HomeMy WebLinkAboutPACKET Town Board 2013-08-27
The Mission of the Town of Estes Park is to provide high‐quality, reliable
services for the benefit of our citizens, guests, and employees, while
being good stewards of public resources and our natural setting.
BOARD OF TRUSTEES - TOWN OF ESTES PARK
Tuesday, August 27, 2013
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.
1. CONSENT AGENDA:
1. Town Board Minutes dated August 13, 2013 and Town Board Study Session
Minutes dated August 13, 2013.
2. Bills.
3. Committee Minutes:
A. Public Safety, Utilities and Public Works, August 8, 2013.
1. 2013 Freightliner M2106 single axle dump truck, Transwest Truck,
$130,871.00 – Budgeted.
4. Estes Valley Planning Commission Minutes dated July 16, 2013.
(acknowledgement only).
5. Tree Board Minutes dated July 18, 2013. (acknowledgement only).
6. Audit Committee Minutes dated August 7, 2013. (acknowledgement only).
2. LIQUOR ITEMS:
1. SHOW CAUSE LIQUOR HEARING FOR SAFEWAY STORES 46 INC., DBA
SAFEWAY STORE NO. 920, 451 WONDERVIEW AVENUE, 3.2% BEER OFF
PREMISES LIQUOR LICENSE. Attorney Roselle.
2. SHOW CAUSE LIQUOR HEARING FOR BOWL FORT COLLINS LLC DBA
CHIPPERS LANES ESTES PARK CENTER, 555 S. ST. VRAIN AVENUE TAVERN
LIQUOR LICENSE. Attorney Roselle.
Prepared 8/19/13
*Revised
NOTE: The Town Board reserves the right to consider other appropriate items not available at the time the agenda was
prepared.
3. REPORTS AND DISCUSSION ITEMS:
1. MULTI-PURPOSE EVENT CENTER & STALL BARN CONSTRUCTION UPDATE.
Director Zurn.
4. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS. Items reviewed by Planning Commission or staff for
Town Board Final Action.
1. CONSENT ITEMS:
A. SUPPLEMENTAL CONDOMINIUM MAP #2 - The Meadow Condominiums,
311 & 315 Kiowa Drive, Marys Meadow Development, LLC/Applicant.
B. AMENDED PLAT, Lot 6, Lake Pines Subdivision, 625 Community Drive,
David Moderi/Applicant.
5. ACTION ITEMS:
1. CLASSIFICATION & COMPENSATION POLICY 301 & 2014 COMPENSATION
PLAN. Director Williamson & Eric Marburger/Consultant.
2. ACCRUAL OF MAJOR MAINTENANCE COSTS POLICY 900.1. Director Bergsten.
3. PROBLEM STATEMENT: ESTES VALLEY DEVELOPMENT CODE TEXT
AMENDMENT, CONCURRENT REVIEW AND PROMULGATING PROCESSING
SCHEDULES. Director Chilcott.
6. ADJOURN.
Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, August 13, 2013
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 13th day of August, 2013.
Present: William C. Pinkham, Mayor
Eric Blackhurst, Mayor Pro Tem
Trustees Mark Elrod
John Ericson
Wendy Koenig
Ron Norris
John Phipps
Also Present: Frank Lancaster, Town Administrator
Lowell Richardson, Assistant Town Administrator
Greg White, Town Attorney
Jackie Williamson, Town Clerk
Absent: None
Mayor Pinkham called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. and all desiring to do so,
recited the Pledge of Allegiance.
PUBLIC COMMENTS.
None.
TOWN BOARD COMMENTS / LIAISON REPORTS.
Trustee Norris commented the Economic Development Corporation held their first
organizational meeting with over 30 investors attending. The corporation would
organize as a nonprofit corporation focused on business retention, expansion, and
recruitment in the Estes Valley. He commented on the current opening on the Local
Market District Board and encouraged interested individuals to apply. The Bear
Education Task Force reminds people to do their part to protect the bears by keeping
trash and other attractants away from bears. Waste Management, on their own
initiative, replaced Lonigan’s dumpster with a bear-resistant dumpster after a bear
entered the establishment recently. Other examples of bear awareness include over 80
local businesses signing a pledge to reduce conflicts with bears; Moosely T’s is selling
“Estes Cares About Bears” shirts with a portion of the proceeds going toward the
purchase of additional bear-resistant containers downtown; and Rocky Mountain
Chocolate Factory donated $1,500 to support the Task Force.
Trustee Koenig promoted the Rooftop Rodeo royalty tryouts for wranglers, attendees
and the queen on August 25th, 9:00 a.m. at the Fairground hosted by Rooftop Rodeo
Queen Michelle Claypool.
Mayor Pro Tem Blackhurst stated the Housing Authority would hold its monthly meeting
Wednesday, August 14, 2013 in Room 203 at 8:30 a.m.
Trustee Phipps stated the Larimer County Open Lands Board has completed a county
wide survey to determine the acquisition of new lands and the purpose of future
purchases, i.e. recreational, open lands, etc. The final report would be completed later
this month with a presentation to the Town Board in September.
Trustee Ericson reported the Audit Committee met and received a report from the
Town’s investment advisor outlining the Town continues to do as well in the market
place as possible. The Committee also discussed the audit report and the findings.
The Community Development/Community Services committee meeting would be held
on August 22, 2013 at 8:00 a.m. in the Board room.
Board of Trustees – August 13, 2013 – Page 2
Mayor Pinkham commented the Town Board and staff attended the topping off
ceremony for the new stall barn last Friday. He commended the Town Board and staff
for finally moving forward with a project that has been discussed for 30 or more years.
The Mayor would attend the Mayor’s Challenge in Grand Lake this weekend with
proceeds from the event to benefit Estes Valley Investment in Early Childhood Success.
TOWN ADMINISTRATOR REPORT.
1. CONSENT AGENDA:
1. Town Board Study Session Minutes dated July 23, 2013 and Town Board
Minutes dated July 23, 2013.
2. Bills.
3. Committee Minutes:
Community Development / Community Services, July 25, 2013.
4. Estes Valley Board of Adjustment Minutes dated July 2, 2013.(acknowledgement
only).
5. Resolution #14-13 – Scheduling a Show Cause Liquor Hearing for Café de Pho
Thai Inc., dba Café de Pho Thai, 225 W. Riverside Drive, Tavern Liquor License
on September 10, 2013.
6. Resolution #15 -13 – Scheduling a Show Cause Liquor Hearing for EP Resorts
Inc., dba Marys Lake Lodge, 2625 Marys Lake Road, Tavern Liquor License on
September 10, 2013.
7. Resolution #16-13 – Scheduling a Show Cause Liquor Hearing for Everest
Kitchen LLC., dba Famous Eastside Groceries, 381 S. St. Vrain Avenue, 3.2%
Beer Off Premises Liquor License on September 10, 2013.
8. Resolution #17-13 – Scheduling a Show Cause Liquor Hearing for Rocky
Mountain Pharmacy of E.P., Inc., dba Rocky Mountain Pharmacy of E.P., 453 E.
Wonderview Avenue #1, Liquor Licensed Drug Store Liquor License on
September 10, 2013.
9. Resolution #18-13 – Scheduling a Show Cause Liquor Hearing for Deer Ridge
Inc., dba National Park Village South, 900 Moraine Avenue, 3.2% Beer Off
Premises Liquor License on September 10, 2013.
10. 10. Resolution #19-13 – Scheduling a Show Cause Liquor Hearing for Safeway
Stores 46 Inc., dba Safeway Store No. 920, 451 Wonderview Avenue, 3.2% Beer
Off Premises Liquor License on August 27, 2013.
11. Resolution #20-13 – Scheduling a Show Cause Liquor Hearing for Bowl Fort
Collins LLC dba Chippers Lanes Estes Park Center, 555 S. St. Vrain Avenue,
Tavern Liquor License on August 27, 2013.
12. Resolution #21-13 – Appointing Jerry Roselle to Perform Show Cause Hearings
related to compliance checks conducted on July 25, 2013.
13. Park R-3 School District School Resource Officer Agreement for 2013-2014
School Year.
Trustee Elrod requested the removal of Consent Items 5-12 for further discussion. It
was moved and seconded (Norris/Phipps) to approve the Consent Agenda Items 1-
4 and 13, and it passed unanimously.
Board of Trustees – August 13, 2013 – Page 3
CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS 5-12.
Trustee Elrod stated the items are related to Show Cause Liquor hearings for liquor
establishments that have failed a recent compliance check and the hiring an attorney to
prosecute the hearings. Last fall the Board, as the liquor licensing authority for the
Town, requested the administrative action for liquor violations be handled locally rather
than by the state. He stated in order for the Board to have more control the guidelines
currently in place need to be retested and reviewed. He commented the current
guidelines are not a policy and that a policy on how to address violations and stipulation
agreements should be developed to provide staff with clear direction. He suggested all
7 violations should be brought forward as Show Cause hearings in order to treat each
licensee the same and render a decision by the Town Board.
Trustee Koenig stated the individual selling to the underage operative is cited into
County court in addition to the penalties served by the liquor establishment. She
commented the Board directed staff in the fall that future violations were to be reviewed
by the Town and not the state in order to take a vital role and be proactive in addressing
violations locally. The stipulation guidelines are a policy and the Town needs to offer
the licensee the option to stipulate.
Town Clerk Williamson clarified the current guidelines provide staff to option to
negotiate a stipulation agreement with a licensee, and it has been the Board’s desire in
the past to have first offenses negotiated and a stipulation agreement presented for
consideration. It was staff’s decision to offer the opportunity to negotiate a stipulation
agreement with 5 of the 7 licensed establishment as it was their first offense under the
current ownership or the first offense with the Town in some time.
Trustee Phipps agreed a new policy should be developed and reviewed by the Board
and he would recommend addressing the current violations before developing a new
pol.icy. Mayor Pro Tem Blackhurst concurred the Board should address the current
violations with the policy/guidelines in place and develop a new policy over the next
several months. Trustee Ericson agreed the main issue was timing with the process of
the violations and the timing of when violations were served. Norris expressed his
concern with the number of violations and repeat violations. Trustee Elrod questioned if
the Board could require the Licensee to serve a penalty in July the next year, and could
the cost of hiring an outside attorney be passed on to the Licensee.
It was moved and seconded (Blackhurst/Koenig) to approve the Consent Agenda
Items 5-12, and it passed with Trustee Elrod voting “No”.
2. REPORTS AND DISCUSSION ITEMS:
1. MULTI-PURPOSE EVENT CENTER & STALL BARN CONSTRUCTION
UPDATE. Director Zurn reported the final elements of the structural steel for
the stall barn was placed in a topping out ceremony. The project moves
forward with the installation of exterior panels to begin closing in the barn. The
foundations for the MPEC are moving toward completion and the structural
steel has started to arrive on site. The project continues to be on schedule for
delivery in February and on budget.
Assistant Town Administrator Richardson updated the Board on the marketing
efforts for the MPEC, stating Johnson Consulting recommended an outside
agency be used to market the facilities at the fairgrounds and the conference
center. An RFP continues to be developed by Johnson Consulting with a
timeline of 6 weeks for the completion and submittal of proposals. The outside
consultant would be used moving forward to market the facilities. Director
Winslow stated the goal remains to have an event in the facility by April.
Mayor Pro Tem Blackhurst confirmed with staff that an open house has been
budgeted to invite the community and front range communities that may be
interested in using the facilities.
Board of Trustees – August 13, 2013 – Page 4
2. VISITOR CENTER TRANSIT (PARKING) STRUCTURE PLANNING
PROCESS. Director Zurn stated the $4.6 million project funded by 3 grants
and Town matching funds has obtained the proper environmental clearance,
therefore, the project can move forward to the design phase. The Board
approved an accelerated review process at the July 9, 2013 meeting. The
public process would be inclusive and open to public input throughout the
process, would provide the Town Board with immediate information for decision
making, fast-track the approval process, involve stakeholders in the design
phase early and make the facility available for use by the public sooner than the
current review process used for development. A 3 day design charrette
meeting would be held on September 4, 5 and 6, 2013. The facilitator would
develop a detail schedule of the public process; at the end of the 3 day process
a schematic design would be presented to the Town Board for approval; a
preliminary design would be developed and submitted to the Planning
Commission for review and approval; once approval has been received the final
construction documents would be developed; a construction RFP would be
submitted; an award of a contract would be approved by the Town Board; and
construction would begin. The 3 day public process would include on day 1 -
the determination of building uses, physical constraints, and possible
configurations; day 2 – public and stakeholders would be invited to comment on
schematics during the morning session, selection of options/alternatives, and
formal public comment would be received by the end of the day; day 3 –
consultants would narrow down schematics to one option, provide schematic,
elevations and floor plans, and a meeting in the evening would allow the
Planning Commission an opportunity to provide a formal opinion on the
schematic to the Town Board. The meetings would be televised for the public
to review the process.
Trustee comments have been summarized: Mayor Pro Tem Blackhurst and
Trustee Koenig raised concern of the time commitment required by Trustees
and Planning Commissioners; Trustee Koenig stated the intent was to have the
public help design the building and the current process does not allow them
input until after the building is designed; the board requested allowing the public
input on day one during the design of the building with respect to aesthetics; an
outlined agenda with timeframes as to when the Board and Planning
Commission would need to attend the three day meetings; and the formal
decision on the schematic design would take place at the regular board
meeting on September 10, 2013.
3. PRO-CYCLING CHALLENGE UPDATE. Director Winslow provided a review
of the race course, aid stations, water stations, positioning of police and fire
personnel, parking areas (Lot 4 behind Safeway), family viewing area, shuttles,
road closures, Bond Park events, timing of the race, and other events during
race day. He stated the event would bring significant exposure to the Town
from over 160 countries in which the race would be broadcast. He reiterated
the road closures, detours, increased security, and large crowds of spectators
for the entire day, with many arriving the days in advance of the race to stake
out prime viewing opportunities.
3. ACTION ITEMS:
1. ESTES VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION APPOINTMENT.. Director
Chilcott stated a position on the commission became open due to the
resignation of Commissioner Tucker. The position was advertised and
interviews were held. The interview team recommends the appointment of
Charley Dickey to complete Commissioner Tucker’s term. It was moved and
seconded (Ericson/Blackhurst) to approve the appointment of Charley
Dickey to the Estes Valley Planning Commission for a term expiring
December 31, 2015, and it passed unanimously.
