The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1988-01-05 Support Documentation Town Council Regular SessionVAIL TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING TUESDAY, JANUARY 5, 1988 7:30 p.m. AGENDA 1. Presentation of Plaques to Paul Johnston and Hermann Staufer for their Service on the Vail Town Council 2. Ten Year Anniversary Award to Mike McGee 3. Approval of Minutes from December 1 and 15, 1987 Meetings 4. Appointment to the Local Liquor Licensing Authority Board 5. Ordinance No. 1, Series of 1988, first reading, an ordinance amending Chapter 5.04 Annual Business License to provide for a definition of seasonal business and to set forth a business license fee for a seasonal business; setting forth the method by which business floor area shall be measured; providing a new definition for premises; setting forth a new license fee for the rental of dwelling and accommodation units based on the number of units rented; providing that Chapter 5.04 shall be effective for only one (1) year unless extended by the Town Council; and setting forth details in regard thereto. 6. Ordinance No. 2, Series of 1988, first reading, an ordinance. accepting certain improvements constructed and installed in and for Town of Vail, Colorado, West Vail Local Improvement District No. 1, determining the total cost thereof, receiving and accepting the assessment roll apportioning the cost thereof to be paid by special assessments as among affected properties within the district, assessing said cost as apportioned therein against each assessable lot or tract of land within the district. specially benefitted by said improvements, prescribing the method of paying and collecting said assessments, describing the lien securing payment thereof, making necessary findings with respect to the satisfaction of all conditions and requirements relating to the foregoing, and limiting actions challenging the proceedings. 7. Resolution No. 1, Series of 1988, a resolution setting forth the Town Council of the Town of Vail's objection to the Homestake II water diversion project. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION 8. Town Manager's Report 9. Adjournment VAIL TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING TUESDAY, JANUARY 5, 1988 7:30 p.m. EXPANDED AGENDA 7:30 1. Presentation of Plaques to Paul Johnston and Hermann Staufer for their Service on the Vail Town Council 7:40 2. Ten Year Anniversary Award to Mike McGee 7:45 3. Approval of Minutes from December 1 and 15, 1987 Meetings 7:50 4. Appointment to the Local Liquor Licensing Authority Board Action Requested of Council: Appoint one member to the Board. Background Rationale: To date, Colleen McCarthy is the only applicant for the .opening. Council does have the option, if you wish, to choose to keep the vacancy open until more applications are received. 8:00 5. Ordinance No. 1, Series of 1988, first reading, regarding Larry Eskwith the amendment of the business license fee ordinance Charlie Wick Action Requested of Council: Approve/deny Ordinance No. 1, Series of 1988, on first reading. Background Rationale: The Council, after receiving public input on the new business license fee ordinance, directed staff to make certain amendments to the ordinance. Staff Recommendation: Approve Ordinance No. 1, Series of 1988, on first. reading. 9:00 6. Ordinance No. 2, Series of 1988, first reading, regarding Stan Berryman West Vail assessments Larry Eskwith Charlie Wick Action Requested of Council: Approve/deny Ordinance No. 2, Series of 1988, on first reading if Council has elected to proceed with Local Improvement District financing of the Town's street improvement program. Background Rationale: In accordance with Vail Municipal Code Section 20.04.120, this ordinance reflects the assessments for the street improvements in the West Uail Local Improvement District No. 1. Legal notices were mailed to all property owners on 12/16/87. Legal notice was published on 12/18, 12/25/87 and 1/1/88. Property owners may object to the levy of assessments if they comply with Vail Municipal Code Section 20.04.200. Staff Recommendation: Approve Ordinance No. 2, Series of 1988, on first reading. If the Council decides to call all or a portion of the West Vail bonds in 1988, a resolution or ordinance would be passed at that time which would release the home owners from their assessment obligations in an amount equal to the number of bonds which were called. 9:25 7. Resolution No. 1, Series of .1988, opposing Homestake II Larry Eskwith Action Requested of Council: Approve/deny Resolution No. 1, Series of 1988. Background Rationale: The Resolution gives the Council an opportunity to formally oppose the Homestake II water diversion project. Staff Recommendation: Approve Resolution No. 1, Series of 1988. 9:45 CITIZEN PARTICIPATION 10:00 8. Town Manager's Report 10:05 9. Adjournment -2- MINUTES VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING DECEMBER 1, 1987 7:30 P.M. A regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesday, December 1, 1987, at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: Kent Rose, Mayor John Slevin, Mayor Pro Tem Eric Affeldt Merv Lapin Gordon Pierce Tom Steinberg Gail Wahrlich-Lowenthal Ron Phillips, Town Manager Larry Eskwith, Town Attorney Pam Brandmeyer, Town Clerk The first order of business was a horse drawn carriage agreement. Larry Eskwith gaup background information and discussed past contracts the Town had with Steve Jones. Mayor Rose asked questions-regarding the contract, which Stan Berryman and Steve Jones responded. Kent then stated that page 6, paragraph B, line 4 should read "Town Transit Superintendent" as shown in paragraph A. After discussion by Council, Tom Steinberg made a motion to approve the contract with the noted changes. John Slevin seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 6-0. The next item was Ordinance No. 39, Series of 1987, second-reading, regarding business license fees. Mayor Rose read the full title. Larry Eskwith noted Section numbering changes to be corrected on pages 6 and 7. Charlie Wick then reviewed details of the ordinance and gave a slide presentation showing highlights of the new plan. He then explained why he felt the ordinance was viable. He noted two business owners' concerns who had phoned him that day. Mayor Rose requested Larry Eskwith to review the issues he had researched in regards to this ordinance. Larry explained what was illegal and what would possibly attract litigation and commented on problems assessing a fee on a business which operated outside city limits. Noel Belcher, who was on the Marketing Committee, commented why he felt the ordinance was not fair and explained why he was against passing it. Colleen McCarthy aired her feelings against the new plan. Mayor Rose explained it was not to support the Vail Resort Association. David Kanally responded he was tired of being patient, that the VRA has been and will continue to be a sound organization and they will bid along with any other organization who want to bid for the job. Dave Simonett suggested the Uail Associates merchant pass become a true pass and tie it to the business license