle also has extensive experience in mobilizing communities to support
entrepreneurship and in building startup ecosystems. Before moving to Ausitn, Kyle
was an investor and entrepreneur in Atlanta and New York City. He graduated from
Emory and Georgia Tech.
Kyle serves as a frequent commentator on early-stage technology-driven economic
development and community formation. On this engagement, Kyle will specialize in
institutional investor and corporate partnerships and in community engagement.
Ryan Field
Ryan manages Research at the Austin Technology Incubator, supporting companies,
investors, and academic projects. Ryan coordinates grant funding efforts, tracks and
reports on ATI’s metrics and key performance indicators, and facilitates research in
core areas of interest to the incubator. He has also co-authored and driven the
publication of two major white papers and actively engages with the UT research
community focused on entrepreneurship. Ryan also acts as lead researcher for
LiveOak Venture Partners, the largest active early-stage technology-focused venture
15
fund in Texas. Since joining LiveOak part time, Ryan has conducted due diligence on
nearly 100 companies, leading to 12 successful investments. Ryan’s undergraduate
degree is from Illinois; his two masters’ are from Texas.
Ryan will own the team’s competitive heatmap and opportunity/practices scans on
this project.
Mike Freeman
Mike is CEO of the Rocky Mountain Innosphere, a leading, state-wide incubator
based in Ft. Collins and associated with Colorado State University, with operations
in Fort Collins and Denver. Previously, Mike served as Chief Financial Officer for the
City of Fort Collins, Colorado; prior to joining the City of Fort Collins, Mike led the
Local Government Solutions Group and was regional director of HDR’s Rocky
Mountain region. Mike also served as city manager of Ashland, Oregon, and held
numerous positions with the City of Thornton, Colorado.
Mike does periodic consulting working with top public and private officials and their
staff on projects and programs that enhance a community’s competitive position,
operations, and management structures. He will bridge the Estes Park incubator
into the broader state startup and entrepreneurship support programs in Colorado,
including at Colorado universities and colleges, and will work with Isaac on strategy,
sustainability, talent modeling, and operational best practices.
Jamie Rhodes
Jamie founded both the Central Texas Angel Network (now the third most active
angel network in the United States by dollar volume) and the Association of Texas
Angel Networks, and serves as vice president of the North American Angel Capital
Association. Jamie has helped establish angel investor groups in more than 8 cities
and regions. Jamie is an active angel investor, and has history as an entrepreneur
and technology executive. Jamie ran the startup commercialization programs at
Texas A&M University; he also serves on the Board of The University of Texas at
Austin’s IC2 Institute. Jamie has two degrees from UT-Austin.
Jamie has helped establish 8 regional angel groups. On this project, Jamie will be
accountable for working with members of the Estes Park community to form and
launch the Estes Park Angel Network.
Isaac Barchas Page 1 of 3
ISAAC BARCHAS
Austin Technology Incubator ibarchas@yahoo.com
3925 West Braker Lane c. 512.460.9973
Austin, TX 78759
WORK HISTORY
THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN, Austin, TX
Austin Technology Incubator, Director 2006 – Present
IC2 Institute, Associate Director
MCKINSEY & COMPANY, Chicago, IL; Sydney, AU; Auckland, NZ; and Dallas, TX 1996 – 2005
Associate Principal
EDUCATION
THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO LAW SCHOOL, Chicago, IL 1993 – 1996
J.D. Honors
THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO COMMITTEE ON SOCIAL THOUGHT 1990 – 1993
M.A., Century Fellowship
STANFORD UNIVERSITY, DEPARTMENT OF CLASSICS, Palo Alto, CA 1985 – 1989
A.B., Honors and Phi Beta Kappa
EXPERIENCE
THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS IC2 INSTITUTE, Austin, TX 2006 – Present
The IC² Institute, an interdisciplinary unit of The University of Texas at Austin, focuses on the theory and practice of
entrepreneurial wealth creation. The Austin Technology Incubator (ATI) is the flagship program of the IC 2 Institute. The
majority of ATI companies originate outside of UT-Austin.
Director, the Austin Technology Incubator (ATI) and Associate Director, IC² Institute
Recruited to turn around ATI and lead the resulting organization. Secured ATI’s economic model, redesigned its value
proposition and value delivery model, built a high-performing team, and rebuilt ATI’s presence/impact in Central Texas,
statewide, and nationally.
Built privileged relationships with investors and others in the startup community. Recruited, developed, and retained a
world class professional team. Enhanced ATI’s membership pipeline and upgraded its portfolio of member companies.
Marketed the “new” ATI to start-up ventures, investors, and the marketplace. Drive thought leadership regarding
entrepreneurship support, especially regarding incubation, university entrepreneurship, and capital markets evolution.
Serve as a global spokesman for IC² and as a member of the IC² Executive Leadership Team.
Institution Building and Turnaround
Rebuilt ATI’s economic model. Diversified funding sources and increased top-line more than 300%.
Rebuilt ATI’s value propositions and value delivery to startups and capital markets. Over the past 7 years, ATI
startups have raised more than $650 million in investor capital; investors have extracted over $650 million; and $1 -1.5
billion of value remains unrealized in current and graduate ATI companies. Over the past 5 years, 89% of ATI
graduates have successfully raised capital.
Developed a value proposition to economic development and political funders based on cost-effective job and wealth
creation through technology entrepreneurship. ATI graduates added $880 million in economic value, created over
6,500 jobs, and paid over $20 million in taxes in the Austin/Travis County area.
Created a service lines to support student/faculty entrepreneurship at UT-Austin, the ATI Development Portfolio.
Teams served by the ATI Development Portfolio have raised more private capital than teams served by NSF’s I -Corps
Isaac Barchas Page 2 of 3
national program ($29 million vs. $13 million.) Developed the Incubator as a laboratory in applied entrepreneurship
for UT-Austin students and as a research laboratory for UT-Austin and other faculty. ATI has averaged 30 student
interns per year; ATI staff teach the only endowed course in the history of The University’s prestigious Undergraduate
Studies program; and ATI currently supports entrepreneurship research conducted by three teams of scholars.
Redesigned and successfully implemented new management and governance processes, including boards, budgets,
pipeline management, impact metrics, and reporting.
Increased ATI’s public profile and brand recognition. ATI has had hundreds of media mentions and hosted over 100
events that have touched more than 10,000 attendees since 2006. ATI regularly hosts teams of both domestic and
global visitors with an interest in incubation, economic development, and university technology commercialization best
practices.
Talent Recruitment and Management
Recruited a professional staff of globally recognized executives on a not-for-profit pay-scale by appealing to their
passion for developing entrepreneurs, working with the University, and contributing to the Central Texas economy
within a unique working environment.
Created career paths that allow younger professionals to contribute to ATI as part of a broader career trajectory. ATI
program managers have been recruited to prestigious organizations including Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers, Booz
Allen Hamilton, and to become CEO of an energy startup.
Created internship opportunities for students from 9 UT schools and colleges, from Business to Liberal Arts. ATI
student interns have gone on to roles including: the General Electric leadership program, a Federal judicial clerkship,
Bain Consulting, Wall Street investment banking, executive roles in early-stage technology companies, and founder
roles in newly launched startups.
Economic Development
Contributed more than $880 million in economic impact to Central Texas and created more than 6,500 jobs.
Partnered with the City of Austin, Austin Chamber of Commerce, and Opportunity Austin on business recruitment,
retention, and other growth-oriented initiatives.
Engaged by State of Texas to create and support three new incubators, modeled on ATI, in other Texas geographies.
Founding board member of Pecan Street, Inc., a joint venture between ATI, the City of Austin, UT-Austin, Austin
Energy, the Environmental Defense Fund, and the Chamber of Commerce designed to further clean energy/smart
grid, gas, and water technology development and deployment. The Pecan Street Project has secured more than $10
million in Federal funding and launched a $29 million demonstration and research project in Austin.
MCKINSEY & COMPANY 1996 – 2005
International management consultancy.
