Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1989-10-03 Support Documentation Town Council Regular SessionVAIL TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING TUESDAY, OCTOBER 3, 1989 7:30 p.m. AGENDA 1. Ten Year Employment Anniversary Awards to Larry Eskwith and Don Gallegos 2. Approval of Minutes of the September 5 and 19, 1989 Meetings 3. Resolution No. 59, Series of 1989, a resolution adopting certain of the recommendations of the Vail Transportation and Parking Advisory Committee relating to short-term parking within the Town of Vail. 4. Consent Agenda A. Ordinance No. 22, Series of 1989, second reading, an ordinance amending the Investment Policy of the Town of Vail. B. Appointment of a Local Liquor Licensing Authority Board Member 5. Resolution No. 60, Series of 1989, a resolution supporting the School District bond election. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION 6. Adjournment VAIL TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING TUESDAY, OCTOBER 3, 1989 7:30 p.m. EXPANDED AGENDA 7:30 7:35 7:40 Stan Berryman 1. Ten Year Employment Anniversary Awards to Larry Eskwith and Don Gallegos 2. Approval of Minutes of the September 5 and 19, 1989 Meetings 3. Resolution No. 59, Series of 1989, approving the 1989-90 parking policies Action Requested of Council: Approve/deny/modify Resolution No. 59, Series of 1989, approving the 1989-90 parking policies. Background Rationale: Council has reviewed the policy recommendations of the Parking and Transportation Advisory Committee, and asked that they be set for a public hearing. Policy changes are to be adopted by resolution. Staff Recommendation: Approve the policy recommendations of the Advisory Committee by adopting Resolution No. 59, Series of 1989. 8:40 Steve Thompson 4. Consent Agenda A. Ordinance No. 22, Series of 1989, second reading, an ordinance amending the investment policy of the Town of Vail. Action Requested of Council: Approve/deny Ordinance No. 22, Series of 1989, on second reading. Background Rationale: The investment policy is reviewed annually and amendments are made, if necessary. The proposed amendments were presented to Council on August 15, at the Work Session. Staff Recommendation: Approve Ordinance No. 22, Series of 1989, on second reading. B. Appointment of Local Liquor Authority Board Member Action Requested of Council: Appoint one member to the Liquor Authority. Background Rationale: Betty Neal's term is expiring in October. She is the only person applying for the opening. Staff Recommendation: Appoint Betty Neal to the Local Liquor Authority Board for a term of two years. 8:50 Dan Corcoran 5. Resolution No. 60, Series of 1989, supporting the School District bond election Action Requested of Council: Approve/deny/modify Resolution No. 60, Series of 1989, supporting the School District bond election. Background Rationale: Dan Corcoran and members of the Yes, Yes for Kids Committee will make a presentation to the Council asking for Council support by resolution of the proposed bond election for two new elementary schools and renovation of both high schools. The resolution will be available at the meeting. 9:10 CITIZEN PARTICIPATION 9:25 6. Adjournment -2- ~. MINUTES VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING. SEPTEMBER 5, 1989 7:30 P.M. A regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesday, September 5, 1989, 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 Michael Cacioppo Merv Lapin Tom Steinberg Gail Wahrlich-Lowenthal Ron Phillips, Town Manager Larry Eskwith, Town Attorney Pam Brandmeyer, Town Clerk The first order of business was a Ten Year Employment Anniversary Award to Peter Patten. Ron Phillips gave a brief description of Peter's work background with the Town of Vail, and this was followed by comments from Peter Patten, as well as Joe Macy of Vail Associates. The second item of business on the agenda was the approval of the minutes of the August 1 and 15, 1989, meetings. Tom Steinberg moved to accept the minutes as presented, with a second from John Slevin. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 6-0. The third item was a public hearing on the proposed Village Parking Structure expansion and •renovation. Stan Berryman provided an overview of the process involved in setting forth this proposal and offered justifications for this expansion. He stated this is a portion of the parking solution problem, and also pointed out that the Parking Advisory Committee had been influential in helping along this process. Berryman stated a report from the Vail Transportation and Parking Advisory Committee would be presented to Council at their September 19, 1989, work session. Stan introduced Michael Barber from Michael Barber Architecture, who proceeded with a presentation of the proposed