fee. Bruce Kendall, Vice Chairman of the VRA, read a letter from Joseph Staufer supporting the new fee plan. Noel Belcher again emphasized the unfairness of the fee. Rob Levine of the Antlers disagreed with Noel and expressed why he felt it was basically fair just to start and urged the Council to pass the ordinance. Mike Cacioppo commented why he did not like the fee and gave suggestions. He also requested Gordon Pierce not be able to vote because he had at one time moved from the town, to which Larry Eskwith responded. Ken Wilson questioned what would be done with the money collected for marketing, what were the ideas and commented that $600,OG0 was too small amount of money to do much. He requested the Town survey all businesses and questioned that since URA was represented on the Committee if they should be allowed to bid. Mayor Rose responded that the Council members needed to meet soon to discuss goals for the next few months up to the next year. Charlie Crowley aired his grievances with the new fee plan and commented how he felt it should be handled. Mike Robinson of the Marriott explained the effort that went behind the ordinance and recommended the Council get on with it. Ron Browr, a general contractor in town, just found out the day before that he .needed a business license. He stated he agreed the businesses should help pay for the marketing of Vail, but recommended the Council not pass the ordinance now, but to look outside the city limits to see who benefits from the town and seek financial support from them, too. Cathy Bondrill, who has a store in West Vail and one in Crossroads, commented she had compared the two and .opposed the new fee. Bob Doyle of The Menu in West Vail stated he was against the ordinance and questioned if it was possible to do this in the middle of next year, the possibilities of a discounted ski pass, and the possibility of a combination of things. Joan Shelsta commented it was already late for marketing for 1988 and getting close to time for 1989. She noted the ordinance could change as we went along and get more information from more people. Will Miller of Montaneros commented that when money was spent for marketing, there usually was a return. He then suggested a toilet tax which would make everyone a participant. Pat O'Brien of Ace Hardware agreed to the fee, but explained it needed a wider base than square footage. Noel Belcher again commented that if the Council did not feel ready to pass the ordinance, he would be willing to start over, or to please send it to a public vote. Mike Robinson of the Marriott suggested since the businesses were the main beneficiaries, it was time for action. Chuck Crist, who was a member of the Marketing Committee, expressed his feelings. Larry Benway stated he was against the fee. After more discussion by Mike Cacioppo, Noel Belcher, Bob Doyle and Colleen McCarthy, a motion to pass the ordinance with a sunset clause for three years and to be reviewed in one year was made by Eric Affeldt. Gordon Pierce seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed 4-2, with Tom Steinberg and Merv Lapin opposing. The third item was Ordinance No. 40, Series of 1987, second reading, regarding a request to rezone the Garden of the Gods Club from public accommodation zoning to a special development district. The full title was read by Mayor Rose. Kristan Pritz stated a charge of a date in Section 5, page 3, from September 1, 2002 to December 1, 2007. She noted that all the required agreements were almost signed and they needed to be completed before the ordinance was approved. John Slevin made a motion to approve the ordinance subject to the conditions as noted by Kristan Pritz, and Merv Lapin seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 6-0. The next order of business was Ordinance No. 41, Series of regarding modification of fees to be charged by the Town t• Mayor Rose read the full title. Ken Hughey explained what the ordinance was implemented. There was no discussion by motion to approve the ordinance was made by Merv Lapin and A vote was taken and the motion .passed unanimously 6-0. 1987, first reading, ~ monitor alarm systems. the changes would be if Council or the public. A seconded by John Slevin. The fifth item was Ordinance No. 42, Series of 1987, emergency reading, adding a provision to the Municipal Code permitting snowcats on public streets for certain special events. The full title was read by Mayor Rose. Larry Eskwith explained the ordinance was drafted under the direction ~f the Council and what the ordinance would allow and why. After a short discussion by Council, Tom Steinberg made a motion to approve the ordinance. Gordon Pierce seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 6-0. The next item was Ordinance No. 43, Series of 1987, first reading, requesting to rezone property located at 1785 Sunburst Drive from low density multi-family to single family residential. Mayor Rose read the title in full. Peter Patten explained what the ordinance would do. There was a short discussion by Council. A motion to approve the ordinance was made by Merv Lapin and seconded by Tom Steinberg. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 6-0. The seventh order of business was the Amphitheatre lease agreement between the Town of Vail and Vail Valley Foundation. Larry Eskwith noted what changes had been requested at the Work Session that day and that the agreement had been revised to reflect them. There was a short discussion by Council to include in Section 29, page 9, after financial statement, "including balance sheets, profit/loss state~ent, and endowment funds earmarked,". Eric Affeldt then made a motion to approve the lease agreement as submitted with the changes recommended by Council that evening. The motion was seconded by Gordon Pierce. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 6-0. The next item of business was the appointment of an Election Commission. Pam Brandmeyer stated that the Charter requires an Election Commission be appointed at the first meeting in December following a regular municipal election. She noted the term is for two years and the individuals would not receive compensation. She then stated her nominees as reguiar members were Lauralee Swetish and Kathy Rossi, with Celine Krueger and Vi Brown as alternates. After a brief discussion by Council, Tom -Z- Steinberg made a motion to approve the appointments and John Slevin seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 6-0. There was no Citizen Participation. Under the Town Manager's Report, Ron Phillips noted that he wanted to recognize Charlie Wick who had parried the full load on the business license fee plan over the last eight months and had done a remarkable job. He then stated there would be no Work Session on December 22 or 29, that after the the December 15 Evening Meeting, there would be r,o Council meetings until the new year. There was a brief discussion over the procedures for passing an ordinance which needed more work done on it. There was then more discussion on business license fees and how things could have been handled differently; how perceptions were bad. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 10:B5 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Kent R. Rose, Mayor ATTEST: Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Town Clerk Minutes taken by Brenda Chesman -3- MINUTES VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING DECEMBER 15, 1987 7:30 P.M. A regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesday, December 15, 1987, at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: Kent Rose, Mayor John Slevin, Mayor Pro Tem Eric Affeldt Merv Lapin Gail Wahrlich-Lowenthal Gordon Pierce Tom Steinberg None Ron Phillips, Town Manager Larry Eskwith, Town Attorney Pam Brandmeyer, Town Clerk Before the meeting began, the Vail Community Chorale sang Christmas carols for everyone. The first order of business was a farewell to Rich Parzonko, Controller for the Town. Ron Phillips commented Rich was not present at the moment, and wanted the item postponed until later during the meeting. The next item was the approval of the minutes from the November 3 and 17, 1987 meetings. Gail Wahrlich-Lowenthal questioned page 2, last paragraph, line 9, and asked that the tapes be listened to, that she did not remember saying what was noted in the minutes. Since there was no other discussion on the minutes, Eric Affeldt made a motion to approve the minutes as presented, including to check on the line as requested by Gail. Gordon Pierce seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 7-0. The third item of business was the selection of the Vail Marketing Committee. Ron Phillips stated that seven people had been recommended by Community Development and nine more had sent in their resumes. He noted those interested in serving were Tom Boselli, Randy Garman, Kaiser Morcus, Del Schooley, Mark Smith, Dan Telleen, Cathy Von Dreele, James Gibson, Colleen McCarthy, Michael Sansbury, Janet Heidmiller- Shipka, Beth Slifer, Jan Strauch, Michael Wasmer, Kenneth Wilson and William Downs. Ron then stated it had been discussed at the Work Session that day that it might be appropriate for seven to be chosen for the committee instead of five originally thought. He said if Council members agreed, to vote for seven instead of five. The Council voted in Tom Boselli, Mark Smith, Dan Telleen, James Gibson, Michael Sansbury, Beth Slifer and Jan Strauch for the committee members. Mayor Rose suggested the Council hold a Work Session on Tuesday, December 29, 1987 at 2:00 p.m. to meet with the group, and the Council could also summarize the goals they talked about at the Work Session today. The fourth order of business was a consent agenda for the following: A. Ordinance No. 41, Series of 1987, second reading, regarding modification of fees to be charged by the Town to monitor alarm systems. B. Ordinance No. 43, Series of 1987, second reading, requesting to rezone property located at 1785 Sunburst Drive from low density multi-family to single family residential. Mayor Rose read the full titles. There was no discussion by Council or the public. A motion to approve the ordinances as presented was made by Tom Steinberg and seconded by John Slevin. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 7-O. The next item was an intergovernmental agreement between Eagle County and the Town of Vail for snow and ice removal services in West Vail. Stan Berryman noted this was an annual contract with Eagle County and explained what areas were included in the agreement, and that this agreement was the same as what was used for the last two years with only mileage changes. He then explained how the price was figured. After a brief discussion by Council, Merv Lapin made a motion to approve the agreement as presented, which John Slevin seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 7-0. Under Citizen Participation, Jim Lamont spoke about Homestake II. He explained where it stands presently, and why he recommended the Town to review and make their comments known to the Commissioners. He noted the Town had until January 12, 1988 at 5:00 p.m. to submit their comments, and recommended denial from all Eagle County municipalities. He and Larry Eskwith then answered questions from Council. He advised the Council to take all the findings of fact, evaluate and submit a resolution for denial and submit by January 12. Ron noted the Council's decision from earlier this year and explained the how they were planning to proceed. Larry Eskwith commented on the legal aspects. Jim Lamont commented that the Town should be prepared. Mayor Rose thanked Jim for updating the Council and stated that action on this item was scheduled for the January 5, 1988 Evening Meeting. Under the Town Manager's Report, Ron Phillips thanked the Vail Board of Realtors for donating $440 to the Library, which would be used to purchase books on marketing and financial planning. He also thanked them for cosponsoring the children's program at the Library tomorrow. Ron then commented there had been an anonymous $2,500 contribution to the Library to be used for creative children's programs in 1988. At this time, it was noted Rich Parzonko was still not present, and that Rich had only wanted to thank the Council for all the opportunities offered him here. He had taken a position as Finance Director in a new city in California, near San Diego. Ron and Mayor Rose then expressed their best wishes for Rich. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:25 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Kent R. Rose, Mayor ATTEST: Pamela A. Brandmeyer. Town Clerk Minutes taken by Brenda Chesman -2- ORDINANCE N0. 1 Series of 1988 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 5.04 ANNUAL BUSINESS LICENSE TO PROVIDE FOR A DEFINITION OF SEASONAL BUSINESS AND TO SET FORTH A BUSINESS LICENSE FEE FOR A SEASONAL BUSINESS; SETTING FORTH THE METHOD BY WHICH BUSINESS FLOOR AREA SHALL BE MEASURED; PROVIDING A NEW DEFINITION FOR PREMISES; SETTING FORTH A NEW LICENSE FEE FOR THE RENTAL OF DWELLING AND ACCOMMODATION UNITS BASED ON THE NUMBER OF UNITS RENTED; PROVIDING THAT CHAPTER 5.04 SHALL BE EFFECTIVE FOR ONLY ONE (1) YEAR UNLESS EXTENDED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL; AND SETTING FORTH DETAILS IN REGARD THERETO. WHEREAS, the Town Council has recently repealed and reenacted Chapter 5.04 Annual Business License; and WHEREAS, the Town Council has received input from the citizens of the Town and the Town staff relating to the new business license ordinance; and WHEREAS, the Town Council wishes to implement said input. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO, that: 1. Section 5.04.020 Definitions of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail is hereby amended by the addition of paragraph 0 to read as follows: 5.04.020 Definitions 0. Seasonal Business means any business conducted for a period of not more than six (6) months per year. 2. Section 5.04.020 Definitions, subparagraph M is hereby amended to read as follows: 5.04.020 Definitions M. Business Floor Area shall mean the number of square feet located within a premises as defined in this Section. Square footage shall be measured from inside wall to inside wall. 3. Section 5.04.020 Definitions, subparagraph E is hereby amended to read as follows: 5.04.020 Definitions E. Premises means any structure, lodge, store office, sales room, warehouse, or other place of business situated within the Town which is owned, leased or occupied by a business. 