Board of Trustees – August 13, 2013 – Page 5
2. LMD INTERVIEW COMMITTEE, ESTES PARK ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
CORPORATION, NORTHERN COLORADO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
CORPORATION & COMMUNITY SERVICE GRANT REVIEW COMMITTEE
APPOINTMENTS. Administrator Lancaster stated the Board policy states the
full Board shall approve the designation of any trustee or designee serving on
behalf of the Board on any outside committee or board interview committee.
The Board needs to approve the interview committee for the upcoming vacancy
on the Local Marketing District Board, positions on the newly formed Estes
Park Economic Development Corporation, the review committee for the 2014
Community Services Grants, and an ex-officio representative on the Northern
Colorado Economic Development Corporation due to the financial support
provided by the Town to the group.
It was moved and seconded (Elrod/Blackhurst) to approve the appointment
of Trustee Norris, Trustee Phipps and Town Administrator Lancaster to
the Local Marketing District interview committee, and it passed
unanimously.
Greg Rosenor/Town citizen and Economic Task Force member commented the
Economic Task Force and three of the major Economic Development Directors
in Colorado recommended the appointment of two members by the Town to the
Estes Park Economic Development Corporation.
It was moved and seconded (Elrod/Ericson) to approve the appointment of
Mayor Pinkham and Town Administrator Lancaster to the Estes Park
Economic Development Corporation, and it passed unanimously.
It was moved and seconded (Norris Elrod) to approve the appointment of
Trustee Koenig, Trustee Ericson and Assistant Town Administrator
Richardson to the Community Services Grant review committeee, and it
passed with Trustee Koenig abstaining.
It was moved and seconded (Elrod/Koenig) to approve the appointment of
Town Administrator Lancaster as an ex-officio member to the Northern
Colorado Economic Development Corporation, and it passed unanimously
3. ORDINANCE #11-13 PROHIBITING MARIJUANA ESTABLISHMENTS –
TESTING FACILITIES, PRODUCTION FACILITIES, RETAIL STORES &
PRIVATEMARIJUANA CLUBS. Attorney White reviewed the passage of
Amendment 64 that legalizes the personal possession, use, and limited home-
growing of marijuana by adults 21 years of age and older, and authorizes the
operation of marijuana establishments which include marijuana cultivation
facilities, marijuana product manufacturing facilities, marijuana testing facilities,
and retail marijuana stores. Amendment 64 authorizes local governments to
prohibit the operation of marijuana establishments by adoption of an ordinance.
The proposed ordinance would prohibit the operation of marijuana
establishments, including private marijuana clubs.
Those speaking in favor of Ordinance #11-13 Neil Woodley/Town citizen,
Charley Dickey/Town citizen and business owner, and Chris Daubin/County
resident. All stated the establishments would negatively impact the community,
which continues to be a family friendly destination.
Erin Curran/Chapter leader of Estes Park Moms for Marijuana spoke in
opposition of Ordinance #11-13 reading from a prepared statement included in
the Board packet. She stated marijuana is less harmful than alcohol, the least
toxic recreational drug, established marijuana businesses would drive the black
market and drug dealers out of town limits, and the businesses would provide
additional tax dollars for the local schools.
Board of Trustees – August 13, 2013 – Page 6
Trustee Elrod stated the Board has received comments from constituents on
why the Board is not supporting the Amendment passed by the electorate. The
review of the local election results demonstrates the passage of the measure in
Estes Park was extremely close. He contends marijuana businesses continue
to be in conflict with Federal laws and money laundering laws.
It was moved and seconded (Norris/Phipps) to approve Ordinance #11-13
Prohibiting Marijuana Centers, Optional Premises Cultivation Operations
and Marijuana Infused Products Manufacturing, and it passed unanimously.
4. ORDINANCE #12-13 AMENDING MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 9.28 DRUG
PARAPHERNALIA & MARIJUANA. Attorney White commented the passage
of Amendment 64 legalizing the personal possession, use and limited home-
growing of marijuana by adults 21 years of age and older, requires a revision to
the Town’s Municipal Code. Ordinance #12-13 amends Chapter 9.28 of the
Municipal Code to address the provisions of Amendment 64 which prohibit the
enforcement of any municipal ordinance which prohibits the possession, use
and display of one ounce or less of marijuana by a person over 21 years
subject to certain restrictions as set forth in the Ordinance. He stated Police
Chief Kufeld has agreed to the provisions outlined in the Ordinance. Any
additional regulations may be brought forward at a later date as needed, such
as restricting the growth of marijuana in residential areas.
Town Administrator Lancaster stated Larimer County continues to review the
issue but may limit the number of dispensaries to 2 in the unincorporated area.
There are currently 2 medical marijuana facilities that would be converted,
thereby meeting the limit and not allowing any additional facilities in the
unincorporated Larimer County.
It was moved and seconded (Ericson/Koenig) to approve Ordinance #12-13
Amending Municipal Code Chapter 9.28 Drug Paraphernalia with a
revision to the ordinance to consistently state “over the age of 21”, and it
passed unanimously.
5. MULTI-PURPOSE EVENT CENTER & STALL BARN CIVIL SITE WORK
CONTRACT. Engineer Ash stated Public Works advertised the RFP in July for
construction services to complete the underground utilities and concrete
walkways for the Multi-Purpose Event Center and the stall barn. Staff received
one response from Cornerstone Concrete, Inc. for a bid of $359,845.20. Staff
evaluated the submitted bid and recommends the fee is appropriate for the
proposed scope of services and Cornerstone Concrete, Inc. is a qualified
respondent to the RFP. Staff therefore recommends the Town enter into a
contract with Cornerstone Concrete, Inc. for $359,845.20 with a contingency of
10% for the execution of these services. The project would be managed by the
Public Works staff. It was moved and seconded (Norris/Koenig) to approve a
construction budget of $395,829.72 and approve the contract with
Cornerstone Concrete, Inc. to complete the civil sitework for the MPEC
and Stall Barn for the fee of $359,745.20, and it passed unanimously.
6. VISITOR CENTER TRANSIT FACILITY PARKING STRUCTURE DESIGN
CONTRACT. Director Zurn stated the Town has obtained environmental
approval from the Federal Government to proceed with construction of the
facility. An RFP was advertised and five proposals were received. After close
review of the proposals by the stakeholder group and an interview process,
Walker Parking Consultants was determined to be the most qualified team for
the project design. Staff negotiated a fee of $619,887 for the design and
construction oversight of the project with Walker Parking Consultants. The firm
would also conduct the public process for the fee outlined. After further
discussion, it was moved and seconded (Blackhurst/Norris) to approve a
design and construction oversight budget of $681,875.00 and approve the
contract with Walker Parking Consultants to complete design and
Board of Trustees – August 13, 2013 – Page 7
construction of the Visitor Center Transit Parking Structure for the
negotiated services and fee of $619,887.00, and it passed unanimously.
It was moved and seconded (Blackhurst/Ericson) to extend the meeting to
10:15 p.m., and it passed unanimously.
7. STRATEGIC PLAN - ADOPTION OF 5-7 YEAR GOALS & 2014
OBJECTIVES. Town Administrator Lancaster presented the strategic plan,
including 5-7 year goals and objectives for 2014 developed during several
study sessions in late May, June and July. The goals and objectives have been
refined during subsequent meetings to clearly articulate each item. The goals
and objectives provide clear guidance to staff in the preparation of the
upcoming 2014 budget and work plans, as well as communicating to the public
the key areas the Board has identified as important. After approval from the
Board, staff would be educated on the strategic plan.
Mayor Pro Tem Blackhurst stated concern with the number of outcome areas
and the possibility the Board and staff could lose focus on the issues. Trustee
Ericson complemented Town Administrator Lancaster on the process.
Jean McGuire/County citizen and Ann Morris/County citizen and League of
Women Voters Recycling Committee spoke to the need for the public to weigh
in on the Town’s proposed goals and requested the item be tabled to a future
meeting. They requested the Board add a specific goal to address recycling
and the purchase and installation of additional dual trash/recycle containers.
It was moved and seconded (Norris/Blackhurst) to adopt the revised Town
Vision and Mission statements, key outcome areas, goals and 2014
objectives as presented, and it passed unanimously.
Whereupon Mayor Pinkham adjourned the meeting at 10:12 p.m.
William C. Pinkham, Mayor
Jackie Williamson, Town Clerk
Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, August 13, 2013
Minutes of a Study Session meeting of the TOWN BOARD of the Town of
Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held at Town Hall in
Rooms 202/203 in said Town of Estes Park on the 13th day of August,
2013.
Board: Mayor Pinkham, Mayor Pro Tem Blackhurst, Trustees Elrod,
Ericson, Koenig, Norris and Phipps
Attending: All
Also Attending: Town Administrator Lancaster, Assistant Town Administrator
Richardson, Town Attorney White and Town Clerk
Williamson
Absent: None
Mayor Pinkham called the meeting to order at 4:35 p.m.
FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS.
Mayor Pinkham requested the next study session include a discussion on staff support
to the Town Board.
ROLE OF TOWN BOARD LIAISONS.
Town Administrator Lancaster reviewed the policies governing appointments to Town
Board committees, liaison positions, and special assignments, i.e. temporary
committees, community groups, and interview panels, stating the polices should be
reviewed for consistency.
Mayor Pro Tem Blackhurst stated concern that liaison appointees are acting as
advocates of the groups and not displaying impartiality. Members should be impartial
and be a conduit for sharing information related to the group with the full Board and not
advocating for the group. He would recommend liaison positions be eliminated. Mayor
Pinkham stated the original role of the liaison has gone beyond the intent and crept into
an advocacy role as well as the liaison becoming more involved with the groups.
Trustee Ericson supports the liaison positions as they help to keep the Board informed
on the activities of groups. He agrees the role of the liaison should not be one of
advocacy. Trustee Koenig agreed and stated the liaison must stay out of the processes
of the committee. She would not advocate for liaison position for special district such as
the School district, Library, Hospital, etc.
The Board stated the liaison positions should be appointed after the regular Municipal
Elections with a term of 2 years; the language in the Municipal Code and the policies
shall be consistent and clarify what appointments can be appointed by the mayor and
other appointments the Board would endorse; special assignments which become
permanent committees should have Board approval of committee members; and
interview committees should consist of the liaison to the board/commission with a
second member appointed by the Town Board. Town Administrator Lancaster stated
the policy would be updated to define special committee/special assignment as a sub-
group of the Board, i.e. Transportation Committee. Staff would prepare revisions to the
policy including definitions and examples of each board and committee type. The Board
would determine which appointments can be made by the mayor at a future study
session.
COMPENSATION POLICY DISCUSSION.
Eric Marburger/ESM Consulting provided the Board with an update on the Classification
and Compensation Plan: questionnaires collected from employees, market data
Town Board Study Session – August 13, 2013 – Page 2
collected for as many Town positions as possible, Town positions organized into job
families, pay scales developed for each job family, and job descriptions are being
consolidated and rewritten. Market data was collected from public sector resort
communities, public sector local communities, and private sector data for appropriate
positions: Denver/Boulder market, Northern Colorado market and resort area market.
The resort community data was slightly lower than the local area community with regard
to public sectors. For positions in which private sector data was used the Denver
market was 8-10% higher than Northern Colorado. Market data was blended to
average the markets and to address the competitive disadvantages of Estes Park, i.e.
lack of employee housing, affordable housing, day care, reverse commute to valley for
other family members and response time requirements. Job families established
include Administrative, Management, Public Safety, Technical and Professional, and
Labor, Trades, Skilled and Crafts. The pay scales developed are simple, open pay
ranges, midpoints are near the average market wage, each job assigned to a pay
range, jobs moved between ranges as market changes, and entire pay scale updated
as market changes. Next steps would include finalizing pay scales, confirm placement
of each position into a pay range, determine overall costs and provide a
recommendation for the 2014 budget, develop pay methodology for placement of
employees in their new pay range, finalize job descriptions, implement robust
communication to employees and finalize implementation. As there were no major
concerns raised by the Board with the process or data presented, staff would meet with
the consultant to place employees in the new classification system and identify their
new pay range, prepare a final presentation to the Board, and prepare a
recommendation to the Board for the 2014 budget.
ICE RINK DISCUSSION.
Based on the success of the rink last winter, staff proposes the installation of the ice
skating rink at the same location, parking lot next to children’s park, this coming winter
season. Without the initial infrastructure and transportation costs, staff estimates the
operational cost for 2013/2014 schedule of $70,000 compared to $101,935 in
2012/2013 due to transportation and initial setup costs. The budgeted funds set aside
in 2013 for the rink are adequate to cover the set up and operational costs with
additional funds budgeted in 2014 for the deinstallation of the rink. The rink was stored
in Estes Park with the anticipation the Town may want to rent and install the rink this
winter. The rink was received well by the community and visitors. If installed this
winter, staff would have additional time to develop programming, i.e. hotel packages,
recreational opportunities/competitions, etc. The Estes Valley Recreational and Park
District would run the operations again.
Trustee Phipps stated the rink and the area around the rink should be dressed up to
improve the general aesthetics. Mayor Pro Tem Blackhurst questioned the possibility of
purchasing the rink or something similar in the future. The Board supports the
installation of the rink for the 2013/2014 season.
There being no further business, Mayor Pinkham adjourned the meeting at 6:45 p.m.
Jackie Williamson, Town Clerk
Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, August 8, 2013
Minutes of a Regular Meeting of the PUBLIC SAFETY/UTILITIES/PUBLIC
WORKS COMMITTEE of the Town of Estes Park, Larimer County,
Colorado. Meeting held in the Town Hall in said Town of Estes Park on the
8th day of August, 2013.
Committee: Chair Blackhurst, Trustees Koenig and Phipps
Attending: Chair Blackhurst, Trustees Koenig and Phipps
Also Attending: Town Administrator Lancaster, Chief Kufeld, Dir. Bergsten,
Dir. Zurn, and Deputy Town Clerk Deats
Absent: Assistant Town Administrator Richardson
Chair Blackhurst called the meeting to order at 8:00 a.m.
PUBLIC COMMENT.