Associate Principal
Served on the leadership teams for McKinsey’s Global Organization Practice and the North American Payor-Provider
(Healthcare) Practice. Designed and executed engagements in strategy, operations, and organization across multiple clients
in the higher education, biotechnology, agriculture, forest products, healthcare, telecommunications, financial services, and
technology industries.
Notable contributions:
Founding team member of McKinsey’s Auckland, New Zealand, Office, which grew from 3 to 11 full-time employees
while on the leadership team and became the dominant management/strategy consultancy in the country. Led
relationship with 2 of the office’s 4 largest clients.
Coached and mentored 5 consultants to become Partners.
Key engagements:
$3 billion U.S.-based Healthcare Provider: Led engagement to work with the new executive team of a previously
fraud-tainted client on the verge of bankruptcy. Developed strategic and operational options that allowed it to continue
operations, save 22,000 jobs, and re-enter the public market.
Isaac Barchas Page 3 of 3
$21 billion Global Technology Services Company: Served on leadership team that consulted to CEO and lead
executives on business strategy, operations, and organization re-design for a company under acute financial pressure.
Led organizational initiatives.
U.K.-based Health Service: Served on the leadership team of an engagement that helped the British government
reform health services and implement efficient and quality healthcare across the United Kingdom.
New Zealand Dairy Export Company: Led engagements to create growth platforms for one of New Zealand’s oldest
and most conservative companies, which is also New Zealand’s largest exporter.
Australia/New Zealand Forest Products Company: Led engagements to develop growth platforms and increase
operational efficiencies.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AND BOARD MEMBERSHIPS
Pecan Street, Inc., Founding Board Member and Finance Committee Chair
Human Dimensions of Organization, Advisory Board Member
CleanTX Foundation, past Founding Board Member and Chair
3DayStartup, past Founding Board Member
Austin Technology Council, past Executive Board Member
Central Texas Regional Center of Innovation and Commercialization, past Founding Advisory Board Member and Chair
Greater Austin Chamber of Commerce, Past Board Member and Technology Volunteer of the Year
Texas Foundation for Innovative Communities, Past Board Member
PUBLICATIONS, MEDIA, AND SPEAKING ENGAGEMENTS
Published articles in outlets including Texas CEO Magazine, The Dallas Morning News, Texas Monthly, The Austin American
Statesman, and The Wall Street Journal. Appeared in multiple media outlets, including The CBS Evening News and The Wall
Street Journal, as well as local media. Speaking engagements with multiple international and U.S. delegations, as well as at
SxSW Interactive, ECO, and EDU.
TEACHING
Contributed lectures and assisted in class design in courses at the University of Texas at Austin. Designed and co-taught
UGS 302 entrepreneurship offering for freshmen. Worked with faculty to mentor and/or judge student teams in the local
and global Idea to Product Competitions, the local and global Moot Corp Competitions, and other business plan
competitions.
Designed and co-led the Entrepreneurs’ Workshop, a 9 week curriculum for community entrepreneurs in Central Texas.
The Workshop is offered twice annually for the past 6 years. It is co-presented by ATI, the Rice Alliance, and the Central
Texas Angel Network.
KYLE A. COX
1108 Lavaca Street, #110-115
kcox@atpfund.com
Austin, TX 78701 678.612.9553
EDUCATION
MBA, GOIZUETA BUSINESS SCHOOL, EMORY UNIVERSITY, Atlanta, GA 2002–2004
Concentration in Strategy and Finance
BSEE, GEORGIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, Atlanta, GA 1992–1995
Certificate in Economics
CERTIFICATIONS • AWARDS
International Board of Heart Rhythm Examiners (HRS) – Certified, Pacing & Defibrillation.
3-time Recipient of St. Jude Medial US Division Excellence Award.
Star Award Recipient, Outstanding Corporate Employee at WebMD.
St. Jude Medical Education – Certified: Pacing, Defibrillation, Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy.
EXPERIENCE & ACCOMPLISHMENTS
ATP Fund – Austin, TX 2014-Present
Founding Managing Partner
Austin Technology Partners Fund I is a seed-stage venture capital fund focused on science and technology
investments in Texas. Investments include Toopher (acq. CRM Q1 2015), Lynx Laboratories (acq. Occipital Q2
2015), & Capsenta Technologies
UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS - AUSTIN TECHNOLOGY INCUBATOR – Austin, TX 2011–2014
Program Manager (Director), IT/Wireless & University Development Incubator
The ATI, within the IC2 Institute, is a part of The University of Texas - Austin that harnesses business,
government and academic resources to provide strategic counsel, operational guidance and infrastructure support
to its member companies to help them transition from early stage ventures to successful technology businesses.
Since its founding in 1989, ATI has worked with over 200 companies, helping raise close to $1 Billion in investor
capital.
Notable portfolio companies
Ridescout, raised $2.5M seed round (acq. Daimler Benz, Q2 2014)
Datical Technologies, raised $6.9M from 2012-2015
Structured Polymers, raised $2M Series A, Q1 2014
Riskpulse, raised $2.5M from 2013-2015
Xeris Pharmaceuticals, raised $21.7 from 2011-2015
POSTOAK VENTURES – Austin, TX / New York, NY / Atlanta, GA 2001–2011
Managing Director
International strategic advisory firm, working with clients through all phases of corporate development;
Engagements ranged from idea feasibility and patent filing to corporate turnarounds; Clients ranged from start-up
family businesses to multinational healthcare firms.
Venture Capital, Start-Ups & Advisory Services
SEED-ONE VENTURES 2008–2010
Principal with seed-stage VC firm
Responsible for sourcing and leading transactions. Raised $7M in outside funding. Provided due
diligence, business development, market assessment, and transaction-related services to emerging
medical technology and biotech companies. Led the development, negotiation and execution of
contracts and other business alliances with numerous domestic and international partners.
CEO of Firefly Mobile
Executed turn-around of bankrupt $6mm global consumer products organization in
telecommunications sector into a viable on-going concern.
KYLE A. COX -2-
Executive-in-residence of GenerationOne
Filled roles as CFO, Marketing and Operations executive for medical technology start-up in mobile
disease management space. Developed go-to-market strategy and pro-forma model tied to strategy.
EMISSION SUPPLIES 2001–Present
Co-Founder
Created market strategy and developed operational plan for national distribution company.
Directed new account acquisition and business development efforts. Achieved over 85% market share
for first year in core market.
ST. JUDE MEDICAL, Austin, TX / Los Angeles, CA 2004–2008
Sales Management, West Division, Market Development CRM/AF (2007–2008)
Marketing Manager, CRM – Heart Failure & Tachycardia (2005–2007)
Program Manager, Education Department (2004–2005)
Designed and implemented market development and share capture initiatives targeted both at the broad
market and specific competitive accounts. Market share capture of 3 full points in responsible products during
tenure.
Managed launch of 23 new products in Cardiology medical device space with first 12-months’ revenues
totaling over $350M. Launch responsibilities include positioning and messaging, collateral design, sales
training, internal and external promotional activities. Responsible for product portfolio of over $600M in
annual revenues.
Developed strategic marketing plans presented to CEO and Board of Fortune 500 medical device company.
Managed 22 Senior Sales Representatives dispersed across the Western US with sales totaling $100M and
20% growth year-over-year.
Launched new corporate sales organization to grow market share through strategic, focused sales execution.
Developed strategic best practices process to capture tacit knowledge of sales team to leverage and replicate
across entire sales organization. Defined capital equipment sales process, developed sales tracking and
accountability system and management level reports.
Led or participated in over 40 sales and marketing presentations to key accounts (e.g., Hospital CEO/CMOs,
Purchasing Managers), potential customers (implanting and referring physicians and staff), and internal
employees, annually.
WEBMD, Atlanta, GA 2000–2001
Business Systems Manager, Physician Sales Division
Led coordinated effort along with marketing division to retain potential clients acquired through corporate
acquisitions – enrolling over 50,000 members and increasing portal utilization by 20%.