4. Section 5.04.040 Fee is hereby repealed and reenacted to read as follows: 5.04.040 Fee An annual business license fee shall be paid by every person doing business within the Town in accordance with the following schedule: A. 1. Any person who engages in the short term rental of ten (10) or more dwelling units and/or accommodation units for consideration to one who uses, possesses or has the right to use or possess such accommodation unit and/or dwelling unit shall pay a minimum annual fee of four hundred dollars ($400) and in addition shall pay thirty-six dollars and twenty cents ($36.20) for each accommodation unit and/or dwelling unit in excess of ten (10) units. 2. Any person who engages in the short term rental of less than ten (10) accommodation units and/or dwelling units for consideration to one who uses, possesses or has the right to use or possess such accommodation unit or dwelling unit, shall pay an annual fee of forty dollars ($40) per each such unit rented. B. Restaurants shall pay a minimum annual fee of four hundred dollars ($400), and in addition, shall pay sixteen dollars and seven cents ($16.07) for each seat in excess of twenty-five (25) seats based upon the number of seats located within the restaurant during the winter ski season. For the purposes of this ordinance, a seat shall include a chair, stool, sitting mat or sitting pillow. In addition, every twenty-four (24) inches of booth or sofa shall be considered a seat and every twenty-four (24) inches of bar shall also be considered a seat if stools are not utilized for customers at the bar. C. Ski Companies Ski companies shall pay an annual fee of fifty-five thousand dollars ($55,000). D. Athletic Clubs 1. Athletic clubs containing more than two thousand nine hundred eighty five (2,985) square feet of business floor area shall pay a fee of one thousand dollars ($1,000). 2. Athletic clubs with less than two thousand nine hundred eighty five (2,985) square feet of business floor area shall pay an annual fee of four hundred dollars ($400), and in addition, shall pay thirty-one cents ($.31) for each square foot of business floor area in excess of one thousand fifty-two (1,052) square feet up to two thousand nine hundred eighty-five (2,985) square feet of business floor area. E. Home occupations shall pay an annual fee of seventy-five dollars ($75). -2- F. Seasonal businesses shall pay an annual fee of two hundred dollars ($200), and in addition, fifteen dollars and five cents ($15.05) for each square foot of business floor area in excess of one thousand fifty-two 11,052) square feet up to a maximum of thirty thousand (30,000) square feet of business floor area. G. All other businesses shall aay an annual fee of four hundred dollars ($400), and in addition, thirty-one cents ($.31) for each square foot of business floor area in excess of one thousand fifty-two (1,052) square feet up to a maximum of thirty thousand (30,000) square feet of business floor area. H. Any single business other than a ski company or athletic club, which is a combination of two (2) or more of the categories set forth in this Section, shall pay an annual license fee which shall be the sum of the fees computed as set forth herein for each category, however, each such business shall be required to obtain only one (1) business License. 5. Section 5.04.140 Termination is hereby amended to read as follows: 5.04.140 Termination This Chapter 5.04 Business License shall terminate and cease to be effective on December 31, 1988 unless extended by the Town Council on or before said date. 6. If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance; and the Town Council hereby declares it would have passed this Ordinance, and each part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, regardless of the fact that any one or more parts, sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid. 7. The Town Council hereby finds, determines and declares that this Ordinance is necessary and proper for the health, safety and welfare of the Town of Vail and the inhabitants thereof. 8. The repeal or the repeal and reenactment of any provision of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail as provided in this Ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued, any duty imposed, any violation that occurred prior to the effective date hereof, any prosecution commenced, nor any other action or proceedings as commenced under or by virtue of the provision repealed or repealed and reenacted. The repeal of any provision hereby shall not revive any provision or any ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless expressly stated herein. -3- INTRODUCED, READ AND APPROVED ON FIRST READING this day of , 1988, and a public hearing shall be held on this ordinance on the day of _ 1988, at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado. Ordered published in full this day of 1988. Kent R. Rose, Mayor ATTEST: Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Town Clerk Kent R. Rose, Mayor ATTEST: Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Town Clerk INTRODUCED, READ AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED this day of 1988. -4- RESOLUTION N0. 1 Series of 1988 A RESOLUTION SETTING FORTH THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF VAIL'S OBJECTION TO THE HOMESTAKE II WATER DIVERSION PROJECT. WHEREAS, the Town Council of the Town of Uail believes that diversion of water to the East Slope by Homestake II will cause concentrations of toxic heavy metals to exceed water quality standards set by the Colorado Department of Health and reduce water quality on the Eagle River; and WHEREAS, the Town Council of the Town of Uail is aware of testimony presented during the Homestake II hearings which established the fact that Homestake II will result in a loss of valuable wetlands within the Holy Cross Wilderness area; and WHEREAS, the combined effects of Homestake II would degrade many of the natural amenities that have enabled the Town of Vail and Eagle County to develop a healthy and stable economy based upon summer and winter tourism and recreation; and WHEREAS, Homestake II clearly violates the Eagle County Master Plan; and WHEREAS, Homestake II is only one phase of a much larger plan for transmountain water diversion to the Colorado Front Range which in the aggregate will have a devastating impact on the economy and the environment in the Town of Vail and Eagle County. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO, that the Town Council is strongly opposed to the Homestake II Water Diversion project for the following reasons: 1. Violation of water quality standards on the Eagle River. 2. Loss of wetlands. 3. Degradation of our natural environment and its effect on our economy.. 4. Clear violation of the Eagle County Master Plan. INTRODUCED, READ, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day of . 