Mike Kearney, Town resident, expressed dissatisfaction with the construction project
along Moraine Avenue. He stated that a project on a main artery such as Moraine
Avenue should never have been undertaken during the summer season and said that
when it was determined that the project could not be completed by Memorial Day, it
should have been stopped. Chair Blackhurst said the Town Board was made aware of
delays prior to the middle of June but, by that time, a contract had been let. He said
now that the project is underway it needs to be finished and asked Town Administrator
Lancaster to address the issues that have been encountered. Town Administrator
Lancaster said that in hindsight the job should not have been started with design and
contractor issues leading to delays, and stated that there was also some concern about
the viability of the grant if the project went into another fiscal year for the state. Director
Zurn expounded on the topic stating that this is a Town project along a state highway
and, therefore, requires coordination with the state. He said issues were encountered
related to the ownership of the retaining wall along Moraine Avenue and the design and
engineering of the sidewalk to be constructed atop the retaining wall, which required
redesign in order to satisfy the state. Once in the field it was determined that a redesign
in regard to grades was also necessary, causing further delays. Director Zurn noted
that the original design and engineering was not faulty, rather it had to be changed
when additional information came to light. He noted that Mountain Construction, low
bidder on the project, has been difficult to work with, however the Town is obligated to
the contractor and the specified timeline for completion of the job. Director Zurn said
stringent specifications for asphalt construction would preclude rescheduling the job
until fall. He said the scope of the project changed slightly, because of the possibility of
building a one-way couplet in the future, and stated he anticipates that the Moraine
Avenue job will be completed in the next two weeks. Town Administrator Lancaster
said that staff has been communicating on a regular basis with businesses affected by
the project and said that in the long run the improvement should result in better access
to their establishments and better business in the future. The Committee also
expressed concern about the disruptions that may occur if the Federal Land Access
Program (FLAP) grant is awarded and a one-way couplet is built. Director Zurn said
that interruptions to traffic flow would be minimal during construction of a one-way
couplet and added financial compensation and relocation for affected businesses will be
considered.
The Committee questioned the Town’s bidding procedures. Town Administrator
Lancaster stated that Town policy does not require that the lowest bidder be hired for a
job. Director Zurn said the policy states that the lowest, responsible bidder be selected.
Public Safety/Utilities/Public Works Committee – August 8, 2013 – Page 2
PUBLIC SAFETY.
REPORTS.
Reports provided for informational purposes and made a part of the proceedings.
1. Estes Valley Victim Advocates – 6-Month Report – Executive Director Mary
Mesropian said the program is celebrating its 25th anniversary this year and credited
former police chief Dave Racine and Jo Pierce with being instrumental in the
creation of the organization. She said 167 people have been served so far this year
through the advocate, counseling, bilingual outreach, and safe house programs, and
said she anticipates approximately 250 to 300 people will have been served by the
end of the year. She said that the organization lost $7,000 in funding this year which
will need to be made up through other sources.
2. Verbal Updates –
o US Pro Challenge – Planning continues for the bike race on Saturday, August
24th with weekly meetings being held in preparation for the event. The Police
Department will be hiring ten additional officers from Boulder County and the
City of Boulder to work the event at $55/hour plus vehicle mileage. The
officers will be on duty from approximately 8 a.m. till 5 or 6 p.m. on race day
to help with crowd and traffic control and pedestrian safety. Chief Kufeld said
by reallocating funds the additional expense of approximately $10,000 can be
absorbed by the department. Chief Kufeld said he is expecting the event to
go smoothly, despite the fact that large crowds and increased traffic are
anticipated. He said an estimated 5,000 people are expected to gather to
view the race at the switchbacks and added that shuttle routes and schedules
are being adjusted to accommodate the crowds. Rocky Mountain National
Park (RMNP) staff will be assisting with traffic control at the intersection of
Marys Lake Road and Moraine Avenue.
o Staffing – Amanda Nagl and Noel Bryan have both resigned from their
positions with the Police Department and will be taking positions in Fort
Collins. Sergeant Corey Pass will be promoted to Support Services
Commander and Melissa Westover, who has been receiving training from Ms.
Nagl, will be promoted to a managerial-type position. The records position
will be filled as soon as possible. In addition, a new police officer has been
hired and is scheduled to start work on August 19th.
o Hail Storm Damage – Two new police cars received significant hail damage
while parked at the car dealership in Greeley during a recent storm. Staff is
working with the dealership to rectify the situation; staff’s preference would be
to order new vehicles to replace those damaged during the hail storm.
UTILITIES.
ENTERPRISE FUND LARGE MAINTENANCE EXPENSE POLICY.
Director Bergsten presented a proposed policy that would allow for the accrual of funds
to be used to cover expenses related to large maintenance projects for Light & Power
and Water. For example, replacement of the filter media at Glacier Water Treatment
Plant at a cost of approximately $150,000 is performed every 15 years with the next
replacement scheduled for 2017. In addition, membrane replacement at Marys Lake
Water Treatment Plant will occur every 12 years at an estimated cost of $900,000. The
first replacement is planned for 2022. The policy would allow for the financial burden of
large maintenance costs such as these to be spread out over a period of years. The
Committee commended staff for being proactive and planning ahead for these costs,
however, Chair Blackhurst voiced concern about the appearance of an unfunded liability
which could affect bonding rates. Director Bergsten stated that Finance Officer
McFarland has been in contact with the Town’s auditors about this topic and will have
additional information when the item comes forward to the Town Board. Town
Administrator Lancaster said that the Town should also be planning for expenses
related to care and maintenance of Town-owned buildings by getting allocation and
replacement plans in place. He cited the vehicle replacement fund as a good example
Public Safety/Utilities/Public Works Committee – August 8, 2013 – Page 3
of such a program. The Committee recommends approval of the Accrual of Major
Maintenance Costs Policy as an action item at the August 27, 2013, Town Board
meeting.
REPORTS.
Reports provided for informational purposes and made a part of the proceedings.
1. Utilization of Water Bleeders – Director Bergsten said water bleeders are used by
the Water department as a maintenance tool for freeze protection and quality
control, as well as an effective method of deferring capital projects such water
main replacement. He said that Carriage Hills has the highest density of
bleeders on the system and stated that the cost of freeze protection bleeders in
this area including sewer discharge fees, is $2,071 per year. He estimated the
capital cost to replace the water mains in this area at $2,713,000. Chair
Blackhurst took issue with the example provided and said the Town has adopted
a Water Conservation Plan and should be determining what needs to be
accomplished in order to avoid putting 12% of the Town’s treated water on the
ground through bleeder systems. Director Bergsten said the distribution system,
water plants, and bleeders will all be investigated and considered as a master
plan is developed.
2. Light & Power Capital Projects – Crews have completed the dirt work and pulled
all the wire for the Fall River/Big Thompson project. Clean up is underway and
re-seeding will take place next spring. Removal of the overhead lines is ongonig
and expected to be completed by the end of the year. The Allenspark project
entailed the replacement of approximately 60 poles, which has been completed,
and replacement of 12,000 feet of overhead line down Big Owl Road. Tree
trimming is completed and the project is ahead of schedule. Director Bergsten
commended L&P crews for taking on these projects in-house at a cost savings to
the Town.
3. IT – A Request for Proposal (RFP) has been published for a firm to provide IT
support to the Town, which would consist primarily of a remote help desk to
provide resolution to issues that arise. Superintendent Fraundorf estimates that
nearly half of the requests for support could be resolved remotely. He expects to
receive three to four proposals in response to the RFP. Also, an advertisement
is currently running for a full-time IT staff person.
PUBLIC WORKS.
REPLACEMENT OF STREETS VEHICLE #G-95.
Streets Vehicle #G-95, a 1996 International 4800 single axle dump truck, has been in
service for 17 years. The 2013 budget contains $135,000 for the replacement of this
vehicle. The Town utilized the State of Colorado competitive bid process with the low
bid being submitted by Transwest Trucks. Staff is recommending the purchase of a
2013 Freightliner M2106 single axle dump truck from Transwest Trucks in Commerce
City, Colorado, at a cost of $130,871, including trade-in. The Committee recommends
approval of the purchase of a 2013 Freightliner M2106 single axle dump truck at a
cost of $130,871 from the vehicle replacement fund #635-7000-435-34-42, as a
consent agenda item on the August 27, 2013, Town Board meeting agenda.
There being no further business, Chair Blackhurst adjourned the meeting at 9:24
a.m.
Cynthia Deats, Deputy Town Clerk
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Planning Commission 1
July 16, 2013
Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall
Commission: Chair Betty Hull, Commissioners Doug Klink, Joe Wise, Kathy Bowers, Nancy
Hills, Steve Murphree, one vacancy
Attending: Chair Hull, Commissioners Wise, Murphree, and Hills
Also Attending: Director Chilcott, Senior Planner Shirk, Code Compliance Officer/Planner
Kleisler, Town Board Liaison Elrod, and Recording Secretary Thompson
Absent: Commissioners Bowers and Klink
The following minutes reflect the order of the agenda and not necessarily the chronological sequence.
Chair Hull called the meeting to order at 1:30 p.m. There were approximately 34 people in
attendance. Chair Hull explained the purpose of the Estes Valley Planning Commission and stated
public comment is invaluable. Each Commissioner introduced him/herself.
1. PUBLIC COMMENT
None
2. CONSENT AGENDA
A. Approval of minutes, June 18, 2013 Planning Commission meeting.
B. Lake Pines Amended Plat, 625 Community Drive
It was moved and seconded (Hills/Murphree) to approve the consent agenda and the motion
passed unanimously (4-0) with two absent and one vacancy.
3. ZONING AMENDMENT AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN 2013-02; TRACT 2, HILLERY PARRACK
EXEMPTION PLAT, 1753 Wildfire Road
Commissioner Wise recused himself from the review of this project and left the dais.
Director Chilcott reviewed the staff report. The applicant has requested to remove the existing
restrictions on the CH–Commercial Heavy zoning, which were put in place with the Nytes
Rezoning in 2005. At that time the property was rezoned from E–Estate to CH-Commercial Heavy,
with restrictions. The current request is not to rezone, but to remove the restrictions placed on
the property in 2005. The applicant has also submitted an associated development plan. Director
Chilcott stated staff has continued the application due to the complexity of various issues with
proposed use, the intensity of the use, neighborhood compatibility, etc. Staff will conduct more
research and will have a recommendation at the August Planning Commission meeting. No action
was taken by the Commission; however, public comment was accepted.
Public Comment
Corinne Dyer/Town resident distributed copies of her comments (dated July 16, 2013), which
were posted on the Town website following the meeting. Her comments related directly to the
existing restrictions on the property. The restrictions were placed on the property because the
full range of uses allowed under the CH–Commercial Heavy zoning classification would not be
appropriate at that location. She stated the intent of the County Commissioner’s decision was to
allow limited use of the property while promoting growth of the community as a whole. One of
the restrictions placed stated no outside storage of business or construction materials would be
allowed on the property. She was disappointed no enforcement of the restrictions had taken
place, and was opposed to the removal of the restrictions.
Gayle Tiejtens/Town resident was concerned about possible fire issues. She was opposed to the
waiver to allow delay of installation of the water main extension and fire hydrant, as well as the
waiver to extend the amount of time to abandon the water well. She was concerned about the
high fire danger with lumber and lumber mill debris stored on site. She was aware that limiting
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Planning Commission 2
July 16, 2013
Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall
the height of the pole barns would eliminate the need for an automatic sprinkler system. She
thought this may be in conflict with the Estes Valley Fire Protection Districts requirements.
Bob Umscheid/Town resident was opposed to expanded development in a residential area.
Director Chilcott and Town Attorney White answered questions concerning the Development
Code and the Comprehensive Plan.
Dionna Patterson/Town resident was opposed to the development. She was concerned about
traffic, pollution, and potential for fire. She encouraged the Commission to consider the neighbors
on all sides of the property. She was opposed to the waivers delaying installation of the
infrastructure.
Public Comment Closed.
Chair Hull stated the review of this proposal would be heard by the Planning Commission on
Tuesday, August 20, 2013, at 1:30 p.m.
4. PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION PLAT & DEVELOPMENT PLAN 2013-03, MOUNTAIN RIVER
TOWNHOMES, 650 Moraine Avenue
Planner Shirk stated the property owner requested continuance of this project to the August,
2013 meeting. The application proposes redevelopment of the Telemark property on Moraine
Avenue, with the intent to construct 34 residential/accommodations units. The street design
would extend Park River West from the east side of the proposed project, loop around through
the development, and join Moraine at the intersection with Cedar Ridge Circle. Fifteen units
would be located along the river, and the remainder of the units would be north of the road
through the development. Staff still has research to conduct concerning limits of disturbance,
wildlife habitat, right-of-way dedication, etc. Planner Shirk stated although the review will be
continued to August, public comment would be accepted at the meeting.
Gordon Ulrickson/Town resident and Secretary/Treasurer of Mountain Haven Condominiums,
directly west of the proposed development. They have been working with the developer and the
construction company, specifically to discuss relocation of the existing sewer line. There are still
some questions about the new road into the Mountain Haven property. They want to know
where the west property line and easement are located. Mr. Ulrickson was opposed to the
removal of the large trees on the west side of the proposed development.
Gail Shroyer/Town resident was concerned about impact on wildlife. She was concerned about
the density of townhomes along the river, and shared Mr. Ulrickson’s opinion about removing the
large trees, or possible damage to those trees due to trenching.
Brian Maders/Town resident was concerned about the close proximity of the proposed road to
his property, and also the increased traffic creating light pollution. He agreed with the concerns
about the large trees.
Stewart Squires/President of Park River West Condominiums Home Owners Association stated
the association met with the developer to discuss concerns and present questions. They were
impressed with the proposed development and thought it would complement Park River West
and be supportive of property values in the area. They support the waiver request for the public
trail easement that would adjoin the existing trail. Mr. Squires stated the developers have agreed
that no construction traffic would go through Park River West, construction crew parking and
materials storage would be confined to the west side of the property, and the road between
Mountain River Townhomes and Park River West would remain closed until sales offices for the
development are established on the property. They requested the Town enforce the code
concerning dust control and code be enforced concerning dust control and mud on vehicles being
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Planning Commission 3
July 16, 2013
Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall
removed prior to leaving the property. After reviewing the Traffic Impact Study, his group did not
think the study was of sufficient scope to address the impact to Park River West with a second
entrance to the project. Mr. Squires suggested there would be a substantial increase in thru
traffic from residents and non-residents alike. Impact on traffic at Park River West was not
addressed in the study. The association objected to an entrance into Mountain River Townhomes
from Park River West. If the road is built, they requested speed control ramps at least on the
portion of road through Park River West, and signage at the entrance to Park River West to deter
non-essential through traffic. They objected to access aprons running north/south along the fence
line, and the entrance into the new development property. They requested a waiver be granted
to allow removal of those required aprons.