FACTORY AUTOMATION SYSTEMS, Atlanta, GA 1995–2000
Engineering Manager (1999–2000)
Project Manager (1996–1999)
Project Engineer (1995–1996)
Directed reengineering of 150-employee industrial services organization. Crafted organizational structure and
business plan, transforming manufacturing facility from overhead expense into a profit center, enhancing
performance and accountability.
Led project management efforts to on-time/in-budget completion of capital equipment projects for industrial
and consumer product companies including Nokia, Coca-Cola, Ford, GM, Kimberly-Clark, and Duracell.
Michael A. Freeman Rocky Mountain Innosphere – Chief Executive Officer
Resumes
Curriculum Vitae:
Education:
Master of Arts, Public
Administration, George Washington
University
Bachelor of Arts, English Language &
Literature, University of NC Chapel Hill
Board Memberships:
Fort Collins Chamber of Commerce
Colorado Clean Energy Cluster
Colorado Water Innovation Cluster
Colorado Enterprise Fund
Mr. Freeman is the Chief Executive Officer for
the Rocky Mountain Innosphere. The Innosphere
is a 501c3 Technology Incubator that serves more
than 40 start-up companies annually which
employ around 200 people. Mr. Freeman is
responsible for all Innosphere operations, finances,
strategy and execution. Innosphere exists to
support high growth potential startup companies in
Colorado.
Previously, Mr. Freeman served as the Chief
Financial Officer for the City of Fort Collins, CO.
Fort Collins has a population of 140,000 and a
total budget of nearly $500 million. Fort Collins
is a full-service City including a municipal electric
utility. Responsibilities include overall management
of the City’s finances, budgeting, strategic
planning as well as economic development.
Prior to joining the City of Fort Collins, Mr.
Freeman led several management consulting
ventures. He managed the Local government
Solutions Group, was the Regional Director of
HDR’s Management Consulting Group
responsible for the Rocky Mountain region of
the United States.
Prior to consulting, Mr. Freeman was City
Manager of Ashland OR, and held numerous
positions with the City of Thornton, CO.
Mr. Freeman also does periodic consulting
working with top public and private officials and
their staff on a variety of projects and programs
that enhance a community’s competitive position,
operations, and management structures.
Michael A. Freeman Rocky Mountain Innosphere – Chief Executive Officer
Resumes
Professional Endeavors
Innosphere
2011 – 2015
Colorado State University Ventures
2010-2011
City of Fort Collins, CO
2006 to 2010
Local Government Solutions Group
2003 - 2006
HDR Management Consulting
2001-2003
Innovation Groups
2000-2001
City of Ashland, Oregon
1998-2000
City of Thornton, Colorado
1991-1998
International City and County Management Association
1989-1991
Public Technology Inc.
1991-1991
Mp
13700 Overland Pass
Bee Cave, Texas 78738
512.845.1555
James (Jamie) F. Rhodes
Education Master of Science in Technology Commercialization, University of Texas
at Austin, 2002
Bachelor of Science in Communication, University of Texas at Austin, 1980
Recent Honors
Angel Capital Association
§ Vice-chair, board of directors, 2012-2014
§ Invited to speak to National Academy of Sciences on the latest trends
in startups based on lab IP/research, Fall 2015
§ Invited to speak to Asian Business Angel Conference by the New
Zealand government, Fall 2015
IC2 Institute, University of Texas at Austin
§ Named IC2 Fellow, 2011
McComb’s School of Business, University of Texas at Austin
§ Commencement Speech, 2010
Austin Business Journal
§ Named one of the 30 Most Influential People in the last 30 Years, 2011
§ Best Places to Work, Top 10, Perceptive Sciences Corporation, 2007
§ Most Spirited Company, Perceptive Sciences Corporation, 2007
Greater Austin Chamber of Commerce
§ Technology Volunteer of the Year, 2006
Relevant Work
Experience
National NanoMaterials, Inc., 2011-present
§ Cofounder, Chairman, CEO of nanomaterials startup
§ Received STTR grant from Department of Energy related to creating
new type of field emitter for blood irradiation
Director, New Ventures, Office of Technology Commercialization, Texas
A&M University System, 2011-2012
§ Responsible for selecting technologies from university members to
commercialize, pairing it quality entrepreneurs, forming companies
and guiding them to success
Perceptive Sciences Corporation, 1999-2009
§ Founder, Chairman, CEO of nationally recognized market research
company,
§ Pioneered the use of cognitive psychological research to understand
customer behavior
§ Defined and validated marketing and channel strategies for Fortune
1000 companies
Traq-Wireless, 1997-1999
§ Cofounded venture backed cellular industry startup
§ Enterprise software to manage cell usage
§ Company acquired and IPO’ed in 2011
IBM, 1988-1996
§ Eight years in management
§ Led a variety of programs including: TCP/IP/email/network file system
for the RISC system/6000 platform; Object Oriented System
Management; WARP Server (IBM’s competitor to Microsoft’s NT
Operating System)
Innovation
Activities
E3 Angel Network, 2014-present
§ Co-founder and board member
§ Creating Austin based national organization fostering investment in
minority and women led startups
§ Mentoring and creating scholarships for women and minority led
startups
Central Texas Angel Network, 2006-2012
§ Founder and past Chairman of the Board of Directors
§ Over 100 angels
§ Evaluate approximately 120 business plans yearly for fundability
§ One of the top 10 most active angel groups since 2011
Alliance of Texas Angel Networks, 2007-present
§ Co-founded consortium of non-profit angel groups from all regions of
Texas, 2007 and incorporated 2010, Chairman of the Board
§ Members invested $45M+ in 100 +/- companies in 2014
§ Includes approximately 12 operational angel groups and 3 groups in
formative stage, stretching from Amarillo to McAllen
§ Mission is to share deal flow among operational networks and share
best practices to get fledgling investor groups up and running
Teaching, 2007-2008
§ St. Edward’s University, Adjunct Professor teaching New Venture
Creation in MBA curriculum
Boards Community, past & present
§ Central Texas Regional Center for Commercialization and Innovation
(CT-RCIC), Board of Advisors
§ Greater Austin Chamber of Commerce, Board of Directors
§ Long Center for the Preforming Arts, Trustee
§ National Association of Corporate Directors, Texas Tri-Cities Chapter,
Board of Directors, Governance Fellow
§ Rice Alliance I.T. and Web Venture Forum Advisory Board
§ Rice Alliance, Austin Chapter Advisory Board
§ Texas Foundation for Innovative Communities, Board
§ United Way Capital Area, Community Board
National
§ IC2 Institute, University of Texas, Board of Advisors
§ Angel Capital Association, Board of Directors
Private Sector
§ National Nanomaterials, Inc., Board of Directors
§ St David’s North Austin Medical Center, Trustee
26
DESCRIPTION OF PAST PROJECTS
This team has come together specifically to respond to this RFP. We are not economic
development professionals. Rather, we are executives with established careers in
incubation, investing, entrepreneurship, and startup support who have worked together
in the past and who have teamed for this project because of the unique nature of the
challenge and the significant potential for impact if the project is planned and executed
correctly.
Project-relevant past experience includes:
Barchas
Turn-around of the Austin Technology Incubator; incubator strategy consulting to Fort
Collins, Colorado, economic development planning team.
Cox
4 years of incubation management at the Austin Technology Incubator; 3 years of
Venture Capital investing experience.
Field
Authorship of white paper on Austin Technology Incubator economic impact; authorship
of white paper on economic impact of clean tech sector in Central Texas..
Freeman
Over 60 consulting projects for municipalities and regions ranging from Arvada, CO to
the State of Florida. List of project details attached below.
Rhodes
Catalyzed founding of 8 different angel investment groups; founded Central Texas Angel
Network and Association of Texas Angel Networks.
Mike Freeman, Relevant Project Experience
Page 1
Management Consulting Experience:
Senior Consultant, South Jordan, UT
Senior member of the consulting team implementing priority based budgeting for the City. Mike’s role is
overall strategy formulation with a lead focus on economic development programs and services.
Senior Consultant, Redondo Beach, CA
Senior member of the consulting team implementing priority based budgeting for the City. Mike’s role is
overall strategy formulation for the key outcomes the City is seeking.