1988. Kent R. Rose, Mayor ATTEST: Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Town Clerk town of uaill% 75 south frontage road department of public works/transportation vail, Colorado 81657 (303) 476-7000 MFM(1T2 D TTTITTM T0: RON PHILLIPS FROM: STAN BERRYMAN DATE; DECEMBER 30, 1987 RE: TOWN OF VAIL TRAVELER'S INFORMATION RADIO STATION This memo is to bring you up to date regarding the status of the Town's T.I.S. radio station. We have experienced several problems this ski season in getting the Town's radio station in operational condition. The Town has a maintenance agree- ment with Marty Hijmans (the only radio engineer in eagle County). Marty made repairs to the radio transmitter this week. The leased phone line from the transmitter in the dispatch office to the radio antennae at the Town Shop still is malfunctioning. Mountain Bell is to make repairs to the line this week and the radio station should be operational by New Year's Day. SBJajm T O W N O F V A I L INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM 8712-2301 T0: All Media FROM: Karen Morter SUBJECT: Town Council Press Conferences DATE: December 30, 1987 In an effort to increase communications with the Vail Valley press, the Vail Town Council will start holding monthly Press Conferences which will be scheduled every third Tuesday at 1:00 PM in the Town Council Chambers. Agendas for the Council Work Sessions will include the press conference information as a reminder to you to come at 1:00. The first scheduled Press Tuesday, January 19, 1988. Conference will take place on -_ T0: Lt. Mulson FROM: Kathy Roth DATE: 12/11/87 RE: Citizen Assist I received a call from Stewart Crow homeowner at 1250 Ptarmigan Rd. complimenting Jason Parsons and JR Mondragon. They assisted a RAC delivery truck in backing into his driveway.. However, the truck still stuck out on the road, .causing a potential problem for the buses. The truck driver, JR and Jason. lifted a hot tub from the truck to expedite the truck leaving. Mr. Crow said they had a "great attitude".and went well beyond their job duties to help him out. He wanted to tell their supervisor, .t he `Chief of Police and whoever else needed-to-know! CC: Chief .Hughey Ron Phillips Cathie Jarnot ~' } f ~autho =.SRA Nkn~ew identit ~,.® r, v w t Id o. call :.:Macy sa s --3 ,.r as o ~ ~_ _ . p. - by John Colson -. = _ ~ that~Mace has had her permission :_ : ~.... ~: . orado, apart of the network's Por- The Snowmass Resort Associa- to use the poem for a number of trait Of America series, and that - tionwas told to check with a New .personal, spiritual and education- he liked the poem and wanted to _ Mexico poet-before using her poem in Snowmass' 1987 summer ~ aI purposes. -- -~ "'` ~ ~ ~. - But, Wood insisted last week, ` use it.' '"" Mace, contacted this week, said brochure, which is at the center of she never gave the Snowmass Re- - he got a call from SRA two years a $100 million lawsuit filed by the sort Association permission to use ago, "saying they had an interest - poet recently, according to a local man who is a friend of the poet. _ the poem in the brochure. She said the SRA's use of the ~ in it. I told them at the time it was Nancy Wood's work and they ; Stuart Mace, owner of the Tok- lat Lodge at Ashcroft and along- poem, in which it was misidenti- feed as being about the Ute Indi- should get ahold of her .:.- they `didn't bother. It's that simple.- ' time resident, acknowleged this ans, has angered her Taos Indian And it's a matter of manners more week that he read the poem on a 1985 television show, the same. friends, who are traditional ene- mies of the Utes. - than anything." Hunt, contacted by the Aspen ' poem that ultimately ended up in She also said the use of the Times, has refused to comment on the Snowmass brochure. poem has jeopardized her work, the matter, saying he has not yet The poem, from a 1972 book by which is to live among the Taos been served the legal papers re- author Nancy Wood of Taos, NM, _ Pueblo Indians and portray them garding the lawsuit and that the is about the Taos Pueblo Indians ` in pictures and in text. She has matter would be handled by and is an evocative representa- published three books about the SRA's legal staff. tion of their.'relationship with Taos Pueblo and is in the middle - The suit, which alleged copyr- nearby Taos~Mountain, which of a fourth. fight infringement on the part of . they consider a holy site. SRA head Terry Hunt reported- SRA and asks for $100 million in Both Wood and Mace said they ` ` ly has said he saw Mace read the `damages, `was filed Dec 1? in the have been friends for years and poem on a TBS show about Col- " US District Court in Denver. - - .,. a , .. ,. ~,_.__.- __- -~._,,.~--r-~ --"•-"mss----~*------___ _^.^'----------._~,..~_,._...__.._.__•..,.m...~-,_-,_. --_-..~_---~--_ _. _ .,__ _..... _. w... ,,. .. ~~ `.. M,,. ,,. , -,. s ~: . . _ , .,~~,~~: '~, e~~~.. ~~ ,,., . rt _ a ,.,_ ., . December 24,1967 . The Aspen Times; Paae 3•A : r r s en raven ue a eco_ , , . ~. .. ... . . ..~ ~. ~.w ..._ ~ Record high income from ' 61% increase over theysame' the following month,'local sales' two percent tax. a ~~ ;, those businesses~there located in 1 ` ~ Aspen's real estate transfer tax ;period last year and higher than' taxes are rnllected by the state. " : A .third penny county tax, Pitkin County. ' (RETT)' in November raised re- ' any full year in the tax's history. ; department of revenue and repaid which is not collected inthat por- Total earned by the county's ' ~ venue for the first 11'months of~~ Previous'record year for the to local governments-two months ; tion of Basalt within the county one percent tax' dedicated to this year above that for any full ~ RETT was 1986, when a -record ' later - ~= ~ -and is dedicated to RFTA (Roar- RFTA. was $2,787;070.`Of this year in the tax's eight•year hfe, . , , $109,984 was collected in Decem• ' = ing Fork Transit Agency) use, amount, $1,869,554 came from ~ ~' °'''~' " ~ '" =~ '' ` ~ ''; bar, bringing the 12•month'total Revenues from Aspen and Pit- earned $113,406 in October, an Aspen; $547,468 from Snowmass a November' RETT revenue was r. to $431,284. - kin County sales taxes were up ' increase of 3.4% from October, Village, and $370,048fromthe re- t " ' $65,352; an increase of 199%from Income fromthe first 11 months slightly in October from the same. 1986. ' ' naainder of the county ... ~; " ; °' the same mo .nth' last~year and ~ ~ of the RETT covered 389 transac- ` month last year, but less than in-' r'~ -: , Since this sales .tax was made ', ~_. higher-than any,hlovember since ~.. tions; with 131 exemptions,`also " flationwith a 2,8%increase in the ' Of this total, $78,923 was col- ~ possible by rescision of existing '' ~ q . the ~/~ percenttax was initiated m F' record numbers for any past foil ' city and a 4.4%hike in the county..' lected in Aspen, $4,653 in Snow- ' one percent sales taxes is Snow- , y a 1980. .' ~ year ' ° "' Reports prepared by the Aspen mass Village and $29,830 was re-..mass Village and Aspen,' all of it ~ This' covered 46 transactions, ~ Finance Office show that $69,208 tamed by the county;. $2,410,596 collected in Snowmass is rebated, , ' while another eight were ex- Sales~Taxes '" " ' was collected by the city's one per-= was distributed 'to Aspen;'"',while~Aspen `receives'funds`for°. empted, and brought the total for ; Unlike the RETT, which is col- cent sales tax in October and ' $768,147 to Snowmass Village, debt service ,food tax refunds and the first 11 months to $517,609, a lected by the City and reported $229,528 by the county's original and $11,304 to Basalt, covering mall maintenance. ` ' ~~';d~~ r~f,i~~a~d~+'~i~l 'i~~l 1~'I ~fiY'd".. ,! Page 8-A The Aspen Times December 24,1987 ^ ,. n counc~ orce wo 0 Although it was approved by over $1 million from city taxes, approved by the council last week four of Aspen's five council mem- how they can turn down funds for: includes $60Q,000 for purchase of :bars last week, the 1988 Roaring a downtown shuttle." 