Vinton Arnett/Town resident was concerned about increased traffic. He asked the Commission to
consider a turn lane into the proposed development. He was also concerned about the impact on
wildlife, due to the close proximity of a conservation easement directly across Moraine Avenue
from the property.
Fletcher Shields/Town resident was also concerned about the impact on wildlife and increased
traffic, especially during construction.
Pat Blume/Town resident read the letter to the editor published July 12, 2013 in the local
newspaper. Concerns included increased traffic congestion on Moraine and the impact on
wildlife. She disagreed with the traffic impact study concerning the numbers of vehicles and
potential noise.
Chair Hull closed public comment. She stated the application would be reviewed at the August
Planning Commission meeting.
5. REPORTS
A. Comprehensive Plan – Director Chilcott
1. Director Chilcott stated staff continues to work on the modernization of the Comprehensive
Plan. She showed several slides of the draft version. Planner Kleisler has reviewed the data
tables in the land use section, simplifying the data for more clarity. Mr. Kleisler stated
additional land uses would be added, e.g. religious and school uses. The Town’s GIS consultant
would be improving the maps to include some physical features in the area. Director Chilcott
stated time has been spent on the Action Plan section of the plan and updating charts created
by the Planning Commission approximately one year ago. Estimated costs have been changed
from actual dollars to symbols conveying approximate project costs. References to EPURA will
be removed. Planner Shirk worked on the Mobility and Circulation section, stating the current
plan (1996) used data from the 1980s. Several projects in the 1996 plan would be removed,
having been completed. Planner Shirk stated it was interesting to see ideas in the 1996 plan
for a parking lot at the fairgrounds and a possible parking structure at the visitor center.
B. County Commission Reviews – Senior Planner Shirk
1. The Woodland Heights Fire Resolution was approved on June 17, 2013.
2. Staff has been meeting on a monthly basis with the County Commissioners to keep them
updated on the planning and development activities in the Estes Valley.
C. Code Compliance – Code Compliance Officer Kleisler
1. An accommodations business has added some exterior lighting, drawing complaints about
glare from adjacent property owners. The property owners are in the process of making
adjustments to come into compliance with the EVDC.
2. There is an area in the Estes Valley with recreational vehicles (RVs) connected to water and
sewer and being used as dwellings. These RVs are not in a zone district allowing such use. He
has been working with those residents and property owners to remedy the situation. Social
services has been contacted to help the residents find an alternative place to live.
3. The greatly improved Code Compliance database will help address issues in a more timely
and efficient manner.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Estes Valley Planning Commission 4
July 16, 2013
Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall
D. Planning Commission Vacancies – Director Chilcott
1. The interviews for the Town representative for Planning Commission were taking place in
the very near future.
2. The closing date for the County representative for Planning Commission is next week.
3. Commissioner Hills was reappointed for an additional term, expiring June 30, 2017.
E. Introduction
1. Director Chilcott introduced Larimer County Community Development Director Terry
Gilbert. He was interested in observing development in the Estes Valley, and looked forward
to offering his assistance to staff and the Planning Commission, if needed. He stated the Town
of Estes Park and Larimer County have been discussing the possibility of a partnership with a
new land use software program, and details are being worked out.
There being no further business, Vice-Chair Hull adjourned the meeting at 2:42 p.m.
___________________________________
Betty Hull, Chair
___________________________________
Karen Thompson, Recording Secretary
Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, July 18, 2013
Minutes of a Regular meeting of the Tree Board of the Town of Estes
Park, Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held in the Engineering
Conference Room Suite 100 of Town Hall in said Town of Estes Park
on the 18th day of July, 2013.
Board Members Present: Rex Poggenpohl, Apryle Craig, Celine Lebeau, Dewain Lockwood
and Chris Reed
Also Attending: Director of Public Works Scott Zurn, Municipal Service Worker –
Park Division Brian Berg, Utilities Department Secretary Susie
Parker
Absent: Barbara Williams, Scott Roederer
Chair Poggenpohl called the meeting to order at 4:30 p.m.
MINUTES APPROVAL
Chair Poggenpohl reviewed the June meeting minutes and they were approved with no one
opposing.
INTRODUCTION OF NEW BOARD MEMBERS
Chair Poggenpohl introducing the two new Board members, Dewain Lockwood and Chris Reed.
Dewain Lockwood is a resident of both Nebraska and Estes Park. In the past he worked for the
Town of Estes Park Water Department for four years. He received a degree from University of
Arizona in agronomy (field crop production) and has spent most of his life farming land in
Nebraska. For the last fourteen years he has owned and operated Lockwood Grain Cleaning to
make seed for planting. In his experience he has planted over 20,000 trees creating wind
breaks on the farm.
Chris Reed is also a resident of Estes Park who owns and operates Reed Logging & Tree
Service. He has a business and commercial recreation degree from the University of Illinois.
Chris also spent several years with the Town of Estes Park as Streets Foreman in the past.
Through his business he is associated with Colorado State Forest Products, and also with
Timber West. He is currently studying and taking classes to become certified arborist through
ISA, the International Society of Arborists.
REVIEW OF OPEN MEETING LAW AND VOLUNTEER MANUAL FOR NEW
MEMBERS
Chair Poggenpohl explained for the benefit of the new Board members that the Tree Board is an
official Town committee and is subject to the laws for any municipal group regarding
communication requirements such as formal notices of meetings and publishing the agenda
prior to a meeting. There are restrictions regarding communication between Board members:
Tree Board – July 18, 2013 – Page 2
one-on-one discussions are allowed, but if there are three or more Board members present then
it must be advertised first. Board members cannot publish meeting notices themselves. The
meeting notices must be processed through the Public Works Department Secretary for
publication.
He went on to explain the need for the new members to become familiar with the guidelines set
forth in the Volunteer Manual. He requested that a reminder be given to Jen Imber, Public
Works Secretary, to provide copies of the Volunteer Manual (only applicable sections) to the two
new members.
TREE TALK PLANS AND APPROVAL OF HONORARIUM COSTS FOR SUMMER
TREE TALKS
Chair Poggenpohl expressed concern with the naming of these programs, tree talks, ecology
talks, etc. Some are tree talks and some are not; also, it’s too easy to confuse ecology talks
with the Ecology Walk Project. A better name should be determined to describe this year’s
educational program(s).
This year we should have two or three excursions, such as the following:
a) The first one can be a walk led by Scott Roederer in RMNP on tree identification for
a full morning possibly in Endo Valley. There would not be any participation fee for
the public to attend; however, this excursion would require group transportation of a
limited number of guests (10-20) depending on the vehicle used. Who would pick up
the transportation cost? Guests would be required to make reservations through
Department Secretary Imber. Board Member Craig will talk to the Park regarding
details.
b) For the second event, Merle Moore is willing to lead a walking excursion on either
8/20/13 or 8/21/13 through the Town while talking about plants. Starting at the
Visitors Center, a bus will take the participants to the west end of Town to Mrs.
Walsh’s Garden. The tour will then walk east through Town for two to three hours,
ending back up at the Visitors Center where everyone’s cars are parked. We would
pick up the cost of transporting the guests from the Visitors Center to the Garden.
Again, there would not be any participation fee for the public to attend; however, this
excursion would require group transportation of a limited number of guests (10-15)
depending on the vehicle used. Guests would be required to make reservations
through Department Secretary Imber.
c) The third excursion could be with David Leatherman, an entomologist, giving an
evening talk in the Town Board Room on trees and the ecology in Estes Valley.
Because of the location, this could be a much larger group. Chair Poggenpohl will
look at potential dates for Mr. Leatherman and the Board Room.
Discussion continued regarding possibly adding other events this year or next. For example,
would we want to do an excursion down to Fort Collins to the CSU Gardens and the Spring
Creek Garden plus a third xeriscape installation? This would be a small group for a full day.
We would need to consider if there would be a charge for the public. Reservations would be
Tree Board – July 18, 2013 – Page 3
required. Transportation and other details would need to be worked out before publicizing the
event.
Also we should look at creating similar program(s) for school kids for this next school year.
Board Member Lebeau will talk to the school briefly about this before the August meeting. Also
Board Member Craig will talk to Kathy Brown (RMNP) before the August meeting regarding
potential Park volunteers with ecology knowledge to work with kids.
Another possibility, Merle Moore has offered to lead an excursion to Denver Botanical Gardens
and one other tree and plant installation in Littleton. However, Chair Poggenpohl has
discovered that the Senior Center and the Museum are or have already led similar excursions.
Merle Moore and Scott Roederer will receive honorarium costs of $150 each; Dave Leatherman
will receive an honorarium of $350.
ECOLOGY WALK PLANS
Chair Poggenpohl pointed out that the Ecology Walk is different from the educational talks
discussed above. This project is a native plant arboretum starting at the Visitor Center and
ending at the bird sanctuary with interpretive stations set up along the way. The Town is
working in conjunction with Estes Valley Parks & Recreation District and the Bureau of
Reclamation on this project. The following points were discussed:
a) It was suggested that a kiosk be set up near the Visitors Center to address questions
and give out information.
b) It is anticipated that an RFP (request for proposal) will go out regarding a developing
a master plan for the project which is anticipated will cost approximately $20,000.00.
c) It is requested that Director Zurn recommend who in Town should work with Chair
Poggenpohl on creating a map for the project.
d) Also Chair Poggenpohl suggests that an advisory board be set up as a reviewing
body for work on the planning and development of this plan. The advisory board
should probably consist of representatives from the Town, Estes Valley Parks &
Recreation, Bureau of Reclamation and two members of the Tree Board.
e) A short list of goals to work on for this project is as follows:
i. Solicit a consultant to assist in creating a detailed plan;
ii. Look into additional funding through grants, etc.;
iii. Hire a designer to develop a broad-brush conceptual design for the
master plan and a contractor to do the work.
f) There is a Estes Valley Parks & Recreation District Board meeting in August when
Chair Poggenpohl will give a 15-minute presentation and discussion on the Ecology
Walk Project. He will advise Board Members Craig and Lebeau of the date, time and
place so they may attend.
Tree Board – July 18, 2013 – Page 4
SEPTEMBER MEETING PLANS
In light of the upcoming excursions and talks, the Board Members agreed to have an August
meeting to be held on Monday, August 12th at 8:00 a.m. The proposed agenda will be as
follows:
a) Discussion of process for election of officers; elections will be conducted at the
September meeting;
b) Receive a report on the America In Bloom Program;
c) Solicitation of new members;
d) Confirmation of honorarium costs for summer tree talks/excursions;
e) Update on status of three summer tree talks/excursions:
i. Scott Roederer in Endo Valley (RMNP) on trees;
ii. Merle Moore’s walking tour of plants in downtown;
iii. David Leatherman in Town Board Room on trees and the ecology in
Estes Valley.
f) Status update of other potential programs such as school programs and a possible
excursion to Ft. Collins to CSU, Spring Creek Garden and other xeriscape
installation.
g) Status update of Ecology Walk Project.
SELECTION OF POSSIBLE NEW MEMBERS
Chair Poggenpohl recommended that the Board should try to replace Board Member Scott
Roederer this fall. He will be leaving Town again about mid-September. Chair Poggenpohl’s
term is up at the end of August and in September the Board must elect a new president.
Therefore, we should pursue advertising for new members through Director Zurn and Public
Information Officer Rusch as soon as possible.
RESPONSIBILITY FOR REMOVAL OF DEAD/DYING TREES ON TOWN PROPERTY
It is the responsibility of Municipal Service Worker Berg to remove dead or dying trees on Town
property. Reasons for removal include trees becoming hazards, beetle-kill trees and eye sores.
Sometimes trees are not removed due to their location and/or surrounding habitat, allowing their
demise to be part of the natural ecology. Requests for such removal usually come through the
Public Works Department Secretary and are passed on to Mr. Berg. However, this contact
process and information needs to be more visible and accessible to the public. It was
suggested that the Tree Board website can be better utilized for information such as this, as well
as posting the tree ordinances of both the Town and the County; the ISA brochures could be
linked; events, programs and excursions set up by the Tree Board, etc. The question was
posed (and an answer still needs to be determined) if the Tree Board should become involved
with the website content or should that be the function of the Public Works Department and
Municipal Service Worker Berg.
Tree Board – July 18, 2013 – Page 5
MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS
Municipal Service Worker Berg brought the ISA brochures and display stands to show the
finished product. Since ISA has given permission for the brochures to be placed on the Tree
Board website, it was suggested that Municipal Service Worker Berg should work with the
Public Works Department Secretary on adding this information to the website.
Director Zurn gave an update on the pine beetle and said it’s been relatively quiet lately. It
seems to be minimal at this stage inside Town limits. However, it is still very active outside of
Town. Unfortunately, the Ips beetle is on the increase and the ash borer is coming in the
future.
There being no further business, Chair Poggenpohl adjourned the meeting at 6:10 p.m.
Susan Parker, Recording Secretary
Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, August 7th, 2013
Minutes of a meeting of the AUDIT COMMITTEE of the Town of Estes
Park, Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held in the Municipal Building in
said Town of Estes Park on the 7th day of August, 2013.
Committee: Mayor Pinkham, Trustee Ericson, Town Administrator
Lancaster, Assistant Town Administrator Richardson,
Finance Officer McFarland
Attending: Committee: Mayor Pinkham, Trustee Ericson, Town
Administrator Lancaster, Finance Officer McFarland
Non-Committee: Assistant Finance Officer McDougall,
Bruce Ely and Marc McClure of Cutwater Asset
Management
Absent: Assistant Town Administrator Richardson
Chairman Ericson called the meeting to order at 11:00 a.m.