Senior Consultant, Colorado State University Ventures
Colorado State University Ventures engaged Mike to conduct two significant projects. The first was
creating the first strategic plan for the CSU Research Innovation Center, a 60,000 sq. foot advanced
biosciences facility and technology incubator. The second project was facilitating and crafting an updated
strategic plan for the Vice President of Research.
Senior Consultant, Town of Evans, CO
The Town of Evans engaged Mike Freeman to lead a business planning process for Administrative
Services. The business plan involved analysis of the Finance, Utility Billing, Court, Human Resources and
customer service functions for the Town.
Senior Consultant, Denver International Airport
Denver International Airport engaged Center for Public Budgeting to implemented a new financial
management and budgeting process. Mike Freeman provided senior consulting services to top
management during the implementation of the program.
Senior Consultant, Dillon Valley, CO Water & Wastewater District Financial Analysis
Dillon Valley engaged DITESCO to perform a financial analysis, rate study and capital plan for the District.
Mike Freeman was the Senior Consultant working on financial analysis, modeling, and rate forecasting.
Project Manager, Pitkin County, CO Finance Department Business Plan
Pitkin County engaged Berksire to conduct a Finance Department Business Plan. Mike Freeman provided
all consulting services related to this engagement.
Project Consultant, Loveland, CO Building Inspection Process Improvement
Providing training for City of Loveland staff on process improvement for building inspection.
Project Manager, City of Petersburg, VA Finance and Economic Development Study
The City of Petersburg engaged Berkshire to conduct a City-wide study. Mike Freeman provided project
management for two departments.
Project Manager, City of Casper, WY Administrative Services Business Plan
The City of Casper has engaged Solutions Group to organize a business plan for its Administrative
Services Department.
Project Manager, City of Hayden, CO Asset Management/CIP Development Plan/Rates
The City of Hayden has engaged Solutions Group to guide them through the process of assessing their
physical assets/infrastructure and to develop a five year capital plan and corresponding rate scenario.
Mike Freeman, Relevant Project Experience
Page 2
Project Manager, City of Brighton, CO Capital Plan/Purchasing Process Improvements
The City is seeking significant enhancements to its capital improvement planning process and its
procurement and contracting processes. This project identified value added enhancement the City can
adopt to streamline its processes.
Project Manager, Santa Barbara County IT& GIS Business Planning
The business planning projects are designed to develop a two year implementation plan for a
comprehensive IT and GIS strategy.
Project Manager, City of Brighton, CO Capital Improvement Planning & Contracting Assessment
The City is seeking to implement better business practices to manage an increasing number of capital
improvement projects and professional services contracts. This study led to the implementation of best
business practices for capital planning and a procurement code update.
Project Manager, Southern University, Baton Rouge, LA Research and Business Park Feasibility
Study
The University is seeking a strategic implementation plan for its proposed Research and Business Park. The
study resulted in a business case analysis of how the park will enable the University to influence the regional
Baton Rouge economy as well as the State as a whole.
Project Manager, City of Fort Collins, CO Budgeting for Outcomes
The City is implementing a new budgeting process – Budgeting for Outcomes. Solutions Group and Public
Strategies Group are partnering on the project.
Project Manager, City of Fort Collins, CO Economic Health Strategic Plan
The City created the first strategic plan for economic health. Solutions Group facilitated the City Council
strategic planning process and developed the initial strategic plan document.
Project Manager, Town of Johnstown, CO Economic Development Business Plan
The Town is seeking to develop its identity and place in the Northern Colorado market place. The business
planning process will led to a series of high priority initiatives to improve the Town’s competitive position.
Project Manager, Douglas County, CO Budgeting for Outcomes
The County is seeking to end its reliance on “base” budgeting. The County chose a Budgeting for Outcomes
process to guide its new budget processes.
Project Manager, City of Laramie, WY City Council Goal Setting
The City has a number of new elected officials and sought assistance establishing overarching goals for the
community and a process for linking these goals to its budget process.
Project Manager, Jefferson County, CO Budgeting for Outcomes
The County is revamping its budgeting process using Budgeting for Outcomes as the basis. This project is
designed to lead the County through the process and integrate the results with the budget process.
Project Manager, City of Casper, WY Monthly Meter Reading Assessment
The City is implementing monthly meter reading. This project included the analysis of the plan
recommendations for organizational changes facilitated by the change to monthly meter reading.
Mike Freeman, Relevant Project Experience
Page 3
Project Manager, City of Englewood, CO Fleet Optimization Business Plan
The City staff has identified the opportunity to reduce the City fleet and re-invest funds now going to
maintenance and replacement into other priority programs. This project includes the analysis of the City’s fleet
and the identification of vehicles and equipment that should be removed from the fleet due to usage. The
analysis also includes evaluating lease versus purchase, renting equipment, use of vehicle allowances, and use
of personal vehicle use.
Project Manager, City of Northglenn, CO Budgeting for Outcomes Implementation
The City is implementing Budgeting for Outcomes as part of its 2006 budget process. The implementation
assistance provided includes facilitating the entire process, working with the staff to develop results, indicators of
success, and an outcomes based budget.
Project Manager, Santa Barbara County, CA Telecommunications Assessment
The County is working to enhance its competitive position for high-tech and knowledge based industry clusters.
The telecommunications assessment will help identify opportunities for making enhancements in high speed
telecommunications services to better support and retain knowledge based businesses.
Project Manager, City of Sioux City, IA Strategic Facilities Master Plan & Field Services
Consolidation
The City is working through options for assessing and implementing consolidation in this field services groups.
The project involves developing long-range staffing projections, assessment of staff consolidation, and options
for new facilities for housing the staff and equipment.
Project Manager, City of Berthoud, CO Asset Management Business Plan
The City is developing an overall asset management program for its water and wastewater programs. This
initiative involves inventory and assessment of assets and long-range capital program development.
Project Manager, City of Platteville, CO Strategic Water Supply Business Plan
The Town is seeking a strategic direction for its water supply portfolio development. The focus of the initiative is
to develop options and an implementation plan for making modifications to its water supply program.
Project Manager, City of Englewood, CO Fleet Services Business Plan
The City is seeking financial and operational efficiencies within its fleet management operations. This business
planning process identified significant savings in both fleet replacement and operations.
Project Manager, City of Englewood, CO Budgeting for Outcomes Implementation
The City implemented aspects of budgeting for outcomes in 2004. The implementation involves working with all
aspects of City operations to develop outcomes based operations plans.
Project Manager, City of Englewood, CO IT Governance Assessment
The City is working to address Information Technology governance issues. The assessment focuses on how IT
strategy is developed, how IT prioritization takes place, the role of top management, and financing.
Project Manager, City of Santa Rosa, CA IT Business Plan
The City is seeking to address issues of Information Technology finance, governance, decision-making, and
how to manage decentralized IT functions. The business planning process focuses on these issues.
Mike Freeman, Relevant Project Experience
Page 4
Project Manager, City of Logan, UT Asset Management Business Plan
The City is developing an overall asset management program for water, wastewater, streets, engineering and
environmental services. This comprehensive program is addressing significant backlog in infrastructure
replacement in each of these program areas and is focused on developing an overall financial management
plan for the City Council approval.
Project Manager, Miami County, KS Technology Deployment Business Plan
Miami County engaged HDR to complete a technology deployment business plan that will focus on the
vision, strategy, finance, and organization for three overall program areas: information technology, e-
Government, and GIS.
Project Manager, Town of Platteville, CO Asset Management Business Plan
Town of Platteville Deploys Asset Management Practices for Overall Utilities Operations. The Town of Platteville
utilities assets are being assessed, capital plan developed, and regulatory compliance program launched.
Project Manager, Town of Hudson, CO Asset Management Business Plan
Town of Hudson Deploys Asset Management Practices for Overall Utilities Operations. The Town of Hudson’s
utilities assets are being assessed, capital program development, regional wastewater evaluation, and other
tasks.