concept design for the Village Parking Structure (VTRC) expansion and renovation. The Vail Transportation and Parking Advisory Committee had unanimously recommended, and the Town Council at a work session had agreed to proceed with "Scheme Two." Mr. Barber presented conceptual designs and a global view for this project. Through a parking matrix, he described incremental steps that could be taken to fit into this overall picture. Through "Scheme Two," the expansion of the parking supply would be the number one priority, with the addition of 400 parking spaces and would require the structure being converted wholly to a one-way system. It would deal with immediate maintenance problems, improving the ventilation, and myriad other parking structure renovation needs. "Scheme Two" would enhance the pedestrian access to the parking structure as well as along side the exterior; would reconfigure traffic patterns both on the top of and around the parking structure; and would deal with recommended improvements to the interior. The cost of this project is estimated at $8 million. Don Monahan was introduced to discuss the current condition and the ongoing maintenance issues. Charlie Wick discussed the financing scenario that will be finalized within a two-week period of time and presented to Council. Currently, the Council is looking at putting $2.5 million in cash toward the parking structure, and then utilizing either G.O. or Revenue Bonds along with existing revenues, i.e., sales tax revenues, for a term of 10 to 13 years. Questions from the audience were raised by Johannes Faessler, Will Miller, Robert Schiller, Michael Chapman, and Larry Lichliter. Following discussion, all were willing to support this structure. The construction plan calls for complete closedown of the VTRC starting in mid-April of 1990 for one month to renovate, the the new addition being completed by the 1990-91 ski season. The improvements, as well as the new addition, will require continued high-grade maintenance. A motion was made to approve "Scheme Two" by Merv Lapin, with a second coming from Tom Steinberg. A vote was taken, and the motion passed 5-1, with Mike Cacioppo voting against this motion. The staff was directed to study the following concerns: r 1. Financing consideration for an expansion of the Tourist Information Center, as well as URA and the Vail Chamber of Commerce, on the top of the parking structure or at another location, this totalling approximately 2,000 square feet. 2. Size of expansion. Is this parking structure large enough? Should we be adding the two extra floors now, and/or studying carefully any steps so that they are to be considered incremental steps, and additions can be made at a later time. 3. Developers within the Town of Vail must no longer have spaces sold to them, or if spaces are sold, we must ask an approximate amount of what the spaces are costing the Town of Vail to construct. Mike Cacioppo stated Vail Associates was not paying its fair share toward this parking structure, and this was responded to by Larry Lichliter, stating that Vail Associates is the largest taxpayer in the Valley, with all people in the Valley receiving the benefit thereof. Vail Associates was asked to consider an eventual request from the Town of Vail to condominiumize these spaces or to pay for the 535 additional spaces. 4. The specific requirements of what it will take, both with financing and construction, to add the additional 535 spaces and the two floors now. Item four was Ordinance No. 21, Series of 1989, first reading, an ordinance vacating a portion of Meadow Road (also known as Grouse Lane), a public roadway within the Town of Vail (5122 Grouse Lane), adjacent to Lot 7, Block 1, Gore Creek Subdivision. Mayor Rose read the title in full. Merv Lapin moved to approve the ordinance on first reading. Tom Steinberg seconded his motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 6-0. Item five was Resolution No. 57, Series of 1989, updating the Town of Vail personnel rules and regulations. Mayor Rose read the full title. Merv Lapin requested that Charlie Wick present brief information regarding the content of these personnel changes. Merv then moved to approve this resolution, and was seconded by Tom Steinberg. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 6-0. Note: At this point in the meeting (9:10 p.m.), Kent Rose excused himself to attend a function of the 10th Mountain Division as a representative for the Town of Vail. Item six was Resolution No. 58, Series of 1989, supporting local regulation of cable television. Mayor Pro Tem Slevin read the title in full. Larry Eskwith stated the National League of Cities had recommended this strongly-worded resolution be sent to Congress. Eric Affeldt had numerous objections to the subjective language used, specifically as it would affect Heritage Cablevision and our franchise. Following discussion, it was decided that Larry Eskwith will return to the Council at their evening meeting on the 19th of September with a revised resolution. Larry will concentrate on the paragraph that relates to the Town of Vail not currently being able to receive over-the-air signals, and will attempt to expand on the uniqueness of the Town of Vail's situation. Item seven was an appeal of the Design Review Board's decision denying a requested color change by the Camelot Townhouse Association (2801 Bassingdale Blvd.). Mike Mollica stated that on August 2, 1989, the Design Review Board, by a vote of 3-1-1, had denied the Camelot Townhouse Association's request for a color change. The DRB made the following findings in their motion for denial: "That the proposed colors would not be compatible with the neighborhood and that the proposed colors would attract undue attention to the building." Mike Chapman, who serves as Manager/ President of this Association, stated his case before the Council. He asked how aesthetically this color could be detrimental to the community? Additionally, he pointed out in the DRB Guidelines (18.54.050) that although earth tones are called for, in fact, there are numerous examples of homes, condominiums, etc., within the Vail Valley that are not in compliance with this requirement. Eric Affeldt suggested to the staff that they, along with the DRB, look at this language in paragraph 3, on page 154C of the Vail Municipal Code. Mike Cacioppo made a motion to overturn the DRB decision. This motion was seconded by Merv Lapin. A vote was taken and the motion passed 4-1, with Tom Steinberg voting in opposition. Item eight was the appeal of the Design Review Board's approval of the Katz residence on Lot 6, Vail Village 10th Filing (950 Fairway Drive). Kristan Pritz provided the following background rationale. The DRB had approved this project 3-2. Jay Peterson, representing Mr. Katz, the applicant, stated that this was a DRB question only, and presented background. Gene Dwyer, an attorney representing Mrs. Walters, stated he had called within the 10-day time frame to state he would be tailing up the matter on her behalf, but was told the Town Council had already done so. He also suggested the single reason the structure was built so high on the -2- hillside was to get superlative views, and that it was up to the architect to use the freedom to design within the guidelines that are presented in the Design Guideline section of the Municipal Code. Mike Cacioppo questioned the use in Section 18.54.050 of the Design Guidelines regarding primary/secondary structures. It was stated this was inapplicable, based on the fact this is a single-family dwelling with garage and is not a duplex or primary/secondary development. The following neighbors spoke against the DRB recommendation: Dr. Messenbaugh, John Mueller, Vern Anderson, Nancy Rondo on behalf of herself and her husband Paul Rondo, Bill and Alice Cartwright. Robert Schilling supported the "neighborhood" comments. Ned Gwathmey, a member of the DRB, stated that at the time this was presented to DRB, three items were to be considered: 1. The variance allowing the location of the house on the hill had already been granted. Therefore, as a PEC decision that had been appealed to the Town Council and upheld by the Town Council, that matter was settled. 2. The avalanche question had been left to expert opinion, i.e., Art Mears, and this had been resolved. 3. A review of the design as presented was the only item to be considered by the DRB. Gwathmey felt the DRB had made the correct decision, and this home was indeed highly compatible with the neighborhood. Mike Cacioppo moved to overturn the DRB decision, and Eric Affeldt seconded that motion. Cacioppo based this motion on 18.54.050, Section A, paragraph 1, that construction should be compatible and an objective of the design guidelines is to fit buildings to the site. A vote was taken and the motion failed 2-3. Those in opposition were Merv Lapin, John Slevin, and Tom Steinberg. Tom Steinberg then made a motion to uphold the DRB decision, with a second from Merv Lapin. A vote was taken and this motion passed 3-2, with Mike Cacioppo and Eric Affeldt voting in opposition. Following this vote, Tom Steinberg requested staff and Larry Eskwith to work out wording to disallow the call up procedure for PEC and DRB decisions to be allowed without consensus. Also, the staff was instructed to look at the question of a clarification for separated structures and to focus on this issue of single- family, duplex, and primary/secondary homes in respect to Section 18.54.050. The issue is whether or not 18.54.050 was intended to be applicable to lots zoned primary/secondary, or just primary/secondary construction. Item nine was the Finishing Touch sign variance request. This has been tabled to the September 19, 1989, evening meeting. There was no Citizen Participation. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 11:10 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Kent R. Rose, Mayor ATTEST: Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Town Clerk Minutes taken by Pam Brandmeyer -3- MINUTES VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 19, 1989 7:30 P.M. A regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesday, September 19, 1989, 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 Michael Cacioppo Merv Lapin Gail Wahrlich-Lowenthal Tom Steinberg None Ron Phillips, Town Manager Larry Eskwith, Town Attorney Pam Brandmeyer, Town Clerk The first order of business was a consent agenda of the following items: A. Ordinance No. 21, Series of 1989, second reading, vacating a portion of Meadow Road (also known as Grouse Lane), a public roadway within the Town of Vail (5122 Grouse Lane); adjacent to Lot 7, Block 1, Gore Creek Subdivision. B. Resolution No. 58, Series of 1989, a resolution urging the Congress of the United States to revise the Cable Communication Policy Act of 1984, and expressing general concern about the need for greater local government regulatory authority. Mayor Rose read the full titles of the ordinance and the resolution. There was no discussion by Council or the public. Merv Lapin made a motion to approve the consent agenda, which Tom Steinberg seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 7-0. The second item on the agenda was Ordinance No. 22, Series of 1989, first reading, an ordinance amending the investment policy of the Town of Vail. The full title was read by Mayor Rose. Steve Thompson briefly explained the ordinance, noting the policy changes had been discussed with Council at an earlier work session, and answered questions of Council. A motion to approve the ordinance was made by Merv Lapin, and seconded by Gail Wahrlich-Lowenthal. Mike Cacioppo stated he was opposed to Section IV which would allow the Town Manager to review but not approve the investment report; he felt the Town Manager should be able to approve the report. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 7-0. The third item was the Finishing Touch sign variance request. Rick Pylman gave background details of the request, and explained why staff recommended approval. He remarked the Design Review Board had also approved the variance request by a 5-0 vote. John Dunn, representing the applicant, asked to withdraw the application, and continued with the reasoning for it. There was some discussion by Council regarding the process of withdrawal, resubmittal of the request, and what would happen to the existing sign/awning until a solution had been arrived at. Larry Eskwith gave his legal opinion concerning the Council's position and options. There was then some discussion by Council regarding their feelings on the current signage that was up. Mike Cacioppo commented why he would like to approve the current signage and leave it up. Don Hagan explained why he felt the sign should come down because of the regulations of the Town. Tom Steinberg made a motion to accept the withdrawal of the sign by the applicant, and for staff to proceed with the removal of the current sign by any legal means necessary. Gail Wahrlich-Lowenthal seconded the motion. A~ vote was taken and the motion passed 5-2, with Mike Cacioppo and John Slevin opposing. John Slevin stated he was opposed because he felt it was not necessary to take down the current sign until the Design Review Board made a decision on the initial request, and felt it would produce undue hardship on the applicant. Mike Cacioppo agreed with John's comments. John Dunn remarked the applicant could not voluntarily take down the sign due to legal problems with the sign contractor, and also, it would harm the applicant's business. The next item was the Chester residence revised landscape plan. Kristan Pritz stated the Council had called up this item to review in more detail changes to the wall on the landscape plan for the Chester residence. She showed the Council plan drawings and explained the changes made. She noted the Design Review Board had approved the changes by a vote of 3-0-1, with Jamie McCluskie abstaining due to involvement in the project. Kristan stated the Design Review Board had approved the amended plans with the following conditions: 1. The height of the fence shall not exceed 6 feet. In the 20 foot front setback, the height of the fence shall not exceed 3 feet. The height limit includes the column for the fence. Gate columns may exceed the 3 foot height limit in the front setback, but may not exceed 6-feet in height. 