INVESTMENTS
1. DISCUSSION OF INVESTMENT PERFORMANCE/ACTIVITY Cutwater Asset
Management (CAM). Bruce Ely and Marc McClure of CAM delivered the
Investment Management Program Review document. The document
discusses 1) Market Environment and Strategies, 2) Portfolio Performance
and Review, 3) 2nd Quarter 2013 Performance, 4) Broker/Dealer
information, and 5) Bank Credit Analysis.
Approximately $8m of the $22m portfolio is under the care of CAM. The
monies have been deployed into a variety of US Treasuries and
Instrumentalities. The investment accounts are reconciled monthly to
Market Value. Gains/losses are a combination of realized and unrealized.
The first 6 months of 2013 have resulted in a slight negative return due to a
recent spike in interest rates. Current portfolio strategy is to keep
durations short due to forecasted increases in interest rates.
2. INVESTMENT POLICY UPDATE Finance Officer McFarland reported the
Investment Policy (2001) is in the process of being updated, along with the
rest of the Finance Policies (target date – 12/31/2013). CAM has offered a
Audit Committee – August 7, 2013 – Page 2
“go‐by” that can be used. Discussion was had regarding expanding
investment parameters to include commercial paper (this is now common
practice among Colorado municipalities).
3. RFP/CONTINUATION OF RELATIONSHIP WITH CAM CAM was hired in
2011 to a series of one‐year contracts to provide the Town with Investment
Advisory Services. The Audit Committee is pleased with the level of service
and return provided by CAM, and will recommend extending CAM’s
contract for the fourth year when the time comes (contract periods run
March 1 – February 28). The contract is currently in its third year. The
current contract extension was placed on the consent agenda 02/27/2013,
extending the agreement through February 28, 2014.
2012 CAFR (Comprehensive Annual Financial Report)/AUDIT
DISCUSSION OF AUDIT FINDINGS It has not been the practice of the Town
to place the annual CAFR Letter to Management on the internet.
McFarland reported that the Letter to Management was requested by, and
provided to, a citizen within the last month, under an open records request.
The findings of the Letter included Material Weaknesses and Significant
Deficiencies. McFarland reported that Finance Staff is in the process of
addressing these items, and will be conferring with the Auditors
(CliftonLarsonAllen, LLC) in the near future to make sure both parties are
working together to ensure compliance for 2013. These compliance issues
will be presented to the Audit Committee as completed.
BUDGET 2014
DISCUSSION OF 2014 BUDGET PROCESS The 2014 Budget calendar was
provided for review. Finance Officer McFarland and Town Administrator
Lancaster reported that the Budget process is on schedule, with the end
product goal being a flat budget (not counting capital) for 2014. The Salary
Compensation Study (in progress) is likely to suggest an overall increase of
5%. Health insurance is forecasted to increase 10%, although final numbers
are not yet available.
Audit Committee – August 7, 2013 – Page 3
OTHER NEW BUSINESS
There was no other new business.
There being no further business, Chairman Ericson adjourned the meeting at 12:00 p.m.
Steve McFarland, Finance Officer
Show Cause Liquor Hearing for Safeway Stores 46 Inc., dba Safeway Store No. 920, 451 Wonderview
Avenue, 3.2% Beer Off Premises Liquor License
Town Clerk Memo
1
To: Honorable Mayor Pinkham
Board of Trustees
Town Administrator Lancaster
From: Jackie Williamson, Town Clerk
Date: August 26, 2013
RE: Show Cause Liquor Hearing for Safeway Stores 46 Inc., dba Safeway
Store No. 920, 451 Wonderview Avenue, 3.2% Beer Off Premises Liquor
License
Objective:
To approve a Stipulation Agreement with Safeway 46 Inc. dba Safeway Store No. 920
for the sale of alcohol to a minor during a compliance check on July 25, 2013.
Present Situation:
The Town Board approved Resolution 19-13 at their meeting on Tuesday, August 13,
2013 setting a Show Cause hearing for Safeway 46 Inc. dba Safeway Store No. 920 on
Tuesday, August 27, 2013 for a violation of the Colorado Liquor Code Section 12-47-
901 (1) (a.5)(I) C.R.S, alleging the Licensee, through its employee, sold alcohol to a
person under the age of twenty-one. During the past two weeks, Attorney Jerry
Roselle, attorney hired by the Town Board to prosecute the Show Cause hearing, has
been in discussions with Safeway’s counsel Attorney Steve Lee/Dill & Dill.
The licensee has a previous violation for a sale to a minor which occurred on August 2,
2012. The administrative action for this violation was handled by the State Liquor
Enforcement Division. See details of the previous violation attached to the Show Cause
Hearing Procedures. This is considered a second violation within a year, and therefore,
the Town’s guidelines recommend a 30 day suspension of the license.
Proposal:
On Monday, August 26, 2013, Safeway through their attorneys contacted Attorney
Roselle to discuss a Stipulation Agreement. Through the stipulation process, Safeway
has waived their rights to a Show Cause hearing before the Board of Trustees in order
to determine if a violation occurred. Safeway agrees the violations occurred and has
agreed to a 30 day suspension, with actual time served of 21 days of its 3.2% Beer Off-
Premise Liquor License as a penalty for the violation. The 9 days held in abeyance
would be suspended on the condition no further violation occurs during the one-year
stipulation period commencing August 27, 2013. The Stipulation Agreement is attached
for the Board’s review. If approved by the Board, the suspension would be served
beginning September 3, 2013 through September 23, 2013.
Show Cause Liquor Hearing for Safeway Stores 46 Inc., dba Safeway Store No. 920, 451 Wonderview
Avenue, 3.2% Beer Off Premises Liquor License 2
If the Board does not accept the Stipulation Agreement, the licensee has the option to
withdraw the Stipulation Agreement and hold the Show Cause hearing scheduled for
September 10, 2013 as stated in the Stipulation Agreement under Section 5.
Advantages:
The approval of the agreement reduces the cost to the Town of a Show Cause
hearing and the time in finding a violation occurred, as the licensee has agreed a
violation has occurred.
Those subpoenaed are not required to attend the meeting.
Disadvantages: None.
Action Recommended:
Approve the Stipulation Agreement with Safeway 46, Inc. dba Safeway Store No. 920
for the underage sale of alcohol during a compliance check conducted on July 25, 2013.
Budget: None.
Level of Public Interest
High. The other liquor establishments are aware of the compliance checks and the
penalties being approved by the Town Board.
Sample Motion:
I move to approve/deny the Stipulation Agreement with Safeway 46, Inc. dba Safeway
Store No. 920.
TOWN OF ESTES PARK
PROCEDURE FOR SHOW CAUSE LIQUOR HEARING
Safeway Stores 46 Inc. dba Safeway Store #920
August 27, 2013
The Show Cause Liquor Hearing shall be conducted in the following manner:
1. Attorney Roselle will state the Estes Park Police Department/State Liquor
Enforcement Division’s case and present any evidence to support the
same.
2. The Licensee or its Attorney will present their case and present any
evidence in opposition.
3. Attorney Roselle will be allowed a rebuttal limited to the evidence
presented by the Licensee. No new evidence may be submitted.
4. The Licensee or its Attorney will be allowed a rebuttal that is limited to the
evidence presented during rebuttal by Attorney Roselle. No new evidence
may be submitted.
5. The Board of Trustees may ask any questions of any person speaking at
any time during the course of this hearing.
6. Town Board shall deliberate and make a “Finding” on the alleged violation.
Sample Finding:
Based upon the evidence presented at the hearing, the Board of Trustees
finds that a violation occurred/did not occur of the Colorado Liquor Code
Section 12-47-901 (1) (a.5)(I), C.R.S., by the Licensee, through its
employee, in which alcohol beverage(s) were/were not sold an to a
person under the age of twenty-one years on July 25, 2013.
7. If the Town Board of Trustees finds that a violation occurred, then the
Town Board of Trustees shall proceed to determine a suspension or
revocation of the liquor license.
8. Attorney Roselle will present a recommendation for the suspension or
revocation of the license.
9. The Licensee or its Attorney will present a statement and/or evidence
regarding a suspension or revocation of the liquor license.
10. The Town Board shall make a determination as to the suspension or
revocation of the liquor license.
Sample Motions:
I move, based on the finding that a violation of the Colorado Liquor Code
Section 12-47-901 (1) (a.5)(I), C.R.S. occurred, the 3.2% Off-Premise
Liquor License held by Safeway Stores 46, Inc. dba Safeway Store No.
920 shall be suspended for ___ days, with an actual time served of ___
days, with ___ days held in abeyance on the condition that no further
violations of the Colorado Liquor Code and/or Regulations of the
Department of Revenue Liquor Enforcement Division occur within the one-
year stipulation period commencing on August 27, 2013. The suspension
of the Licensee’s 3.2% Off-Premises Liquor License shall take place from
12:01 a.m. ____________, 2013 through 11:59 p.m. ___________, 2013.
OR
I move, based on the finding that a violation of the Colorado Liquor Code
Section 12-47-901 (1) (a.5)(I), C.R.S. occurred, the 3.2% Off-Premises
Liquor License held by Safeway Stores 46, Inc. dba Safeway Store No.
920 shall be revoked effective ____________, 2013.
BEFORE THE LOCAL LIQUOR LICENSING AUTHORITY
TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO
______________________________________________________________________________
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE AND NOTICE OF HEARING
______________________________________________________________________________
IN THE MATTER OF:
STORE MANAGER
SAFEWAY STORES 46, INC.
D/B/A SAFEWAY STORE NO. 920
451 E. WONDERVIEW AVENUE
P. O. BOX 5927 T.A.
DENVER, COLORADO 80217
LICENSE NO: 21-70664-0038
______________________________________________________________________________
WHEREAS, it has been made to appear to the Local Licensing Authority, Town of Estes Park, State
of Colorado, that SAFEWAY STORES 46, INC., d/b/a Safeway Store No. 920, 451 E. Wonderview
Avenue, Estes Park, Colorado 80517 ("Licensee"), has violated the statutes or the rules and
regulations of the Department of Revenue governing its 3.2% Beer Off Premises liquor license in the
following particulars:
I) Pursuant to Section 12-47-901 (1)(a.5)(I), C.R.S., except as provided in Section 18-13-122,
C.R.S., it is unlawful for any person to sell, serve, give away, dispose of, exchange, or
deliver or permit the sale, serving, giving, or procuring of any alcohol beverage to or for any
person under the age of twenty-one years.
A) It is alleged that on July 25, 2013, the Licensee, through its employee/agent, Joyce
Ellen Elmore, permitted the sale, serving, giving, or procuring of an alcohol beverage
to a juvenile under age of 21 years.
NOW THEREFORE, you are hereby ordered to appear before the local licensing authority
to show cause why your said license should not be suspended or revoked as by law provided.
A Show Cause Hearing is set for August 27, 2013 at 7:00 p.m. and will be held in the Town
Board Room at 170 MacGregor Avenue, Estes Park, Colorado.
You are entitled to have an attorney represent you at the hearing. If you should retain an
attorney, you should do so well in advance of the hearing. Once a hearing date has been set, a
postponement will not be granted except for good cause shown. If you should fail to appear at the
Order to Show Cause and Notice of Hearing
Safeway Store No. 920
Page 2 of 2
scheduled time and place for the hearing, testimony will be taken in reference to the allegations,
upon which evidence your license to operate under the terms of the Colorado Liquor or Beer Code
may be suspended or revoked.
Please be further advised that if the Local Licensing Authority does find you in violation of
any of the above-cited section(s) of the Colorado Liquor or Beer Code, the Local Licensing
Authority may consider, in selecting the sanction to be imposed against you, any mitigating or
aggravating factors, any prior violations of the Colorado Liquor or Beer Code, as well as any
sanctions previously imposed against you.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this Order and Notice shall be mailed or
delivered to the above-mentioned Licensee.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have here unto set my hand and seal of my office this ____
day of _____________, 2013.
_______________________________
Town Clerk
LIQUOR LICENSE
STIPULATION GUIDELINES
*Revised July, 1999
Statement of Purpose: To authorize Town staff to negotiate a Stipulation Agreement, utilizing
these Guidelines, with the Liquor Licensee following the setting of a Show Cause Hearing. The
Town Board may amend, approve, or deny any Stipulation Agreement.
REGULATION NO. CODE VIOLATION * RECOMMENDED
SUSPENSION
*ACTUAL
TIME
SERVED –
TO BE
DETERMINED
Critical Violations:
12-47-901(1)(a) Sale to an Underage Person
1st Offense
2nd Offense, w/in 1 yr.
3rd Offense, w/in 1 yr.
4th Offense, w/in 2 yrs.
21 Days
30 “
60 “
90 “ to revocation
12-47-901(1)(a) and
Reg. 47-900
Sale to Intoxicated Person
1st Offense
2nd Offense
3rd Offense
30 Days
90 “
6 Mo. to revocation
Reg. 47-900A. Conduct of Establishment
Intentional:
1st Offense
2nd Offense
3rd Offense
30 Days
90 “
6 Mo. to revocation
Administrative
Violations:
12-47-901(5)(n)(I)
and
Reg. 47-922A.1.
Permitting Illegal Gambling
1st Offense
2nd Offense
3rd Offense
7 Days
30 “
90 “ to revocation
“ Video Poker Gambling
1st Offense
2nd Offense
3rd Offense
7 Days
30 “
90 “ to revocation
2
REGULATION NO. CODE VIOLATION *RECOMMENDED
SUSPENSION
*ACTUAL
TIME
SERVED –
TO BE
DETERMINED
“ Shake-A-Day Gambling Device
1st Offense
2nd Offense
3rd Offense
7 Days
30 “
90 “
Reg. 47-900A. Permitting Disturbances
1st Offense
2nd Offense
3rd Offense
20 Days
30 “
90 “
Reg. 47-900A. Conduct of Establishment
Negligence:
1st Offense
2nd Offense
3rd Offense
20 Days
30 “
90 “ to revocation
Reg. 47-408A. Purchase of Liquor from Other
Than Wholesaler
1st Offense
2nd Offense
5 Days
7 “
Reg. 47-419B. Failure to Meet Food Requirement
(H&R, Brew Pub)
1st Offense
2nd Offense
10 Days
30 “
12-47-901 (5) IV (I) Sale After Legal Hours
1st Offense
2nd Offense
7 Days
20 “
12-47-301(7) Failure to Report Manager,
Corporate & Financial Change
1st Offense
2nd Offense
5 Days
7 “
12-47-901(5)(a)(I) Underage Employee Selling or
Serving
1st Offense
2nd Offense
3rd Offense
20 Days
30 “
90 “
Reg. 47-904C. Altered Liquor
1st Offense
10 Days
3
Definition:
1. Offense: for the purpose of these guidelines, an offense is a single occurrence of a
violation. It is possible that within an offense, there could be multiple counts.