Project Manager, City of Laramie, CO Community Development Organizational Study
City of Laramie, WY Community Development Process Improvement Study. The City is seeking to improve its
development review processes. Developers have expressed significant concern of the timeframe involved in
the application and review processes.
Project Manager, City of Creede, CO Organizational Business Plan
HDR worked with the City of Creede to develop a business plan focused on "Securing Creede's Future" - a broad
theme that encompassed financial strength, clear organizational direction, strategic land use and development goals,
and providing future leadership. Creede’s business plan recommended approach to formalize future business
planning to identify and accomplish future goals.
Project Manager, City of Laramie, WY Fleet Utilization Business Plan
The City of Laramie, WY engaged HDR to complete a business plan for its fleet operations focusing on
making improvements in the overall maintenance functions and better defining the long-term costs for fleet
upgrade and replacement.
Project Manager, City of Littleton, CO Fire Prevention Bureau Study
The City of Littleton, CO selected HDR to lead its Fire Prevention Bureau through a process improvement
and workflow analysis effort. This project is focusing on overall workload, staffing levels, technology
deployment and performance enhancement.
Project Manager, City of Littleton, CO Community Development Business Plan
The City of Littleton, CO selected HDR to lead its Community Development Department through a business
planning process that is focused heavily on process improvement, inter-departmental collaboration and
organizational design.
Mike Freeman, Relevant Project Experience
Page 5
Project Manager, City of Thornton, CO Transportation Mobility Organization (TMO) Business Plan
The City of Thornton, CO engaged HDR to review and refine an existing business plan for its
Transportation Mobility Organization whose goal is to secure state and federal funding for significant North
Metro Denver transportation and transit projects.
Project Manager, City of Loveland, CO Information Technology & GIS Business Plan
The City of Loveland, CO is working with HDR to develop a business plan for both its IT and GIS functions.
HDR is guiding the overall process in collaboration with the City’s project team. The focus of these plans
is cost reduction, organizational design, and strategy.
Project Manager, City of Fort Collins, CO Finance Department Business Plan
The City of Fort Collins, CO hired HDR to develop an overall business plan for its Finance Department
focusing on improving the management capacity, workload planning, technology deployment, and
organizational design.
Project Manager, City of Thornton, CO Automatic Meter Reading Business Case Assessment
The City of Thornton, CO engaged HDR to develop a business case for the investment in automatic meter
reading technology. This project involved developing an overall business plan and 20 year financial model
that resulted in the recommendation of the AMR solution.
Project Manager, City of Santa Rosa, CA Strategic Consulting – Telecommunications/ Intelligent
Transportation System
The City of Santa Rosa, CA hired HDR to lead an assessment and implementation for the City’s advanced
transportation system. This project will involve performing a telecommunications assessment for the
community and development specific recommendations for funding and implementing the overall system.
Project Manager, City of Santa Rosa, CA Business Planning – Telecommunications/Institutional
Network
The City of Santa Rosa, CA hired HDR to lead an assessment and implementation for the City’s
institutional network. The business plan will address the City’s overall options for marketing
telecommunications services to government and non-profit organizations. It includes a detailed marketing
plan and financial plan for the iNet.
Project Manager, Town of Georgetown, CO Asset Management Program
The Town of Georgetown hired HDR to develop an asset inventory so that the Town can properly finance
and maintain its various utilities assets. This project involves performing an asset assessment and
valuation and GIS mapping.
Project Manager, Town of Castle Rock, CO Utilities Comprehensive Infrastructure Solutions
Business Plan
The Town of Castle Rock has hired HDR to complete a business plan for its water and wastewater utilities.
The Town has recently designated these operations as enterprise funds. HDR is guiding the business
planning process and creating detailed 5-year business plans. The business plans include operations,
capital, rate structure, IT, HR, and support services. The business plan is focused on resolving operational
pressures related to growth, development of new tools and approaches for efficient operations, and
development of financial management methodologies.
Mike Freeman, Relevant Project Experience
Page 6
Project Manager, City of San Diego, CA Asset Management Software Procurement Business Plan
The City of San Diego Waste Water Department is procuring software to improve its field operations in
wastewater collections. HDR Management Consulting was hired to guide the department through the
established business planning/investment justification process for the City. HDR’s efforts resulted in the
identification of a solution that saved the City nearly $800,000.
Project Manager, Johnson County, KS GIS Business Planning
Johnson County, KS has one of the most advanced GIS operations in the nation. HDR Management
Consulting has been hired to help the GIS operation develop a strategic plan and business plan for the
development of new products and services. HDR is developing a strategic approach to assisting the GIS
operation become more innovative and entrepreneurial. The business plan identified a strong market for
GIS services and consulting needs.
Project Manager, City of Arvada, CO Strategic Plan and Business Plan Development
The City of Arvada is in the process of developing an overall strategic framework for the City that will guide
the development of department and operational specific business plans. HDR has been hired to guide the
City through the process and to development operational business plans. This project will result in the
development of 12 business plans for all departments within the City. To date, three business plans have
been completed, for Information Technology, Finance and Human Resources.
Project Manager, Town of Firestone, CO Organizational Assessment
The Town of Firestone hired HDR to assess its organizational structure, organizational strategy, and overall
financing. The study was performed for the Town Council and resulted in a series of recommendations for
making improvements.
Project Manager for Telecommunications Assessment for Loveland, CO.
The City of Loveland identified a strategic weakness in its economic development efforts. The City lacks
the advanced telecommunications services required today for organizations to stay competitive. HDR was
hired to assess the City’s telecommunications infrastructure and present recommendations. The
assessment resulted in the immediate investment of two wireless broadband companies, a franchise re-
negotiation with Comcast to secure their investment in cable modem services, and a renewed effort from
Qwest to provide DSL services
Project Manager for Telecommunications Assessment for Martin County, FL.
The Treasure Coast is struggling to define its position in South Florida’s emerging knowledge based
economy. Caught between the Space Coast in the Orlando area and the Internet Coast in the Miami area,
Martin County is finding it difficult to compete. HDR Management Consulting is guiding Martin County
through a competitive assessment of its telecommunications infrastructure and its economic development
strategies. The assessment process revealed that there is a competitive need for added
telecommunications investments.
Mike Freeman, Relevant Project Experience
Page 7
Project Manager for Connecting Southwest Florida.
Spurred by a shared vision that they could serve their communities more effectively through the use of
emerging technology, Charlotte, Lee, and Collier Counties, in the final quarter of 2001, began a tri-county
initiative to improve telecommunications on the Gulf Coast. With the help of HDR Management Consulting,
the three counties conducted a technology assessment in December of 2001 and developed a series of
specific local and regional initiatives to pursue.
More than three hundred community leaders, from all three counties, gathered to participate in the
technology audit. The participants were divided into teams into economic sectors like business,
government, and tourism.
Project Manager Telecommunications Assessment for Lincoln, NE.
Prompted by a withdraw of a major local business, the Gallop Organization, the Major of Lincoln Nebraska
created the Major’s Technology Council which he charged with identifying and addressing obstacles that
needed to be overcome before Lincoln could compete in the New Economy.
Program/Project Manager e-Government Forum. Mr. Freeman planned and organized a national e-
Government strategic planning program with the Innovation Groups of Tampa, FL that has involved more than
70 local government participants. The e-Government program was designed to help local governments create
a customized strategy for integrating Internet technologies into their business plans and operations. The
governments in the program are using this methodology to quickly develop a sound strategy and move rapidly
into implementation. Some of the participants in the program include: Mercer Island, WA; Bellevue, WA;
Forsyth County, NC; Hickory, NC; Martin County, FL; Sarasota County, FL; Naperville, IL; Ann Arbor, MI;
Washtenaw County, MI; Plano, TX; Coppell, TX; Glendale, CO; Fort Collins, CO; Carlsbad, CA; Redondo
Beach, CA; Long Beach, CA; Berkeley, CA; Jackson County, OR and others.
Lead Consultant California Central Valley ACCESS Project. Mr. Freeman is co-managing a first of its
kind program in the Central Valley of California. There are nine counties involved in the ACCESS project.