6vesmallerbuses,butnothingfor Fork Transit Agency (RFTA) RFTA Financing the downtown shuttle. budget should be reconsidered, A special county-wide, one- Another reason hewouldliketo 'two of the three members at Mon- percent sales tax dedicated to have the transit agency budget ,day's meeting decided. RFTA was initiated in 1985 after reconsidered, Stirling asserted Michael Gassman, who criti- Aspen and Snowmass Village Monday, is that"Aspen is the only `sized the agency for being stodgy agreed to rescind one percent of city I know with a busy airport " ' `and unimaginative last week but their separate two-percent sales and no bus service. voted for the budget, requested taxes. ' High Cab Rates ahe reconsideration Monday., Although Snowmass is re- As he did at the December 14 He called the transit agency "a funded the full amount of the tax session, when he said he had paid moribund operation" that lacked it rescinded, the preponderance of $12 to take a cab from the airport `vitality and imagination, adding the tax rescinded in Aspen goes to to Aspen, Stirlingcomplained ab- "that reconsideration ofits budget RFTA after Aspen is repaid out high taxi rates. .."is the only chance we have now to money for mall maintenance, food He told the council that Mellow improve it•" tax rebates, and debt service. Yellow charges $1.50 a mile and Stirling, who cast the lone dis- The council had `previously that High Mountain had recently. ' Renting vote against the 1988 asked RFTA to budget funds for received PUC approval for a rate `RFTA budget on December 14, smaller buses for existing shuttle of $1.80 a mile. ;8greed, pointing out that of the routes and fgr initiation of a This is above the rate charged 'agency's various bus routes, only downtown shuttle linking the Rio.- :three "are pure city routes." Grande with Rubey Park andlor u All the others serve the county, Aspen Mountain. "andIamastoundedaftergetting The $2,664,145 budget bus review in many other cities, added Stirl- ing, reading a list of mileage charges in others, including $1.20 a mite in New York City and $l a mile for Miami. While studying taxi fares, "I was struck by the fact that our airport has no bus service," he ex- plained and the fact visitors and residents are forced to pay the high local taxi rates. .After additional discussion, a motion by Gassman to reconsider the 1988 RFTA budgtet at the next. regular meeting on January 11 was supported by Stirling, but opposed by Isaac. Pat Fallin and. Bill Tuite were absent, Controlling Boots During the discussion Isaac said he would be interested in pro- hibiting or controlling the prac- tice of booting cars, even when on private property: Booting unauthorized cars in private parking lots and charging $50 to have the boot removed has aroused many complaints to.city officials and created much ill will. Aspen police say they do not approve of the practice and do not use it on city streets, but have no . control of what is done to cars on private property. Supporting Isaac's desire to' look into controlling the practice, Stirling agreed it had irritated many people and suggested it also be placed on the January 11 agenda. The other two council members agreed and. the vote to discuss boot controls at the January 11 session was unanimous. T0: Ron Phillips and Peter Patten FROM: Betsy ~~ DATE: -January 4, 1987 SUBJECT: -Termination of several members' terms on DRB and PEC On February 1, Grant Riva's term on DRB will expire. This is also the date of expiration for Diana Donovan, Pam Hopkins, Peggy Osterfoss, and Jim Viele on the Planning Commission. Also, J.J. Collins has indicated that he is moving out of town in January, which makes 5 vacancies on PEC. Brenda and I have scheduled interviews for these 6 positions during the work session on February 2 and appointments that evening. CHAMBER FORUM LUNCHEON ~EC~~ ~A~ 4 i~3~ LOCATION: Windows, Marriott Mark Resort DATE: Tuesday, January 12, 1988 TIME: Cash bar 11:30` Lunch at Noon PRICE: $7.50 for members-$8.50 for non-members The 1989 World Championships are right around the corner and it is time to start gearing up for this special event. Mr. Bob Knous, Vail Valley Foundation's president will highlight on what we should expect, how we should get prepared, and on how we can ge,t the most from this special occasion. Don't miss this opportunity! For reservations contact Teresa Savage by Friday, January 9 at 476-1000 ext. 135. ,3 ~. VAIL RESORT ASSOCIATION, 241 E. Meadow Drive, Vail, Colorado 81657 ~~ ~ town o 75 south frontage road vail, Colorado 81657 (303) 476-7000 MEMORANDUM TO: Vail Town Council S`~`~"~ FROM: Finance Staff (~/ DATE: January 5, 1988 RE: Sales Tax on Retail Deliveries to Vail The purpose of this memo is to address several questions which have been raised recently, about the collection of Vail sales tax on items delivered to Vail. The Town of Vail's new sales tax ordinance imposes sales tax on all retail goods that are purchased outside of Vail but delivered to Vail. This procedure is the same as for all other Colorado municipalities which collect their own sales tax. The primary purpose for this measure is to remove the current competitive edge enjoyed by businesses located outside of Vail. In the past, these businesses were able to sell retail items in Vail without charging the four percent TOV sales tax. The Town staff is making every effort possible to ensure that all businesses which deliver retail goods to Vail collect the appropriate sales tax. Our efforts include public notification of area businesses as identified through the newspaper and yellow pages. We will also use the list of companies heavily involved in retail delivery which has been compiled by municipalities in the Denver Metropolitan area. We also expect to receive complaints from local businesses who are aware of competitors who are not collecting Vail sales tax. These measures, when combined with our legal capability to audit all businesses who make retail sales in Vail, should allow Town staff to adequately enforce the collection of sales tax by outside vendors. SHB/ds ~owo v 75 south frontage road vail, Colorado 81657 (303) 476-7000 MEMORANDUM TO: Vail Town Council FROM: Finance Staff v~ pN e DATE: January 5, 1988 RE: Sales Tax on Construction Materials Vail's new sales tax ordinance currently imposes sales tax on retail goods and construction materials that are purchased