2. The metal support stakes for the aspen on the east side of the property shall be located with Vail Associates approval so that skiers are not endangered by the stakes. Jay Peterson, representing Mr. Chester, further explained some areas of the revised plan. Kristan and Jay then answered questions of Council. John Slevin made a motion to uphold the DRB decision to approve the plans, with Mike Cacioppo seconding. A vote was taken and the motion passed 6-1, with Tom Steinberg opposing. There was no Citizen Participation. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:50 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Kent R. Rose, Mayor ATTEST: Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Town Clerk Minutes taken by Brenda Chesman -2- RESOLUTION N0. 59 Series of 1989 A RESOLUTION ADOPTING CERTAIN OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE VAIL TRANSPORTATION AND PARKING ADVISORY COMMITTEE RELATING TO SHORT-TERM PARKING WITHIN THE TOWN OF VAIL. WHEREAS, the Vail Transportation and Parking Advisory Committee submitted a report containing suggestions relating to parking pass and coupon rates, and other matters concerning short-term parking within the Town of Vail, which recommendations are contained in the report attached hereto as Exhibit A; and WHEREAS, the Town Council wishes to adopt those recommendations. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO, that: The recommendations relating to parking pass and coupon rates and other recommendations relating to short-term parking generally contained in Exhibit A are hereby adopted by the Town Council of the Town of Vail. INTRODUCED, READ, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day of 1989. Kent R. Rose, Mayor ATTEST: Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Town Clerk ~~ - ~~ - EXHIBIT A i REPORT FROM VAIL TRANSPORTATION AND PARKING ADVISORY COMMITTEE SHORT TERM PARKING RECOMMENDATIONS SEPTEMBER 1989 VAIL TRANSPORTATION AND PARKING ADVISORY COMMITTEE Kent Rose, Mayor, Town of Vail Merv Lapin, Councilmember, Town John Slevin, Councilmember, Town Diana Donovan, Member Vail PEC Sid Schultz, Member Vail PEC Dave Gorsuch, Citizen at Large Lee Hollis, Citizen at Large C. Lee Rimel, Citizen at Large George Knox, Citizen at Large Rob Levin, Citizen at large Rich Perske, Colorado Department Joe Macy, Vail Associates, Inc. Bill Wood, U.S> Forest Service Jim Fritze, Eagle County Ron Phillips, Town Manager, Town Stan Berryman, Director of Publi< Peter Patten, Director of Commun: Ken Hughey, Chief of Police, Towi of Vail of Vail of Highways of Vail Works/Transp., ty Development, of Vail Town of Vail Town of Vail ISSUE: PARKING PASS AND COUPON RATES ANALYSIS: 1988-89 Policies Premium (Gold) Parking Pass Premium season parking passes cost $475 plus $25 deposit. The premium pass is valid in both the Village and LionsHead parking structures at any time, no restrictions. Sales of the premium parking pass is limited to 100 at a first come, first serve basis. Limited (Blue) Parking Pass Limited season parking passes cost $200 plus $25 deposit. The limited pass is valid in the LionsHead structure at any time. The pass is valid in the Village structure on non-restricted days at any time and on restricted days from 3000 P.M. to 6x00 A.M[. Parking Coupons Parking coupons cost $40 for 30 coupons. The parking coupons are valid in the LionsHead structure at any time. The parking coupons are valid in the Village structure on non-restricted days at any time and on restricted days from 3:00 P.M. to 6:00 A.M. The parking coupons are available all season. Restricted Days The restricted days are all weekends (Saturday and Sunday) of the ski season. They are not valid until December 1, 1988. Not valid from December 26, 1988 thru January 1, 1989. Not valid January 29, 1989 thru February 12, 1989. Not valid February 18, 19, and 29, 1989. The Vail Parking Field Analysis and Survey indicated the following data regarding 1°local'° parking in the structures 17% of cars in the VTRC are °°local°° 7.5% of cars in the LTRC are °°local°t The Transportation Center Traffic Study indicated the following findingse The supply of parking at the Vail TRC has been insufficient to meet the demand on nearly two-thirds of the days that the ski season has operated during the last two seasons.°° Total parking transactions (both structures) increased 8% over the 1987-88 ski season. Utilization of the LionsHead Parking Structure increased 18% from the 1987-88 ski season. 