The ACCESS project is designed to assess the Central Valley’s technology infrastructure and technology
usage and identify initiatives that can be taken to strengthen the region’s economic development
capabilities. Mr. Freeman is consulting with Kern County, Mariposa County, Tulare County and Kings
County.
Project Manager for Redondo Beach, California - Connecting Redondo Beach and e-Government
Strategic Planning Project. Mr. Freeman managed a process for Redondo Beach assessing their
community technology infrastructure and capabilities. As part of this assessment, Mr. Freeman developed
and facilitated a process for City employees and community members that helped the City with the creation
of an e-Government strategy.
Mike Freeman, Relevant Project Experience
Page 8
Professional Endeavors
Rocky Mountain Innosphere, CEO
March 2012 – present
Colorado State University Ventures
Economic Development Strategy Consultant
August 2011 – March 2012
City of Fort Collins, CO
Chief Financial Officer
2006 – 2011
Local Government Solutions Group, President
2003 – 2007
HDR Management Consulting
Regional Partner
2001-2003
City of Ashland, OR
City Manager
1998-2001
City of Thornton, CO
Assistant City Manager/Administrative Services Director
1991-1998
International City/County Management Association
Assistant Director Future Visions Consortium
1989-1991
To: Honorable Mayor Pinkham
Board of Trustees
Town Administrator Lancaster
From: Jackie Williamson, Town Clerk
Date: December 4, 2015
RE: Ordinance # 16-15 Municipal Court Judge and Clerk Employment
Contracts
Objective:
To adjust the salaries per the market study and establish the salaries for the Municipal
Court Judge and Clerk as required by 13-10-107 and 13-10-108 CRS.
Present Situation:
The Town Board approved funding for a Classification and Compensation study in
2013. The purpose of the study was to update the current Comp Plan utilizing accepted
practices in the management and design of classification and compensation systems,
and to address changes in the Town’s operations and staffing over the last several
years, which may have affected the type, scope and level of work being performed.
All Town employees with the exception of the Municipal Court Judge and Municipal
Court Clerk have had their salaries adjusted per the 2013 Compensation Study. These
positions are unique as they must be paid a salary as outlined in the state statute and
their salaries must be adopted by Ordinance. In order to effectively determine their
salaries staff tracked their time for 2014 and 2015 and found on average the Judge
spends 10 hours per week and the Clerk spends 14 hours per week.
Proposal:
Staff has recommended that both positions be moved to contract employment
agreements adopted by Ordinance. Attached are two employment agreements
outlining the employee’s duties, term, compensation, and benefits.
Eric Marburger and staff have reviewed the two positions as they relate to the market
and determined the Municipal Court Judge should be classified in the management pay
family as a MGMT 6 and the Municipal Court Clerk should be classified in the
administrative pay family as a ADMIN 6. The employment contracts outline the new
salary based on 75% of the pay range for the Judge as he has over 20 years of
experience with the court, and 50% of the pay range for the Clerk. The salaries of each
Administrative Services
Page 2
employee would be adjusted annually based on the market adjustment for the
prospective pay family.
The contracts would terminate at such time the Judge steps down or is not reappointed
to serve as the Municipal Court Judge. The Municipal Court Clerk is appointed by the
Judge; therefore, the continuation of their contract is determined by the appointed
Judge.
Advantages:
To bring the Municipal Court employees in line with the Town’s current market
study and keep them in line with all other Town employees.
The employment contracts would eliminate the need for the Town Board to set the
salaries for the Municipal Court Judge and the Municipal Court Clerk annually by
Ordinance.
Disadvantages:
Increase in salaries for 2016 would require a budget amendment as the issue was
not addressed prior to the adoption of the 2016 budget.
Action Recommended:
Staff recommends approval of the contracts and salaries for the Municipal Court Judge
and the Municipal Court Clerk.
Budget:
An increase in compensation would require an update to the judicial personnel line
items. The salaries would increase by approximately $8,635.
Sample Motion:
I move to approve/deny Ordinance # 16-15.
Attachment
Ordinance #16-15
Employment Contracts
ORDINANCE NO. 16-15
AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING THE COMPENSATION
OF THE MUNICIPAL COURT JUDGE AND THE CLERK OF
THE MUNICIPAL COURT
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE TOWN OF ESTES
PARK, COLORADO:
Section 1. Pursuant to 13-10-107 and 13-10-108 of the Colorado State Statutes,
the annual compensation for the Municipal Court Judge and the Clerk of the Municipal
Court are set through the employment contracts outlined in Exhibit A and Exhibit B.
Section 2. This compensation shall be effective as of January 3, 2016.
Section 3. This ordinance shall take effect and be enforced thirty (30) days after its
passage, adoption and publication.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE TOWN OF
ESTES PARK, COLORADO, THIS DAY OF , 2015.
TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO
By:
Mayor
ATTEST:
Town Clerk
I hereby certify that the above ordinance was introduced and read at a meeting of
the Board of Trustees on the day of , 2015, and
published in a newspaper of general circulation in the Town of Estes Park, Colorado, on
the day of , 2015.
Town Clerk
EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT (hereinafter called the “Agreement”) is effective January 3,
2016, by and between the Town of Estes Park, Colorado, a municipal corporation
(hereinafter called “TOWN”) and Gary R. Brown (hereinafter called “Employee”), both
parties agreeing as follows:
WHEREAS, the Employee is currently serving a two year term as the TOWN’s
Municipal Court Judge; and
WHEREAS, the parties desire to enter into this Agreement in order to establish
the salary of the Municipal Court Judge effective January 3, 2016; and
WHEREAS, the parties desire to set forth in this Agreement the other terms and
conditions of the Employee’s employment as Municipal Court Judge with the TOWN.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants herein contained,
the parties agree as follows:
Section 1. Duties
The TOWN employs Employee as the Municipal Judge of the TOWN’s Municipal
Court to perform the functions and duties of the position in accordance with all the
applicable provisions of the Municipal Code, Sections 13-10-101 et.seq C.R.S., and the
Colorado Municipal Court Rules of Procedure as they may be amended from time to
time.
Section 2. Term
The term of this Agreement shall be the same as Employee’s term as Municipal
Court Judge. The term of this Agreement shall terminate at the same time as
Employee’s term as Municipal Court Judge.
Section 3. Compensation
Beginning January 3, 2016, the TOWN agrees to pay Employee for his services
an annual base salary of $28,153.00 payable in installments as other management
employees of the TOWN are paid. Employee’s total compensation consists of base
salary and other benefits described in this Agreement. Employee’s annual base salary
shall be increased in each calendar year by the percentage of increase for management
level employees of the TOWN. In the event of termination of this Agreement,
Employee’s compensation shall be pro-rated to the date of termination.
2
Section 4. Benefits
The TOWN shall provide to Employee the benefits set forth on Exhibit A.
Employee shall not be entitled to any other benefits from the TOWN nor shall Employee
be subject to the terms and conditions of the TOWN’s Personnel Policy Manual.
Section 5. Removal
This Agreement shall automatically terminate in the event of removal of the
Employee as Municipal Judge pursuant to Section 13-10-105 C.R.S.
Section 6. Resignation
Employee may resign by giving a minimum of 30 days’ written notice to the
TOWN. Employee shall be entitled to all salary and benefits that accrue to Employee to
the effective date of his resignation.
Section 7. Notices
Notices pursuant to this Agreement shall be given by personal service or deposit
in the custody of the United States Postal Service, postage prepaid, addressed as
follows:
TOWN: Town of Estes Park
Attn: Mayor
P O Box 1200
Estes Park, CO 80517
EMPLOYEE: Gary R. Brown
P.O. Box 778
Estes Park, CO 80517
Notice shall be deemed given as of the date of personal service or as of the date
of deposit of such written notice in the course of transmission in the United States
Postal Service. Employee shall notify the TOWN in writing of any change in address.
Section 8. General Provisions
a. This Agreement constitutes the entire Agreement between the parties,
and it shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the heirs, executors, successors,
and assigns of the parties. This Agreement may only be amended by written instrument
executed by both parties, and each provision hereof shall be construed under the laws
of the State of Colorado.
b. In the event of conflict between the terms of policy provisions, regulations,
3
codes and ordinances of the TOWN and terms of this Agreement, this Agreement shall
take precedence and govern.