Notes:
1. These guidelines are intended as an instrument for the Town Board and Staff. The
Town Board and Staff may at any time, depending upon the severity of the violation,
alter the suspension time defined in these guidelines.
2. *These guidelines were prepared following review of the Colorado Liquor Enforcement
Division’s Guidelines, as updated June 4, 1999.
3. Staff may, at any time, elect not to negotiate a Stipulation Agreement, thus proceeding
with the Show Cause Hearing before the Board of Trustees.
4. All substantial liquor license violations, as determined by Staff, will be scheduled for a
Show Cause Hearing. If the Town Board does not approve the Stipulation Agreement,
the Town Board will proceed with the Show Cause Hearing.
5. Days not actually served (days held in abeyance) are suspended on the condition that
no further violations occur within the one-year stipulation period.
6. *Liquor violations are carried for 5 years for purposes of litigation.
Show Cause Liquor Hearing for Bowl Fort Collins Llc dba Chippers Lanes Estes Park Center, 555 S.
St. Vrain Avenue Tavern Liquor License
Town Clerk Memo
1
To: Honorable Mayor Pinkham
Board of Trustees
Town Administrator Lancaster
From: Jackie Williamson, Town Clerk
Date: August 26, 2013
RE: Show Cause Liquor Hearing for Bowl Fort Collins Llc dba Chippers Lanes
Estes Park Center, 555 S. St. Vrain Avenue Tavern Liquor License
Objective:
To approve a Stipulation Agreement with Bowl Fort Collins LLC dba Chippers Lanes
Estes Park Center for the sale of alcohol to a minor during a compliance check on July
25, 2013.
Present Situation:
The Town Board approved Resolution 20-13 at their meeting on Tuesday, August 13,
2013 setting a Show Cause hearing for Bowl Fort Collins LLC dba Chippers Lanes
Estes Park Center on Tuesday, August 27, 2013 for a violation of the Colorado Liquor
Code Section 12-47-901 (1) (a.5)(I) C.R.S, alleging the Licensee, through its employee,
sold & served alcohol to a person under the age of twenty-one. During the past two
weeks, staff has been in discussions with the owner of the business. The owner, Matt
Hoeven, has stated no objections to the fact a violation occurred at his business and
has been cooperative in discussing a stipulation agreement.
The licensee has a previous violation for a sale to a minor which occurred on January
22, 2011. The administrative action for this violation was handled by the State Liquor
Enforcement Division. See details of the previous violation attached to the Show Cause
Hearing Procedures.
Proposal:
On Monday, August 26, 2013, Matt Hoeven agreed to enter into a Stipulation
Agreement. Through the stipulation process, Chipper Lanes Estes Park Center has
waived their rights to a Show Cause hearing before the Board of Trustees in order to
determine if a violation occurred. Chipper Lanes Estes Park Center agrees the
violations occurred and has agreed to a 21 day suspension, with actual time served of
10 days of its Tavern Liquor License as a penalty for the violation. The 11 days held in
abeyance would be suspended on the condition no further violation occurs during the
one-year stipulation period commencing August 27, 2013. The Stipulation Agreement is
attached for the Board’s review. If approved by the Board, the suspension would be
served beginning August 29, 2013 through September 7, 2013.
Show Cause Liquor Hearing for Bowl Fort Collins Llc dba Chippers Lanes Estes Park Center, 555 S.
St. Vrain Avenue Tavern Liquor License 2
If the Board does not accept the Stipulation Agreement, the licensee has the option to
withdraw the Stipulation Agreement and hold the Show Cause hearing scheduled for
September 10, 2013 as stated in the Stipulation Agreement under Section 5.
Advantages:
The approval of the agreement reduces the cost to the Town of a Show Cause
hearing and the time in finding a violation occurred, as the licensee has agreed a
violation has occurred.
Those subpoenaed are not required to attend the meeting.
Disadvantages: None.
Action Recommended:
Approve the Stipulation Agreement with Bowl Fort Collins LLC dba Chipper Lanes Estes
Park Center for the underage sale and serving of alcohol during a compliance check
conducted on July 25, 2013.
Budget: None.
Level of Public Interest
High. The other liquor establishments are aware of the compliance checks and the
penalties being approved by the Town Board.
Sample Motion:
I move to approve/deny the Stipulation Agreement Bowl Fort Collins LLC dba Chippers
Lanes Estes Park Center.
TOWN OF ESTES PARK
PROCEDURE FOR SHOW CAUSE LIQUOR HEARING
Bowl Fort Collins LLC dba Chipper Lanes Estes Park Center
August 27, 2013
The Show Cause Liquor Hearing shall be conducted in the following manner:
1. Attorney Roselle will state the Estes Park Police Department/State Liquor
Enforcement Division’s case and present any evidence to support the
same.
2. The Licensee or its Attorney will present their case and present any
evidence in opposition.
3. Attorney Roselle will be allowed a rebuttal limited to the evidence
presented by the Licensee. No new evidence may be submitted.
4. The Licensee or its Attorney will be allowed a rebuttal that is limited to the
evidence presented during rebuttal by Attorney Roselle. No new evidence
may be submitted.
5. The Board of Trustees may ask any questions of any person speaking at
any time during the course of this hearing.
6. Town Board shall deliberate and make a “Finding” on the alleged violation.
Sample Finding:
Based upon the evidence presented at the hearing, the Board of Trustees
finds that a violation occurred/did not occur of the Colorado Liquor Code
Section 12-47-901 (1) (a.5)(I), C.R.S., by the Licensee, through its
employee, in which alcohol beverage(s) were/were not sold and served to
a person under the age of twenty-one years on July 25, 2013.
7. If the Town Board of Trustees finds that a violation occurred, then the
Town Board of Trustees shall proceed to determine a suspension or
revocation of the liquor license.
8. Attorney Roselle will present a recommendation for the suspension or
revocation of the license.
9. The Licensee or its Attorney will present a statement and/or evidence
regarding a suspension or revocation of the liquor license.
10. The Town Board shall make a determination as to the suspension or
revocation of the liquor license.
Sample Motion(s):
I move, based on the finding that a violation of the Colorado Liquor Code
Section 12-47-901 (1) (a.5)(I), C.R.S. occurred, the Tavern Liquor License
held by Bowl Fort Collins LLC dba Chipper Lanes Estes Park Center shall
be suspended for ___ days, with an actual time served of ___ days, with
___ days held in abeyance on the condition that no further violations of the
Colorado Liquor Code and/or Regulations of the Department of Revenue
Liquor Enforcement Division occur within the one-year stipulation period
commencing on August 27, 2013. The suspension of the Licensee Tavern
Liquor License shall take place from 12:01 a.m. ___________, 2013
through 11:59 p.m. _____________, 2013.
OR
I move, based on the finding that a violation of the Colorado Liquor Code
Section 12-47-901 (1) (a.5)(I), C.R.S. occurred, the Tavern Liquor License
held by Bowl Fort Collins LLC dba Chipper Lanes Estes Park Center shall
be revoked effective ___________. 2013.
BEFORE THE LOCAL LIQUOR LICENSING AUTHORITY
TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO
______________________________________________________________________________
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE AND NOTICE OF HEARING
______________________________________________________________________________
IN THE MATTER OF:
MATTHEW HOEVEN
BOWL FORT COLLINS LLC
D/B/A/ CHIPPERS LANES ESTES PARK CENTER
555 S. ST. VRAIN AVENUE
217 W. HORSETOOTH ROAD
FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 80525
LICENSE NO: 41-58976-0004
______________________________________________________________________________
WHEREAS, it has been made to appear to the Local Licensing Authority, Town of Estes Park, State
of Colorado, that Bowl Fort Collins, LLC d/b/a Chippers Lanes Estes Park Center, 555 S. St. Vrain
Avenue, Estes Park, Colorado 80517 ("Licensee"), has violated the statutes or the rules and
regulations of the Department of Revenue governing its tavern liquor license in the following
particulars:
I) Pursuant to Section 12-47-901 (1)(a.5)(I), C.R.S., except as provided in Section 18-13-122,
C.R.S., it is unlawful for any person to sell, serve, give away, dispose of, exchange, or
deliver or permit the sale, serving, giving, or procuring of any alcohol beverage to or for any
person under the age of twenty-one years.
A) It is alleged that on July 25, 2013, the Licensee, through its employee/agent, Brian
Mateja, permitted the sale, serving, giving, or procuring of an alcohol beverage to a
juvenile under age of 21 years.
NOW THEREFORE, you are hereby ordered to appear before the local licensing authority
to show cause why your said license should not be suspended or revoked as by law provided.
A Show Cause Hearing is set for August 27, 2013 at 7:00 p.m. and will be held in the Town
Board Room at 170 MacGregor Avenue, Estes Park, Colorado.
You are entitled to have an attorney represent you at the hearing. If you should retain an
attorney, you should do so well in advance of the hearing. Once a hearing date has been set, a
postponement will not be granted except for good cause shown. If you should fail to appear at the
scheduled time and place for the hearing, testimony will be taken in reference to the allegations,
Order to Show Cause and Notice of Hearing
Chippers Lanes Estes Park Center
Page 2 of 2
upon which evidence your license to operate under the terms of the Colorado Liquor or Beer Code
may be suspended or revoked.
Please be further advised that if the Local Licensing Authority does find you in violation of
any of the above-cited section(s) of the Colorado Liquor or Beer Code, the Local Licensing
Authority may consider, in selecting the sanction to be imposed against you, any mitigating or
aggravating factors, any prior violations of the Colorado Liquor or Beer Code, as well as any
sanctions previously imposed against you.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this Order and Notice shall be mailed or
delivered to the above-mentioned Licensee.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have here unto set my hand and seal of my office this ____
day of _____________, 2013.
_______________________________
Town Clerk
LIQUOR LICENSE
STIPULATION GUIDELINES
*Revised July, 1999
Statement of Purpose: To authorize Town staff to negotiate a Stipulation Agreement, utilizing
these Guidelines, with the Liquor Licensee following the setting of a Show Cause Hearing. The
Town Board may amend, approve, or deny any Stipulation Agreement.
REGULATION NO. CODE VIOLATION * RECOMMENDED
SUSPENSION
*ACTUAL
TIME
SERVED –
TO BE
DETERMINED
Critical Violations:
12-47-901(1)(a) Sale to an Underage Person
1st Offense
2nd Offense, w/in 1 yr.
3rd Offense, w/in 1 yr.
4th Offense, w/in 2 yrs.
21 Days
30 “
60 “
90 “ to revocation
12-47-901(1)(a) and
Reg. 47-900
Sale to Intoxicated Person
1st Offense
2nd Offense
3rd Offense
30 Days
90 “
6 Mo. to revocation
Reg. 47-900A. Conduct of Establishment
Intentional:
1st Offense
2nd Offense
3rd Offense
30 Days
90 “
6 Mo. to revocation
Administrative
Violations:
12-47-901(5)(n)(I)
and
Reg. 47-922A.1.
Permitting Illegal Gambling
1st Offense
2nd Offense
3rd Offense
7 Days
30 “
90 “ to revocation
“ Video Poker Gambling
1st Offense
2nd Offense
3rd Offense
7 Days
30 “
90 “ to revocation
2
REGULATION NO. CODE VIOLATION *RECOMMENDED
SUSPENSION
*ACTUAL
TIME
SERVED –
TO BE
DETERMINED
“ Shake-A-Day Gambling Device
1st Offense
2nd Offense
3rd Offense
7 Days
30 “
90 “
Reg. 47-900A. Permitting Disturbances
1st Offense
2nd Offense
3rd Offense
20 Days
30 “
90 “
Reg. 47-900A. Conduct of Establishment
Negligence:
1st Offense
2nd Offense
3rd Offense
20 Days
30 “
90 “ to revocation
Reg. 47-408A. Purchase of Liquor from Other
Than Wholesaler
1st Offense
2nd Offense
5 Days
7 “
Reg. 47-419B. Failure to Meet Food Requirement
(H&R, Brew Pub)
1st Offense
2nd Offense
10 Days
30 “
12-47-901 (5) IV (I) Sale After Legal Hours
1st Offense
2nd Offense
7 Days
20 “
12-47-301(7) Failure to Report Manager,
Corporate & Financial Change
1st Offense
2nd Offense
5 Days
7 “
12-47-901(5)(a)(I) Underage Employee Selling or
Serving
1st Offense
2nd Offense
3rd Offense
20 Days
30 “
90 “
Reg. 47-904C. Altered Liquor
1st Offense
10 Days
3
Definition:
1. Offense: for the purpose of these guidelines, an offense is a single occurrence of a
violation. It is possible that within an offense, there could be multiple counts.
Notes:
1. These guidelines are intended as an instrument for the Town Board and Staff. The
Town Board and Staff may at any time, depending upon the severity of the violation,
alter the suspension time defined in these guidelines.
2. *These guidelines were prepared following review of the Colorado Liquor Enforcement
Division’s Guidelines, as updated June 4, 1999.
3. Staff may, at any time, elect not to negotiate a Stipulation Agreement, thus proceeding
with the Show Cause Hearing before the Board of Trustees.
4. All substantial liquor license violations, as determined by Staff, will be scheduled for a
Show Cause Hearing. If the Town Board does not approve the Stipulation Agreement,
the Town Board will proceed with the Show Cause Hearing.
5. Days not actually served (days held in abeyance) are suspended on the condition that
no further violations occur within the one-year stipulation period.
6. *Liquor violations are carried for 5 years for purposes of litigation.
PUBLIC WORKS Report
To: Honorable Mayor Pinkham
Board of Trustees
Town Administrator Lancaster
From: Scott Zurn, PE, Public Works Director
Date: August 27, 2013
RE: Multi-Purpose Event Center & Stall Barn Construction Update
Objective:
To update the Town Board and public on the progress of the MPEC and Stall Barn
Project at the Stanley Fairgrounds.