1989 Projected Revenues Parking Passes - $62,000 Coupons - $80,000 TOWN OF VAIL STAFF RECOMMENDATION% o Increase the cost of Premium Parking Passes to $575. Assuming a person uses a parking pass five out of seven days a week during the ski season (107 out of 150 days), the cost of daily premium parking would be $5.37 per day. o Increase the cost of Limited Parking Passes to $300. Assuming a person uses a parking pass five out of seven days a week during the ski season (107 out of 150 days), the cost of daily limited parking would be $2.80 per day. o Increase the cost of Parking Coupons to $90 for 30 coupons. The cost of daily coupon parking would rise from $1.33 to $3.00 per day. o Restricted days for the 1989-90 ski season will be the followings All weekends of the ski season (Saturday and Sunday) Not valid from December 25, 1989 through December 31, 1989. Not valid President°s 3-day weekend in February. o Revenue gained from the price increases could very well be offset by a decline in usage. TRANSPORTATION AND PARKING ADVISORY CON~IITTEE RECOMNlENDATIONo o Same recommendations as Town Staff except for Premium Parking Passes. Increase the cost of Premium Parking Passes to $650. ISSUES DECREASING FREE PARKING TIME IN THE VTRC AND LTRC ANALYSISS The current policy in effect at the Parking Structures allows vehicles to park for 1-1/2 hours free. Free parking transactions account for 37$ of total parking transactions. The Council last changed this policy for the 1985-86 ski season. Our recommendation of the Transportation and Parking Task Force, the Council reduced free parking time from 2-1/2 hours to 1-1/2 hours prior to the 85-86 season° We currently average a total of 1,092 free parking transactions a day (both structures). Assuming a 33°s distribution of vehicles over the current 1-1/2 hour free period, 728 cars could be expected to exit the structures between 30 and 90 minutes. If a fee were charged, we would expect a decline of free parkers. Projected Revenue AnalysisS 0-30 minutes free 30 minutes - - hours = $2.00 364 cars a day x $2.00 per day = $720/day $720 cars per day x 150 ski days = $108,000 Additional Annual Revenue PROS° o Generates $108,000 projected additional revenue to help offset expansion of the VTRC costs. CONS° o May decrease revenues to Village and LionsHead merchants as some patrons may stop visiting shops and restrains without 1-1/2 hours free parking. TOWN OF VAIL STAFF RECOMMENDATION: o Decrease free parking time from 1-1/2 to 30 minutes free° TRANSPORTATION AND PARKING ADVISORY COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS o Village Transportation Center 0 - 1 1/2 Hours - $1.00 15 minute free parking still allowed on top deck o Lionshead Transportation Center 0 - 2 Hours - Free ISSUES PARKING IN DONOVAN PARK ANALYSIS: The Town of Vail permitted parking in Donovan Park during the 1989 World Alpine Ski Championships. At the earliest construction in Donovan Park will not begin until next summer. The lot is on the existing West Vail South Town of Vail bus route. PROS° o Donovan Park can be utilized as an "overflow" parking lot during the 1989-90 ski season. CONS° None TOWN OF VAIL STAFF RECOMMENDATION: o Allow parking at Donovan Park during the 1989-90 ski season. TRANSPORTATION AND PARKING ADVISORY COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: o Allow free parking for a maximum of 25-35 vehicles as a °Blast resort°° overflow parking area. ISSUEa MOVING RENTAL CAR PARKING SPACES OUT OF THE VTRC ANALYSISo The Town currently leases office space and parking spaces to Hertz and National rental car agencies in the VTRC° Level Three of the VTRC also houses maintenance and rental car washing facilities° The Town receives approximately $54,000 annually from the rental car agencies for use of the space° Relocation of the rental car and maintenance facilities could gain up to approximately 85 parking stalls° If this area were opened for public parking, the Town could realize an estimated $57,375 additional parking revenues annually (average $675 per space per year x 85 spaces)° PROS° o The Town of Vail Transportation Center Traffic Study recommends that the rental car spaces be re-locatede Relocation of the rental car operation is an objective that: o Gains up to 90 spaces within the existing structure o Allows for additional circulation and access possibilities (one-way traffic) o Results in an estimated $3,375 of additional annual revenues° CONS° o Increases traffic congestion and parking problems in other areas° The rental car agencies would need to find other parking° o Rental cars would need to be °°shuttled°1 back to the VTRC and utilize loading zones that are currently overcrowded° o The VTRC has been extremely successful because it functions as a °°one step°° transportation center.° Buses, taxis, shuttles, and rental cars are all based out of the VTRC° Moving the rental car functions out of the VTRC would make transportation less O'user-friendly0° for the guest° TOWN OF VAIL STAFF RECOMMENDATIONe o Terminate leases with Hertz and National on October 31, 1989 rental car agencies requiring them to relocate rental car storage to another area° o Lease office space only to Hertz and National for the 1989-90 ski season° TRANSPORTATION AND PARKING ADVISORY COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: Same as Town Staff Recommendations ORDINANCE N0. 