Section 9. Severability
To the extent any provision herein is prohibited by applicable Federal, State, or
local law, or is impossible to perform, such provision will be deemed deleted from this
Agreement and the remainder of the Agreement will survive.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement is executed on this ____ day of
______, 2015.
TOWN OF ESTES PARK
By___________________________
William C. Pinkham, Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
Town Clerk
EMPLOYEE
_________________________
Gary R. Brown
4
EXHIBIT A
Benefit Summary
Full Time
(over 30
hours)
Part Time
(under 30
hours)
Sworn
Police
Officers
Management
Retirement
Social Security/Medicare (Mandatory)
Employee: 6.20%/1.45%
Employer: 6.20%/1.45% x x x x
PERA
Employee: 8.00%
Employer: 13.70% x x Option
ICMA
Employee: 8.00%
Employer: 13.70% x Option
Voluntary 401K x x x
Voluntary 457/Roth IRA x x x x
Medical Insurance-CIGNA *Spouses are not eligible
Employee Only-Bi-Weekly
x x x
Employee with Children-Bi-Weekly
x x x
Dental Insurance-The Standard
Employee Only-Bi-Weekly
x x x x
Employee with Family-Bi-Weekly
x x x x
Vision Insurance-VSP
Employee Only-Bi-Weekly
x x x x
Employee with Family-Bi-Weekly
x x x x
5
Full Time
(over 30
hours)
Part Time
(under 30
hours)
Sworn
Police
Officers
Management
Life Insurance-Lincoln Life
Employer: 100%
Employee insured at one times annual
salary up to $50,000 max x x x
Employee: 100%
Volunteer additional life insurance or long
term disability coverage x x x
Accident Insurance-AFLAC
Employee: 100%
Volunteer accident insurance or disability
coverage x x x x
Death & Disability Plan-FPPA
Employer: 100%
Benefit includes coverage for Occupational
and Total Disability x
Flexible Spending-Regional Care
Benefit includes pre-tax options for
Premiums, Child Care, and Medical
Expenses x x x
Employee Assistance Program-Mines & Associates
Employer: 100%
Benefit provides confidential assessment,
referral and focused therapy for the
employee and household members and
assists the employee in obtaining the most
effective treatment while ensuring quality
of service. x x x
Holidays
The Town of Estes Park observes 7
holidays and accrues 24 floating holiday
hours each year. x
Pro-
Rated x x
Sick Leave
Accrued at the rate of eight hours per
month x
Pro-
Rated x x
Vacation Leave
Accrued based on years of service. The
first three years of employment it is
accrued at the rate of seven hours per
month x
Pro-
Rated x x
***All benefits are reviewed annually and subject to Town Board budget appropriations.***
EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT (hereinafter called the “Agreement”) is effective January 3,
2016, by and between the Town of Estes Park, Colorado, a municipal corporation
(hereinafter called “TOWN”) and Dale Stapleton (hereinafter called “Employee”), both
parties agreeing as follows:
WHEREAS, the Employee is currently serving a two year term as the TOWN’s
Municipal Court Clerk; and
WHEREAS, the parties desire to enter into this Agreement in order to increase
the salary of the Municipal Court Clerk effective January 3, 2016; and
WHEREAS, the parties desire to set forth in this Agreement the other terms and
conditions of the Employee’s employment as Municipal Court Clerk with the TOWN.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants herein contained,
the parties agree as follows:
Section 1. Duties
The TOWN employs Employee as the Municipal Clerk of the TOWN’s Municipal
Court to perform the functions and duties of the position in accordance with such duties
as are delegated to Employee by law, court rule, or the Municipal Judge.
Section 2. Term
The term of this Agreement shall be the same as Employee’s term as Municipal
Court Clerk. The term of this Agreement shall terminate at the same time as
Employee’s term as Municipal Court Clerk.
Section 3. Compensation
Beginning January 3, 2016, the TOWN agrees to pay Employee for her services
an annual base salary of $15,906.80 payable in installments as other administrative
employees of the TOWN are paid. Employee’s total compensation consists of base
salary and other benefits described in this Agreement. Employee’s annual base salary
shall be increased in each calendar year by the percentage of increase for management
level employees of the TOWN. In the event of termination of this Agreement,
Employee’s compensation shall be pro-rated to the date of termination.
2
Section 4. Benefits
The TOWN shall provide to Employee the benefits set forth on Exhibit A.
Employee shall not be entitled to any other benefits from the TOWN nor shall Employee
be subject to the terms and conditions of the TOWN’s Personnel Policy Manual.
Section 5. Removal
This Agreement shall automatically terminate in the event of termination of the
Employee as Municipal Court Clerk.
Section 6. Resignation
Employee may resign by giving a minimum of 30 days’ written notice to the
TOWN. Employee shall be entitled to all salary and benefits that accrue to Employee to
the effective date of her resignation.
Section 7. Notices
Notices pursuant to this Agreement shall be given by personal service or deposit
in the custody of the United States Postal Service, postage prepaid, addressed as
follows:
TOWN: Town of Estes Park
Attn: Mayor
P O Box 1200
Estes Park, CO 80517
EMPLOYEE: Dale Stapleton
PO Box 71
Estes Park, CO 80517
Notice shall be deemed given as of the date of personal service or as of the date
of deposit of such written notice in the course of transmission in the United States
Postal Service. Employee shall notify the TOWN in writing of any change in address.
Section 8. General Provisions
a. This Agreement constitutes the entire Agreement between the parties,
and it shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the heirs, executors, successors,
and assigns of the parties. This Agreement may only be amended by written instrument
executed by both parties, and each provision hereof shall be construed under the laws
of the State of Colorado.
3
b. In the event of conflict between the terms of policy provisions, regulations,
codes and ordinances of the TOWN and terms of this Agreement, this Agreement shall
take precedence and govern.
Section 9. Severability
To the extent any provision herein is prohibited by applicable Federal, State, or
local law, or is impossible to perform, such provision will be deemed deleted from this
Agreement and the remainder of the Agreement will survive.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement is executed on this ____ day of
______, 2015.
TOWN OF ESTES PARK
By___________________________
William C. Pinkham, Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
Town Clerk
EMPLOYEE
_________________________
Dale Stapleton
4
EXHIBIT A
Benefit Summary
Full Time
(over 30
hours)
Part Time
(under 30
hours)
Sworn
Police
Officers
Management
Retirement
Social Security/Medicare (Mandatory)
Employee: 6.20%/1.45%
Employer: 6.20%/1.45% x x x x
PERA
Employee: 8.00%
Employer: 13.70% x x Option
ICMA
Employee: 8.00%
Employer: 13.70% x Option
Voluntary 401K x x x
Voluntary 457/Roth IRA x x x x
Medical Insurance-CIGNA *Spouses are not eligible
Employee Only-Bi-Weekly
x x x
Employee with Children-Bi-Weekly
x x x
Dental Insurance-The Standard
Employee Only-Bi-Weekly
x x x x
Employee with Family-Bi-Weekly
x x x x
Vision Insurance-VSP
Employee Only-Bi-Weekly
x x x x
Employee with Family-Bi-Weekly
x x x x
5
Full Time
(over 30
hours)
Part Time
(under 30
hours)
Sworn
Police
Officers
Management
Life Insurance-Lincoln Life
Employer: 100%
Employee insured at one times annual
salary up to $50,000 max x x x
Employee: 100%
Volunteer additional life insurance or long
term disability coverage x x x
Accident Insurance-AFLAC
Employee: 100%
Volunteer accident insurance or disability
coverage x x x x
Death & Disability Plan-FPPA
Employer: 100%
Benefit includes coverage for Occupational
and Total Disability x
Flexible Spending-Regional Care
Benefit includes pre-tax options for
Premiums, Child Care, and Medical
Expenses x x x
Employee Assistance Program-Mines & Associates
Employer: 100%
Benefit provides confidential assessment,
referral and focused therapy for the
employee and household members and
assists the employee in obtaining the most
effective treatment while ensuring quality
of service. x x x
Holidays
The Town of Estes Park observes 7
holidays and accrues 24 floating holiday
hours each year. x
Pro-
Rated x x
Sick Leave
Accrued at the rate of eight hours per
month x
Pro-
Rated x x
Vacation Leave
Accrued based on years of service. The
first three years of employment it is
accrued at the rate of seven hours per
month x
Pro-
Rated x x
***All benefits are reviewed annually and subject to Town Board budget appropriations.***
1
TOWN OF ESTES PARK
EXECUTIVE SESSION PROCEDURE
December 8, 2015
Executive Sessions may only occur during a regular or special meeting of the Town
Board.