outside of the Town yet delivered to Vail. Those retail goods and construction materials which are purchased outside of Vail and brought here by the ultimate consumer of those goods are not subject to Vail's sales tax. The collection of this tax on delivered retail goods should proceed fairly smoothly., however the collection of sales tax on delivered construction goods probably will not be as smooth. The following options have been prepared in order to amend the sales tax ordinance, if necessary, as it relates to the sales tax on delivered construction materials. Staff recommends that this issue be resolved as soon as possible in order to alleviate confusion by area businesses. OPTION A-- No Change The primary problem with this option is that it will be confusing and difficult to enforce. The current wording of the ordinance encourages consumers of construction materials to circumvent the system by personally picking up (or pretending this was the case) all materials used in their construction project. SALES TAX ON CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS MEMO JANUARY 5, 1988 PAGE 2 OPTION B--Exempt Construction Materials from Sales Tax Construction material is generally defined as any material to be used in a project for which a building permit has been issued. Simple exemption of such items would do much to relieve the confusion in this area. However, some businesses would still experience some difficulty. For instance, a glass company in Minturn would be required to collect sales tax on sales to all customers who are unable to produce a building permit. OPTION C--Use Tax on Construction Materials Virtually all Colorado municipalities who collect their own sales tax solve the construction material issue by enacting a use tax. A use tax assures that taxes will be paid on all construction materials used in Vail regardless of their origin. Staff estimates that a 4% use tax on construction materials would generate approximately $300,000 in an average year which could be used for items such as: o Replace funds from expired Street Use Tax (averaged $102,500 over last six years) o Capital Projects o Sales Tax Vendor's Fee o Marketing of Vail Staff recommends that Council exempt construction material from sales tax. If Council wishes to tax construction material, staff would recommend the creation of a Use Tax. SHB/ds ' Sunday, January 3, 1988 . 'rtll: IxayyER I'c)ST ~ ~ . ' _,- ~ _ ~ b_ • ... • Y Gillett ~~ la ed a alnst ~~ dds to ama~~s a 're o , ~~By Paui Richter` most influential -and controver- ,os.Anyeies Times,:r sial - of broadcasters. With 12 ma- .~; NASHVILLE, Tenn. -Nearly 20 jor stations that reach 13 percent .,years. sago; George Gillett put to- of the U.S. television audience, he "gether his first diversified busi- is the. very model of .the new broad- ;Mess. Buying and borrowing, laying cast entrepreneur; borrowing ;;.brick on brick, he troweled togeth- heavily, bidding high and wringing er a small conglomerate that in- from his stations profits unima- ' ;eluded the Harlem Globetrotters gined by the family concerns that.. ',basketball team, agolf-club mak- once dominated the industry. rer, radio stations andretail boat ~ ; ` Gillett takes aggressive advan- franchises.~. " tage of broadcast deregulation; Gillett's tower rose to the sky - prompting some in Congress to •until the 1975 recession hit, earn- charge that he has sought to dodge `ings dwindled and he was forced to government rules limiting station sell assets, to pay debts. ownership and has exploited tax Gillett;`. whose company owns breaks offered to minority TV sta- ;,Vail and Beaver Creek ski resorts, tion owners. started over in the television sta- Gillett also has won respect for $tion business in 1978, borrowing. his ability to improve stations' fi- i'arid buying, piling paper on paper,: nancial performance and for his in- !until. by_this year he had amassed terest in quality broadcast news. wthe largest group Hof network-affili- - Buying and selling at a rapid. zated stations outside those. owned clip, Gillett has purchased 12 ma- ~t~y the networks themselves. ` jor-market stations for $1.26 billion a~ People said Gillett was a major oven the past year. Gillett H.old- ~player. And some people wondered ings, his closely held company, .:about his debts.: paid more than $600 million fora 51 ' * "They- say we borrow too much, percent interest in six of the: seven ,i+hat we bid too high,. and in the' stations formerly owned by the .face of -.that cautiousness, we- now-defunct Storer Communica- 4 charge ahead," ,says Gillett, 49, a tions and $365 million for a majori- <~roluble man whose voice seems to ty interest in a big Tampa, Fla., ,;boom from a barrel. ".Why do we station.. 'do, it? .Why does the salmon swim The company also owns a< Wis- ~~pstream?" cousin meatpacking company, and In the. past .two years; this one- it recently. sold another five me salesman has .emerged from ~bscurity o become one of the Please see GILLETT on 14-G ~ Cam) ~.~ ,.~. `~I:: h=Make rf~riili~,r -to .~,. ,ILLETT jiQfn Page a-G ~Uons'~to"a trust set" up for Gil- ft's children. Gillett Holdings' TV ~~ations now include three in Cali- - fOt'-na ' z1~ w s.., . >: ~r • -' '~ #Ie has-" assembled` the chain $gamst daunting competition, for 'ih•recent years TV stations have `'attracted the hungry-eyes of major media corporations and invest- ~9ment heavyweights such as War- :€2en Buffett and Saul Steinberg. ns~,. Wing profits , .' ,'These investors prize stations for eu• ability to turn profits in good yy~ries and bad and.for their ready -,~narketabilitiy; they favor network -1'affiliates'in particular because of Jbeir strong attraction for TV audi- ` en~es. _ , . . ~~~yBut Gillett has usually been will- . `ing to bid more for properties, bet- tir;g always that hiss. strategy _for ;,managing the stations would make "; thQm profitable and cover his ' debts.,• ;:,ter a, -- And the debts have piled up - to `' more than $1.5 billion, some esti- ' •'~~ate - as Gillett has paid top dot- alai and' sold high-yield "junk 'bonds" bearing lofty interest rates bj-13 percent to 17 percent. 'rhe '-.cohpanr._and its venture partners ,,,,have rased $1.16 billion in the last ' wo years through the sale of junk ~yo~nds underwritten by Drexel Burnham Lambert. °: .,,f Last spring, in outbidding NBC ~iM Westinghouse Corp. for the -Nampa station, Gillett offered 21 :~es that station's cash flow - or ~I'iet income plus depreciation - avfiich was substantially above the ~, iil_to 12 times cash flow that buyers :' ~ eel comfortable offering. 1Dperating profits „^; :::Gillett Holdings :bad operating .,profits of $90 million ~ revenue of -x,$670 million last year, according to ~~ a company prospectus for ajunk- wfiond offering. Revenue should ~e,Qge close to $1 billion this year 'with the-`addition''ot the Storer ' '~ stations, which were bought in a ~jolnt venture with the leveraged a;jxryout specialists Kohlberg Kravis ='^George has put eII his chips on ;:.the red' and spun the roulette ~+?syheel," -.says Jefir~t Epstein, a "~Filrst Boston Corp. investment flanker who specializes in the com- w~nunications industry. "He's a smart gambler. Myself, I wouldn't -~do what he's done,"- -. A native of Raciae,.Wis., Gillett =began his career aS 8 salesman for _.