Present Situation:
In the last few weeks the wall panels for the stall barn have been substantially installed
and the roof panels will begin to be placed this week.
Foundations continue and are near completion this week for the MPEC and backfilling
of the foundations is underway. Staff continues to review material submittals and is
reviewing and approving finishes and finish colors.
The civil site contract has been awarded and utilities are beginning to be coordinated
and scheduled with the current activities that are already underway.
In addition staff has begun discussions and meetings regarding the IT and audio visual
needs for the facility. These needs will be established by Bo Winslow. The design team
and contractor representatives will develop a design, cost and implementation schedule
to meet the needs of the operation of the facility.
The project continues to be on schedule and within budget.
Budget:
Community Reinvestment Fund $ 5,682,050.00
Level of Public Interest
This is a project that has a very high level of interest.
Community Development Memo
To: Honorable Mayor Pinkham
Board of Trustees
Town Administrator Lancaster
From: Phil Kleisler, Planner I/Code Compliance Officer
Date: August 27, 2013
RE: SUPPLEMENTAL CONDOMINIUM MAP, Units 3 & 4, The Meadows
Condominiums – Jim Tawney/Applicant
Objective:
Review of The Meadows Supplimental Condominium Map application, submitted by
applicant Jim Tawney, for compliance with the Estes Valley Development Code.
Present Situation:
The site is zoned A –
Accommodations, and is
located at the northwest corner
of Mary’s Lake Road and
Kiowa Drive. Development
Plan 06-01 is approved for 35
units. Six of the 35 units
approved on this site have
been constructed.
Pursuant to state law,
condominium units may not be
finalized until the units are
substantially complete.
Because of this, final
“supplemental maps will be submitted as the project builds out. According to the
procedure set forth in the Estes Valley Development Code, the Final Condominium map
proceeds directly to the Board and is not reviewed by the Planning Commission.
This proposal complies the applicable standards of the EVDC, specifically:
Section 3.9.E “Standards of Review” for subdivisions, and Section
10.5.H “Condominiums, Townhouses and Other Forms of Airspace
Ownership.”
Proposal:
Approving the subject Supplemental Condominium Map will allow sale of the units. This
is the second supplemental condominium map, condominiumizing a duplex containing
Units Three and Four. Units are addressed 311 and 315 Kiowa Trail.
Advantages:
Compliance with the Estes Valley Development Code.
Disadvantages:
None.
Action Recommended:
Staff recommends approval conditional to compliance with Development Plan 06-01
“Marys Meadow.”
Budget:
N/A
Level of Public Interest
Low.
Sample Motion:
I move to Approve (Deny) the Supplemental Condominium Map application with
the conditions recommended by staff.
A
A A
E-1E-1
REE
2800
301
2625
190
2824 2840
2800
28502845
2720
26252625
2625
2625
2625
26252625
2625
2625
2855
26252625
2625
2625
26252625
26252625
2625
2625
26252625
2625
26252625
2625
2625
2625
2625
2625
2625
262526252625262526252625
2625
2625
26252625
2636
2625
2625262526252625
2625
345341 325321
KIOWA DR
KIOWA TRLMARYS LAKE RD S SAINT VRAIN AVEKI
OWA CT0 90 180Feet
1 in = 167 ft ±Town o f Estes ParkCommunity DevelopmentExhibit A Map
Printed: 8/16/2013Created By: Phil Kleisler
Town Boundary
Parcels-Larimer
Zoning
Project Site
Project Name:
Project Description:
Petitioner(s):
Suppemental Condominium Map, The Meadows The third supplemental condominium map, condominiumizing a duplex containing Units Three and Four. Jim Taw ney/Applicant
MARYS LAKE
Site
Vicinity Ma p
A
A A
E-1E-1
REE
2800
301
2625
190
2824 2840
2800
28502845
2720
26252625
2625
2625
2625
26252625
2625
2625
2855
26252625
2625
2625
26252625
26252625
2625
2625
26252625
2625
26252625
2625
2625
2625
2625
2625
2625
262526252625262526252625
2625
2625
26252625
2636
2625
2625262526252625
2625
345341 325321
KIOWA DR
KIOWA TRLMARYS LAKE RD S SAINT VRAIN AVEKI
OWA CT0 90 180Feet
1 in = 167 ft ±Town o f Estes ParkCommunity DevelopmentExhibit B Map
Printed: 8/16/2013Created By: Phil Kleisler
Town Boundary
Parcels-Larimer
Zoning
Project Site
Project Name:
Project Description:
Petitioner(s):
Suppemental Condominium Map, The Meadows The third supplemental condominium map, condominiumizing a duplex containing Units Three and Four. Jim Taw ney/Applicant
MARYS LAKE
Site
Vicinity Ma p
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Memo
To: Honorable Mayor Pinkham
Board of Trustees
Town Administrator Lancaster
From: David Shirk, Senior Planner
Date: August 27, 2013
RE: AMENDED PLAT of Lot 6, Lake Pines Subdivision; 625 Community Drive;
David Moderi/Owner
Objective:
Review of the amended plat application, submitted by David Moderi, for compliance with
the Estes Valley Development Code.
Present Situation:
A deck built 15-20 years ago, without a
building permit, extends outside the
platted setback. Each of the lots within
the Lake Pines subdivision has a platted
building envelope, which provides
‘checkerboard’ spacing between houses
in the subdivision.
The encroachment outside the platted
setback was discovered during a recent
real-estate transfer, and the new owner
seeks ‘clear’ title to the property. One
other lot in this subdivision has amended
the building envelope, also to provide for
a deck addition.
An aerial photo and copy of the plat are attached.
Proposal:
Amend the plat to expand the platted building envelope to include the deck.
Advantages:
Allows the current property owner to keep the deck, which was built by a previous
property owner.
Approval would not compromise intent of the platted setbacks or negatively impact the
subdivision, which has been fully built-out.
Disadvantages:
None.
Action Recommended:
On July 16, 2013, the Estes Valley Planning Commission voted unanimously (4-0, two
absent, one vacancy) to recommend APPROVAL CONDITIONAL TO:
1. Reformat plat for recording (remove improvements).
The Planning Commission also found:
1. This proposal complies with applicable sections of the Estes Valley Development
Code, including Section 3.9.E “Standards for Review” and 10.3 “Review
Procedures.”
2. The proposed building envelope complies with underlying zoning setback
requirements.
3. Approval will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare, injurious to other
property in the neighborhood, or in conflict with the purposes and objectives of this
Code. The deck has been in place for several years, and all surrounding property
owners have been notified; none expressed concern.
4. This request has been submitted to reviewing agency staff for consideration and
comment. No significant issues or concerns were expressed by reviewing staff
relative to code compliance or the provision of public services.
5. Within thirty (30) days of the Board’s approval of the amended plat, the owner shall
submit the plat for recording. If the plat is not submitted for recording within this
thirty-day time period, the approval shall automatically lapse and be null and void.
6. This is a Planning Commission recommendation the Town Board of the Town of
Estes Park.
Budget:
Not applicable
Level of Public Interest:
Low. One nearby property owner contacted staff and expressed no concern.
Sample Motion: I move for the approval/denial of the amended plat application
subject to the findings and conditions recommended by the Planning Commission.
Classification & Compensation Policy 301 & 2014 Compensation Plan
Administrative Services Memo
1
To: Honorable Mayor Pinkham
Board of Trustees
Town Administrator Lancaster
From: Jackie Williamson, Director
Date: August 23, 2013
RE: Classification & Compensation Policy 301 & 2014 Compensation Plan
Objective:
To develop a policy on how the Town will classify job positions, competitively
compensate employees, and approve compensation for the 2014 budget.
Present Situation:
At the Town Board meeting on April 9, 2013, the Town Board approved contracting with
ESM Consulting Inc. to perform a Classification and Compensation study. Eric
Marburger and his staff have worked diligently the past several months to bring forward
a final proposal on classifying town positions, pay scales for each job family, and a
compensation plan for 2014.
Proposal:
Eric Marburger/ESM Consulting has worked closely with staff to collect data through
questionnaires, employee meetings, and a steering committee to accurately classify
every town employee into one of five job families, each with their own pay scale.
Through the development of a market based compensation plan, a salary structure has
been developed that will enable the Town to maintain a competitive position with the
other comparable municipalities and like industries.
The attached policy outlines the Town’s classification and compensation practices,
which establishes a consistent method moving forward in evaluating current and new
positions. The Town would move away from the COLA system currently used to a
quantifiable market based system. The compensation policy will allow the Town to stay
current with the market through an annual review of all positions.
Mr. Marburger will be presenting an overview of the process used throughout the study
and present the recommended 2014 compensation plan. Staff recommends approval of
the compensation plan with a maximum increase of 5% for positions identified in the
study as needing adjustment. However for 8 positions the increase will exceed 5% as
these positions are outside of the new grade, and therefore, will be moved to the
minimum of the new grade. All positions needing adjustment above the 5% will be
reviewed during the 2015 budget process.
Setting Show Cause Hearing 2
Advantages:
The new policy would provide a mechanism for reviewing job positions and staying
current with the market.
Move towards providing employees with competitive market salaries.
Disadvantages:
The cost to bring all positions into market is significant.
Not all positions can be fully adjusted in 2014 and will require a minimum of 2 years
to accomplish.
Action Recommended:
Approve the Classification & Compensation Policy 301 and the 2014 Compensation
Plan.
Budget:
The estimated cost to implement a 5% increase to positions being adjusted due to
market study is estimated at $264,904 with approximately $94,000 expensed directly to
the Enterprise funds. The increase in salaries would also increase taxes and retirement
cost by approximately $56,000.
Level of Public Interest
High. The public/taxpayers have expressed concern over the years with the salaries
paid to Town employees. The completion of a formal salary study provides market data
for the salaries paid to employees.
Sample Motion:
I move to approve/deny Classification & Compensation Policy 301 and the 2014
Compensation Plan.
Effective Period:
Review Schedule: Annually
Effective Date:
References:
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
Classification & Compensation Policy
301
1
301.1 Purpose
The Policy is intended to describe how the Town will classify job positions and
competitively compensate employees for work performed in order to maintain a highly
skilled, educated and professional employee base to serve the citizenry of the Town.
301.2 Policy
The Town's classification and compensation policy is structured to classify and
compensate employees based on the nature and level of work performed. In
establishing the salary ranges for the Compensation Plan, consideration may be given
to factors such as the market based pay rates for comparable public entities, when
practical, private organizations in the surrounding area, and budgetary capacities in an
effort to maintain a competitive compensation program that attracts and retains a
dedicated and versatile workforce.
301.3 Job Classification
301.3.1 Job Families: Each job position will be classified in one of five job families
based on the nature of the work performed. Families may be adjusted by
the Town Administrator in the future based on market factors annually
and/or a review of the job description.
Administrative
Labor, Trades, Skilled and Crafts
Management
Public Safety
Technical & Professional
301.4 Compensation Plan
301.4.1 It is the goal of the Board of Trustees to annually review and, when
necessary, to adjust the Compensation Plan to enable the Town to fairly
Effective Period:
Review Schedule: Annually
Effective Date:
References:
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
Classification & Compensation Policy
301
2
compensate its employees. Human Resources will review the
Compensation Plan each year for external equity and will prepare a proposal
for the Board of Trustees approval.
The Town will use a market based job evaluation method, whereby the
external market is used to establish and benchmark compensation levels.
Job content will be analyzed and documented through job descriptions.
Market data will be collected from a predetermined market area for jobs
that are commonly found and defined to maintain a competitive salary
structure, See 301.4.2. Compensation data is collected utilizing reliable
published salary surveys. Data analysis methods will be reviewed annually
in conjunction with a proposal to the Board of Trustees. Jobs are assigned
to pay grades based on the market to midpoint comparisons. Jobs without
market data are assigned to pay grades based on internal equity.
301.4.1.1 After Human Resources conducts the appropriate analysis,
Compensation Plan adjustments may be made as follows:
a. The Administrative Services Director will take the proposed
adjustments to the Compensation Plan to the Board of
Trustees for approval. The market based Compensation
Plan adjustments must be made in conjunction with the
annual budget planning effort.
b. The Town Administrator is authorized to make changes to
the Compensation Plan in order to deal with position or job
Effective Period:
Review Schedule: Annually
Effective Date:
References:
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
Classification & Compensation Policy
301
3
classification issues, internal equity adjustments based on
job content, external job market changes, and other minor
adjustments to the Compensation Plan without taking
these matters to the Board of Trustees.
c. It is the Town’s goal to establish the Compensation Plan
around the external market value of jobs. However, there
may be a need to limit range adjustments depending on
availability of funds and/or the annual budget as adopted
by the Board of Trustees.
301.4.2 Market Area ‐ The market area primarily consists of other public
organizations, with which the Town competes for employees. This
currently encompasses Larimer County, southern and central Weld
County and Boulder County south, including the Hwy 36 corridor. In
recognition of the varying service requirements Estes Park faces, the
market will include those Colorado resort communities that experience
significant fluctuations between their resident population and their
seasonal visitors. Data will also be included for job classes that have
comparable positions in the private sector.
Survey data will be utilized from surveys conducted by the Colorado
Municipal League and the Mountain States Employers Council. In
addition, other appropriate wage surveys may be used to reflect the
unique jobs and market for the Town.
Effective Period:
Review Schedule: Annually
Effective Date:
References:
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
Classification & Compensation Policy
301
4
These competitive salary levels are coupled with a comprehensive and
strong fringe benefit package that compares favorably with the
designated market area. This package includes health and welfare
benefits at a low cost to Town employees, a very strong retirement
package and a variety of paid time off options that provide a work‐life
balance for Town staff.
The Town of Estes Park recognizes that its employees face some
challenges in the areas of the cost and availability of near‐by housing,
commute times and child care. By including other resort communities
in the comparison market the Town hopes to ameliorate these
concerns. The total compensation package offered by the Town should
be competitive and balance the needs of employees with the financial
constraints of the Town. The Town of Estes Park remains committed to
being not just “A Great Place to Visit, a Great Place to Live” but also “A
Great Place to Work”.