Limited Purposes.
Adoption of any proposed policy, position, resolution, or formal action shall not occur at
any executive session.
Procedure.
Prior to the time the Board convenes in executive session, the Mayor shall announce
the topic of discussion in the executive session and identify the particular matter to be
discussed in as much detail as possible without compromising the purpose for which the
executive session is authorized, including the specific statutory citation as enumerated
below. Prior to entering into an executive session, the Mayor shall state whether or not
any formal action and/or discussion shall be taken by the Town Board following the
executive session.
1. To discuss purchase, acquisition, lease, transfer or sale of any real, personal,
or other property interest - Section 24-6-402(4}(a}, C.RS.
2. For a conference with an attorney for the Board for the purposes of receiving
legal advice on specific legal questions - Section 24-6-402(4}(b}, C.RS.
3. For discussion of a matter required to be kept confidential by federal or state
law, rule, or regulation - Section 24-6-402(4}(c}, C.RS.
4. For discussion of specialized details of security arrangements or investigations
Section 24-6-402(4}(d}, C.RS.
5. For the purpose of determining positions relative to matters that may be
subject to negotiations, developing strategy for negotiations, and/or instructing
negotiators - Section 24-6-402(4}(e}, C.RS.
6. For discussion of a personnel matter - Section 24-6-402(4}(f}, C.RS. and not
involving: any specific employees who have requested discussion of the matter
in open session; any member of the Town Board; the appointment of any person
to fill an office of the Town Board; or personnel policies that do not require
discussion of matters personal to particular employees.
7. For consideration of any documents protected by the mandatory non-
disclosure provision of the Colorado Open Records Act - Section 24-6-402(4}(g},
C.RS.
2
Electronic Recording.
A record of the actual contents of the discussion during an executive session shall be
made by electronic recording. If electronic recording equipment is not available or
malfunctions, written minutes of the executive session shall be taken and kept by the
Town Clerk, if present, or if not present, by the Mayor.
The electronic recording or minutes, if any, of the executive session must state the
specific statutory provision authorizing the executive session. The electronic recording
or minutes, if any, of the executive session shall be kept by the Town Clerk unless the
Town Clerk was the subject of the executive session or did not participate in the
executive session, in which event, the record of the executive session shall be
maintained by the Mayor. If written minutes of the executive session are kept, the
Mayor shall attest in writing that the written minutes substantially reflect the substance
of the discussion during the executive session and such minutes shall be approved by
the Board at a subsequent executive session.
If, in the opinion of the attorney who is representing the Board, and who is
present at the executive session, "all or a portion" of the discussion constitutes
attorney-client privileged communications:
1. No record shall be kept of this part of the discussion.
2. If written minutes are taken, the minutes shall contain a signed statement from
the attorney attesting that the unrecorded portion of the executive session
constituted, in the attorney's opinion, privileged attorney-client communications.
The minutes must also include a signed statement from the Mayor attesting that
the discussion in the unrecorded portion of the session was confined to the topic
or topics for which the executive session is authorized pursuant to the Open
Meetings Law.
Executive Session Motion Format.
Section 24-6-402(4) of the Colorado Revised Statutes requires the specific citation of
the statutory provision authorizing the executive session.
THEREFORE, I MOVE TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION:
X For the purpose of determining positions relative to matters that may be subject
to negotiations, developing strategy for negotiations, and/or instructing
negotiators under C.RS. Section 24-6-402(4)(e) – MPEC/Stall Barns.
X For a conference with the Town Attorney for the purpose of receiving legal
advice on specific legal questions under C.RS. Section 24-6-402(4)(b) –
Lot 4 Stanley Hotel District.
3
To discuss the purchase, acquisition, lease, transfer, or sale of real, personal, or
other property interest under C.RS. Section 24-6-402(4)(a).
For discussion of a personnel matter - Section 24-6-402(4)(f), C.RS. and not
involving: any specific employees who have requested discussion of the matter
in open session; any member of the Town Board (or body); the appointment of
any person to fill an office of the Town Board (or body); or personnel policies
that do not require discussion of matters personal to particular employees.
For discussion of a matter required to be kept confidential by the following
federal or state law, rule or regulation: under C.RS. Section 246-402(4)(c).
_ For discussion of specialized details of security arrangements or investigations
under C.RS. Section 24-6-402(4)(d).
For consideration of documents protected by the mandatory nondisclosure
provisions of the Open Records Act under C.RS. Section 24-6-402(4)(g).
AND THE FOLLOWING ADDITIONAL DETAILS ARE PROVIDED FOR
IDENTIFICATION PURPOSES (The Mayor may ask the Town Attorney to provide the
details): .
The Motion must be adopted by the affirmative vote of two-thirds (2/3) of the quorum
present.
Retention of Electronic Recording or Minutes.
Pursuant to Section 24-6-402(2)(d.5)(II)(E) C.RS., the Town Clerk shall retain the
electronic recording or minutes for ninety (90) days. Following the ninety (90) day
period, the recording or the minutes shall be destroyed unless during the ninety (90) day
period a request for inspection of the record has been made pursuant to Section 24-
72204(5.5) C.RS.
If written minutes are taken for an executive session, the minutes shall be approved
and/or amended at the next executive session of the Town Board. In the event that the
next executive session occurs more than ninety (90) days after the executive session,
the minutes shall be maintained until they are approved and/or amended at the next
executive session and then immediately destroyed.
4
ANNOUNCEMENT
ANNOUNCEMENT SHALL BE MADE BY THE MAYOR AT THE BEGINNING OF THE
EXECUTIVE SESSION. MAKE SURE THE ELECTRONIC RECORDER IS TURNED
ON; DO NOT TURN IT OFF DURING THE EXECUTIVE SESSION UNLESS SO
ADVISED BY THE TOWN ATTORNEY.
It is Tuesday, December 8, 2015 , and the time is (state the time) p.m.
For the Record, I am Bill Pinkham , the Mayor (or Mayor ProTern) of the
Board of Trustees. As required by the Open Meetings Law, this executive
session is being electronically recorded.
Also present at this executive session are the following person(s): Mayor Pro Tern
Koenig. Trustees Ward Nelson. John Ericson, Bob Holcomb. Ron Norris. and John
Phipps; and Town Administrator Lancaster, Assistant Town Administrator Machalek, Town
Attorney White, and Finance Officer McFarland.
This is an executive session for the following purpose of:
For the purpose of determining positions relative to matters that may be subject
to negotiations, developing strategy for negotiations, and/or instructing
negotiators under C.RS. Section 24-6-402(4)(e) – MPEC/Stall Barns.
For a conference with the Town Attorney for the purpose of receiving legal
advice on specific legal questions under C.RS. Section 24-6-402(4)(b) –
Lot 4 Stanley Hotel District
I caution each participant to confine all discussion to the stated purpose of the executive
session, and that no formal action may occur in the executive session.
If at any point in the executive session any participant believes that the discussion is
outside of the proper scope of the executive session, please interrupt the discussion
and make an objection.
The close of the executive session is in the Mayor's discretion and does not require a
motion for adjournment of the executive session.
The Mayor shall close the executive session by stating the time and return to the open
meeting.
After the return to the open session, the Mayor shall state that the Town Board is in
open session and whether or not any formal action and/or discussion shall be taken by
the Town Board.