~Yown Zellerbach Caap., then went -,04 to work a5 a 111<cKinsey & Co. ~3nanagement consultant, put to- y~ ether a computer software com- ~,,y, and managed "and owned a art of the Miami Iblphins profes- dnalfootball team:' -In 1968, he acquireei the Harlem lobetrotters, which became the ,care of his first diversified compa- ny, which was called Globetrotter :Communications. _,,,,..The staff of Gift Holdings has _J -... .-...... ~. s gambles Gillett grown in recent years, but the key . player is clearly still Gillett him- self, who promotes his company with the ardor of a former sales-. man. "You produce a quality product, and you won't be able to get out of the way of the money," Gillett rumbles at his company headquar- ters in Nashville. He is shorter than most others in the room, but his basso profundo out-males any of them. A sportsman The chief executive is a gentle- man sportsman, spending more than one-third of his year on the ski slopes, the golf course, hunting or ,fishing. On the slopes at Vail; where he owns a home, Gillett in- troduces himself to strangers with " a business card that identifies him as aquality-control inspector. " Fellow station owners say they , are charmed by Gillett and ac- knowledge his skill as a deal maker .and broadcaster. But some of the industry's movers have recently been irked, too, because they feel that he has pushed the Federal' Communications Commission rules Aso far that there may be a back- ' lash that will chill the permissive climate that has benefited so many. , In buying WTVT in Tampa, for example, Gillett teamed up with a .Washington communications law- yer, Clarence McKee, who is 'black, in a $365 million deal stru~- tured~to qualify for a tax break that the FCC grants station buyers who are members of minority !groups. The so-called minority tax certificate deferred the capital ..gains tax liability of the seller,; Gaylord Broadcasting, and thus al- lowed Gaylord to trim $100 million. from its price - Tampa deal The use of minority tax certifi - cates is not uncommon, and in re- cent .years many minority and: non-minority investors have' teamed up to strike such deals. But the WTVT deal was more conspic- ' uous, partly because it was the largest minority tax certificate TV deal ever and partly because .McKee put up only a few thousand dollars... , . In return for his participation, McKee got a 51 percent voting in- terest -though only a 22 percent equity interest. A clause in the contract provides .that, after two years, McKee can bail out of the company for $1 mil- = lion if he wants - or can be bought out by Gillett for the same sum. DicKee's. departure would under- mine the purpose of the certificate program, which was to encourage George Gillett is an entrepreneur and communications giant whose company's holdings include Vail and Beaver Creek ski resorts. lasting minority ownership, says Larry Irving, an aide to the house Telecommunications and Finance 'Subcommittee. - "You can see why sortae commit- tee members were concerned," Ir- ving said. McKee says he has not decided ,whether he wID stay with the sta- tion, but insists that he is an active owner who has already helped im- .prove the station's community im- age. "George and I have gotten so :many arrows in our back over this, and it's much ado about nothing," McKee said. FCC officials While FCC officials insist that the Tampa deal was proper, the notoriety of the transaction seems to be changing regulators' atti- tudes. Already, FCC staff mem- bers have discouraged several mi- nority tax certificate proposals that were floated by them for pre- liminary review, according to an investment banker with firsthand knowledge of the proposals. - "The legacy o[ that deal is that it is going to be much tougher for others," the banker said. Gillett describes his job at the company as "project broadcast- ing" -the remaking o[ second- or thud-ranking stations into the top performers in their market. But an analysis undertaken for the Los Angeles Times by Broadcast In- vestment Analysts, a northern Vir- ginia research firm, found that the company has a mixed record in im- proving ratings. Of the 10 stations that Gillett ,Holdings and Busse Broadcast 'Communications, the Gillett chil- 'dren's trust, have held for a year or more, three moved up in the rat- ings under the company's rr~anage- ment, two declined and five stayed !about the same. Some of G illett's most important stations - iticlud- 'hig those in Nashville, Rochester, N.Y., and Lincoln, Neb. -were fast-ranked in their markets when .the company bought them. What Gillett has clearly im- proved are the stations' profits. ills 'strategy is straightforward: He ,buys stations that have been run witYlout close attention to adminis- trative expenses and cuts those costs, while also increasing spend- ing on promotion, top syndicated programming and news opera- . lions, in hopes of raising ratings. The Denver Post / Bri:ui Brainerd ~ov~rs ~ ~ Jow,u ~u,~c,,:. .C~~. P. ~HEATRE VPELZATORB ZNC. ADDRESS REPLY TO: THEATRE OPERATORS, INC. General Offices P. O. Box 1629 Bozeman, Montana 59771 Phones: Film Dept. 587-1251 Accounting 586-1571 /2/,~ fr~~'l' Tcawr°. c:yf ~4'a.i 1 7J J. F"rl..lrl~ct t~~? I"t ci Vctl 1 , 1.O 81a~I AT'TC~i'd: CNAf~:LIE Wl'Ck:: Uea.r- Ct7ar l i e: A=. pt_r- ~ot..tr con~rersat i on 7 find tt-~e City Licence FE~e t cir our° Cr as=roads Theatre to be comp 1 etel y unreasonab 1 e for a City I__i. r_rns~~_:. L:+~;~ I ~.;t•a Ci t}~ 1 i cense fees are st_tppased to be somewhat reflective of the costs involved in ~ city regt_ilc.ting the licensed business. F~tecent law st~.its have ~i. ded wi tt-~ businesses when i t has been prover; that a ci t.y has t_tsed thy? 1lt`en~ie f'Fe`_:: as a ta.i: Gr as afi 1nCCme generatlnta frier.'+.sl.Sr-EE tl'"~~.t e'.•:Cr~eCis the cost of r- ec:~ul at i on . As you e;:plained this fee is gaing to be trued to marl•;et anci ~.dver-tise the Vail ar-cr~. We have na pr-oblerr~ in cantib~_tting tc~ st~.ch a cr;~.tse howe~:~er i t sl-~~~,~_.tl d not be handled ~s a r~ancaa.ntar y ci. t~y l i ce~n=_.e fee. ThF~at.res, ut_tt of neccessity, require large square footage however- the incomF~, per sgt_tare foot i= much lower than other- businesses. We recently toak: the Crossroads theatre tiacE; over when the previaus owner sustained si clni f i cant 1 asses i n the busi mess and defaulted on tii_. 1 ease. Z noted on yot.tr- farm that there are maximum fePS for bt.tsine.s~~s str_~h as attil et. i. c c_ 1 ubs . I would ask: that You. r-~e~,~i. ew the _,t:~tLt s caf 'T t~eatr-es i n your 1 i. cense fee structure» The ~~4U~ rni ni iTCLtf-ii fee i s !Wore thz~n dot_tti 1 e the City License Fee we pay i n any of tt-~e other 1 l cities i n -~hi ch we aperate theatres. I am c7i. vi riy a copy of t.hi = 1 ettFr- and yo~.tr l i cen ~e fee form to our- attourney. Whether ar not tae pay tl-~e fee will depend on his api ni on on the 1 egal i ty of the assessment and an yot_tr r-evi. ew of the amot_tnt that wi 11 be charged. fEaga ~;~~ !~ ~-~ G~~ Dan k.:l u~mann Vice !"'resident er_: David Penwell, Attat_trney