301.4.3 Pay Rates for Regular, Limited Term and Temporary Employees:
All Regular, Limited Term and Temporary employees are paid a base pay
rate within the salary range established for their job classification. All
Regular, Limited Term and Temporary employees are paid base pay
rates within the salary range assigned to their job classification, unless
their pay rates are above the assigned range due to range adjustments
or other approved actions that left the pay rate above the maximum of
the range. See Exhibit A for classification and salary range tables.
Effective Period:
Review Schedule: Annually
Effective Date:
References:
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
Classification & Compensation Policy
301
5
301.4.4 Seasonal Employee (Reserved)
_______________________________________
William C. Pinkham, Mayor
_______________________________________
Date
Exhibit A (Draft – Position data would be added once completed) Administrative Pay Scale Town Job Title Proposed Pay Grade FLSA Status
Exhibit A (Draft – Position data would be added once completed) Management Pay Scale Town Job Title Proposed Pay Grade FLSA Status
Exhibit A (Draft – Position data would be added once completed) Technical & Professional Pay Scale Town Job Title Proposed Pay Grade FLSA Status
Exhibit A (Draft – Position data would be added once completed) Labor, Trade, Skilled & Crafts Pay Scale Town Job Title Proposed Pay Grade FLSA Status
Exhibit A (Draft – Position data would be added once completed) Public Safety Pay Scale Town Job Title Proposed Pay Grade FLSA Status
ESM Consulting Services, Inc.Centennial, COAugust 2013
Questionnaires were collected from Town employees.Questionnaires were collected from Town employees.Market data was collected for as many Town positions as possible.Market data was collected for as many Town positions as possible.Town positions were organized into job families.Town positions were organized into job families.Pay scales were developed for each job family and based on the market data collected.Pay scales were developed for each job family and based on the market data collected.Job descriptions are being significantly consolidated and rewritten.Job descriptions are being significantly consolidated and rewritten.
Each Town employee received a questionnaire so that job descriptions could be updated with current duties and jobs matched correctly with the surveys used• 95 questionnaires were received from employees• Reviewed by departmental management for overall accuracy
Data was collected from:• Public Sector Resort Communities• Public Sector Local Communities• Private Sector data for appropriate positions• Denver/Boulder Market• Northern Colorado Market• Resort Area MarketOnly ten positions had private sector and public sector matches.
Five job families were created to assist in the organization of Town jobsAdministrativeLabor, Trades, Skilled and CraftsManagementPublic SafetyTechnical and ProfessionalFamilies can be adjusted differently based on market factors in the future
Simple, open pay ranges have been developed• (some minor changes may be made as things are finalized and reviewed)Midpoints of pay ranges are designed to be near the average market wageEach job will be assigned to a pay rangeJobs can be moved between ranges as market changesEntire pay scale can be updated as needed based on market changes
Pay GradeGrade MinimumGradeMidpointGrade MaximumADMIN 1 $ 21,736 $ 25,540 $ 29,344 ADMIN 2 $ 24,898 $ 29,255 $ 33,612 ADMIN 3 $ 28,060 $ 32,970 $ 37,880 ADMIN 4 $ 31,221 $ 36,685 $ 42,149 ADMIN 5 $ 34,383 $ 40,400 $ 46,417 ADMIN 6 $ 37,545 $ 44,115 $ 50,685 ADMIN 7 $ 40,707 $ 47,831 $ 54,955
Pay GradeGrade MinimumGrade MidpointGrade MaximumMGMT 1 $ 43,353 $ 53,108 $ 62,863 MGMT 2 $ 51,192 $ 62,710 $ 74,228 MGMT 3 $ 59,030 $ 72,312 $ 85,594 MGMT 4 $ 66,869 $ 81,914 $ 96,959 MGMT 5 $ 74,707 $ 91,516 $ 108,325 MGMT 6 $ 82,545 $ 101,118 $ 119,691 MGMT 7 $ 90,384 $ 110,720 $ 131,056
Pay GradeGrade MinimumGrade MidpointGrade MaximumT & P 1 $ 21,703 $ 25,501 $ 29,299 T & P 2 $ 27,724 $ 32,576 $ 37,428 T & P 3 $ 33,746 $ 39,651 $ 45,556 T & P 4 $ 39,767 $ 46,726 $ 53,685 T & P 5 $ 45,788 $ 53,801 $ 61,814 T & P 6 $ 49,695 $ 60,876 $ 72,057 T & P 7 $ 55,470 $ 67,951 $ 80,432 T & P 8 $ 61,246 $ 75,026 $ 88,806
Pay GradeGrade MinimumGrade MidpointGrade MaximumPS 1 $ 40,074 $ 47,087 $ 54,100 PS 2 $ 42,078 $ 49,441 $ 56,805 PS 3 $ 44,182 $ 51,913 $ 59,645 SwornPS 4 $ 46,366 $ 51,002 $ 55,639 PS 5 $ 48,229 $ 56,669 $ 65,109 PS 6 $ 53,052 $ 62,336 $ 71,620 PS 7 $ 55,704 $ 65,453 $ 75,201 PS 8 $ 61,193 $ 73,431 $ 85,670
Pay GradeGrade MinimumGrade MidpointGrade MaximumLTSC 1 $ 29,108 $ 34,202 $ 39,296 LTSC 2 $ 32,019 $ 37,622 $ 43,225 LTSC 3 $ 35,221 $ 41,384 $ 47,548 LTSC 4 $ 38,743 $ 45,523 $ 52,303 LTSC 5 $ 42,617 $ 50,075 $ 57,533 LTSC 6 $ 46,879 $ 55,082 $ 63,286 LTSC 7 $ 51,566 $ 60,591 $ 69,615 LTSC 8 $ 56,723 $ 66,650 $ 76,576 LTSC 9 $ 59,559 $ 69,982 $ 80,405 LTSC 10 $ 62,537 $ 73,481 $ 84,425 LTSC 11 $ 65,664 $ 77,155 $ 88,647 Separate Grid for Apprentice Lineworkers
Confirm placement of each position into a pay rangeConfirm placement of each position into a pay rangeDetermine overall costs and include in 2014 budgetDetermine overall costs and include in 2014 budgetDevelop pay methodology for placement of employees in their new pay rangeDevelop pay methodology for placement of employees in their new pay rangeFinalize job descriptionsFinalize job descriptionsImplement robust communications to employeesImplement robust communications to employeesSystems/IT work to implement Systems/IT work to implement
• No employee will have salary reduced• No employee will have salary reduced• Employees below the new minimum should receive pay increase to at least the minimum• Employees below the new minimum should receive pay increase to at least the minimum• We compared the “before and after” midpoints of each job and attempted to increase each employee by the increase in midpoints• We compared the “before and after” midpoints of each job and attempted to increase each employee by the increase in midpoints• Increases for 2014 will be limited to 5% or the minimum of the new pay range, whichever is more• Increases for 2014 will be limited to 5% or the minimum of the new pay range, whichever is more
There are 113 employees (as of 8/21) who will be placed in the new pay system19 will receive no immediate increase20 will receive < 5%66 will receive 5%8 will receive > 5%3.95% is the average employee increase$265,000 increases in wages (all funds)2014 review will address positions that remain under market
UTILITIES DEPARTMENT Memo
To: Honorable Mayor Pinkham
Board of Trustees
Town Administrator Lancaster
From: Utilities Director Bergsten
Finance Officer McFarland
Water Superintendent Boles
Date: August 27, 2013
RE: Enterprise Fund Large Maintenance Expense Policy
Objective:
To obtain approval of the proposed Accrual of Major Maintenance Costs Policy
(attached) whereby a percentage of the estimated major maintenance costs will be set
aside annually to accrue for upcoming large maintenance expenditures for enterprise
fund accounts.
Present Situation:
Historically, the largest operations and maintenance (O&M) cost incurred by the Utilities
Department was the replacement of the filter media at Glacier Water Treatment Plant
($150,000). This maintenance must be performed every fifteen (15) years and the next
replacement is planned for 2017. For Marys Lake Water Treatment Plant, which uses
membrane treatment technology, the membrane replacement costs every twelve (12)
years are estimated to be $900,000. The first replacement is planned for 2022.
It has not been the practice to set aside any funds for anticipated major maintenance
expenditures prior to the year in which the major maintenance activity occurs. This
requires a spike in rates in order to meet our bond covenant requirements.
Finance Officer McFarland has worked with the Town's auditor and Platte River Power
Authority (PRPA) to craft an implementation of Governmental Accounting Standards
Board (GASB) Statement 62. This standard allows for the accrual of funds for future
operations and maintenance costs.
Proposal:
This situation would be improved by putting this policy in place.
Instituting this policy would spread out the financial burden placed on rate payers for
major maintenance expenses.
Advantages:
This is a good financial practice to plan for large expenses by saving funds every
year leading up to the actual large maintenance activity.
Doing so addresses two important items: utility rate stabilization and compliance
with our bond rate covenant.
This practice would drastically ease the burden of trying to cover the full amount
of the large expenditures in the affected budget years on top of the normal
planned expenses for the year.
Disadvantages:
We consider this practice to be an exercise in good financial stewardship and, therefore,
do not believe there are any disadvantages.
Action Recommended:
Town Board approval of this policy is required.
We would like this policy to become effective for 2013.
Budget:
Account Number: 503-6200-530.26-40
Account Name: PURIFICATION EQUIPMENT
Amount Recommended: $117,000 per year
Level of Public Interest
Low: The public is always concerned that we are planning for the future in a prudent
manner and using our money wisely; however, much of our public does not follow
GASB statements and rules.
Sample Motion:
I move for the approval/denial of the adoption of the Accrual of Major Maintenance
Costs Policy.
Effective Period: Until superseded
Review Schedule: Bi‐Annually
Effective Date: September 1, 2013
References: Governmental Accounting Standards Board Statement No. 62 (GASB)
UTILITIES DEPARTMENT
ACCRUAL OF MAJOR MAINTENANCE COSTS POLICY
900.1
Revisions: Initially Created 9/1/13;
900.1.1 Purpose
The purpose of this policy is to stabilize rates and improve the financial practices of the
Utilities through accrual of funds for enterprise fund major maintenance costs in excess
of $150,000.
900.1.2 Policy
This policy applies to all major maintenance enterprise fund costs at utility facilities
wholly owned by the Town of Estes Park which have estimated costs in excess of
$150,000 (referred to as a “major maintenance cost”). Funds for enterprise fund major
maintenance costs shall be accrued on an annual basis as described in the Procedures
section of this policy.
900.1.3 Procedures
900.1.3.1 Accounting Treatment
In order to match the appropriate expenses with the revenues received,
the accrual method of expensing major maintenance costs will be
implemented. Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB)
Statement No. 62 – Codification of Accounting and Financial Reporting
Guidance recognizes and provides for accrual or deferral of expenses or
revenues and states that regulators sometimes include costs in allowable
costs in a period other than the period in which the costs would be
charged to expense by an unregulated enterprise. This accounting
treatment has been approved by the Town’s auditors.
900.1.3.2 Accrual Method
To assure accrual funds/expenses are not overstated prior to the period of
the major maintenance activity, ninety percent (90%) of the total
estimated major maintenance costs will be accrued proportionately on an
annual basis as follows:
Effective Period: Until superseded
Review Schedule: Bi‐Annually
Effective Date: September 1, 2013
References: Governmental Accounting Standards Board Statement No. 62 (GASB)
UTILITIES DEPARTMENT
ACCRUAL OF MAJOR MAINTENANCE COSTS POLICY
900.1
Revisions: Initially Created 9/1/13;
a. A separate major maintenance expense account is charged at
the beginning of each year during the accrual period for the
particular major maintenance activity. The accrual period will
begin with the first year after the last major maintenance
activity and continue through the year of the next major
maintenance activity. The amount charged to the major
maintenance account each year will be based on the projected
major maintenance costs divided by the number of years in the
accrual period.
b. Actual maintenance charges will be coded to the normal
accounts set up for the maintenance work. In the year when
the major maintenance takes place, the major maintenance
accrual will be transferred to those accounts being used to pay
for the actual major maintenance charges.
c. Any difference between the actual costs incurred for the major
maintenance activity and the accrued liability will be charged
or credited to expense at the time that the major maintenance
costs occur. The accrual estimate for future years will be
adjusted, if necessary, to reflect increases or decreases in
major maintenance costs.
d. Major maintenance costs shall be defined as reasonably
estimated overtime wages, materials, contracted labor and
supplies related to major maintenance activities. Regular labor
costs will be paid in any period regardless of the activity and,
therefore, are not included in the accrual calculation.
Page 1
To: Honorable Mayor Pinkham
Board of Trustees
Town Administrator Lancaster
From: Alison Chilcott, Director
Date: August 27, 2013
RE: Problem Statement for Estes Valley Development Code Text Amendment
Concurrent Review and Promulgating Processing Schedules
Objective:
Obtain policy direction on revisions to the Estes Valley Development Code (EVDC).
Present Situation:
The EVDC allows an applicant to request concurrent processing of different types of
development approvals to expedite total review and processing time for a project.
The EVDC also authorizes staff to promulgate processing schedules for each
application.
Proposal:
During a recent Town Board study session, the Trustees requested staff draft text
amendments to the EVDC to clarify that staff can establish the processing schedules for
related development applications. For example require review by Planning Commission
prior to review by the Board of Adjustment.
Advantages:
Increased clarity about staff’s authority to promulgate processing schedules for
applications.
Disadvantages:
Time and cost to change the Estes Valley Development Code; and,
More regulatory language will be created.
Action Recommended:
Direct the Estes Valley Planning Commission to review and forward an Estes Valley
Development Code text amendment to the Estes Park Town Board of Trustees and
Larimer County Board of County Commissioners to provide clarify staff’s authority to
promulgate processing schedules for related development applications.
Budget:
Staff Time: 15 hours (Estimated)
Community Development Memo
Page 2
Legal Notice, Publication, and Codification Fees: Minimal (Estimated at $300)
Level of Public Interest:
Low
Sample Motion:
I move to direct the Direct the Estes Valley Planning Commission to review and forward
an Estes Valley Development Code text amendment to the Estes Park Town Board of
Trustees and Larimer County Board of County Commissioners to provide more clarity
about staff’s authority to promulgate processing schedules for related development
applications.