22 Series of 1989 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE INVESTMENT POLICY OF THE TOWN OF VAIL. WHEREAS, the Town Council believes that certain amendments in the Investment Policy of the Town of Vail will be beneficial. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO: 1. The Investment Policy of the Vail Town Council for the Town of Vail is hereby amended to read as set forth in Exhibit A attached hereto and made a part hereof. 2. 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. 3. 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. 4. 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. INTRODUCED, READ AND APPROVED ON FIRST READING this 19th day of September , 1989, and a public hearing shall be held on this Ordinance on the 19th day of September , 1989, at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado. Ordered published in full this 19th day of September 1989. Kent R. Rose, Mayor ATTEST: Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Town Clerk INTRODUCED, READ AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED this day of 1989. Kent R. Rose, Mayor ATTEST: Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Town Clerk -2- .. ~, TOWN OF VAIL MEMORANDUM TO: Ron Phillips Council Members FROMe Steve Thompson DATE: September 6, 1989 RE: Investment Policy Enclosed is'the ordinance which amends the investment policy. The amendments, as discussed with Council at the August 15th work session, have been incorporated within the present policy. The changes are in bold lettering and language to be deleted is crossed out. The following summarizes the effect of the amendments and references the section of the policy being amended: Section I. Adds Section XVII - Policy Review, requiring annual review of policy. Section II. Includes the marketing funds portion of cash and investments within the scope of this policy. Section IV. Requires Town Manager to review but not approve the investment report. Section VI.2 Adds insured by FSLIC or other agency of the Federal Government since FSLIC is being phased out. Allows for deposits with savings banks. Section VI.4 Gives flexibility to use other government agency securities without amending the policy. Section VII. Does not require open-term repurchase transactions to have two bids. Section X. Adding savings banks as a legal investment requires defining a maximum percent of portfolio. Section XII. 2nd paragraph - adds savings banks. 3rd paragraph - requires bidding banking services beginning in 1990. 4th paragraph - allows use of non-primary brokers. Section XVII. New section requiring Council review of policy. VAIL TOWN COUNCIL COUNCIL POLICY STATEMENT 88-1 INVESTMENT POLICY SECTION I. STATEMENT OF PURPOSE The Investment Policy of the Vail Town Council for the Town of Vail represents the financial boundaries within which its cash management process will operate. Areas covered by this policy include: II. Scope of Financial Funds to be Invested :III. Investment Objectives _. IV. Delegation of Authority for Investment Decisions V. Investment .Prudence VI. Investment Instruments VII. Competitive Selection of Investment Instruments VIII. Interest Allocation Method IX. Safekeeping and Custody X. Portfolio Diversification XI. Maturity Scheduling XII. Qualified Institutions and P~'ima~y-Dealers Broker/Dealers XIII. Investment Committee XIV. Reporting Requirements XV. Monitoring and Adjusting Portfolio XVI. Internal Controls XVII. Policy Review Cash management goals shall be developed within the constraints of this policy statement. Goals shall include: A. Percentage of cash invested. The Town shall be earning interest on all available funds for investment. B. Percentage of Return (Yield). A targeted range of yields should be stated as a goal. This target yield goal shall be presented in the annual operating budget. - 2 - C. Total Dollar Return Goal. Combines the goals of percentage of cash available and the percentage of yield to obtain a total dollar return goal. SECTION IIo SCOPE This investment policy applies to all financial funds of the Town of Vail (hereby referred to as the "Town"). These funds are accounted for in the Towns comprehensive Annual Financial Report and currently include the: General Fund Capital Projects Fund Construction Funds Special Revenue Fundse Real Estate Transfer Tax Parking Fee Fund Conservation Trust Fund Marketing Fund Enterprise Fundso Internal Service - Fleet Maintenance Fund Internal Service - Health Insurance Debt Service Fund Special Assessment Funds Monies held by the Colorado State Treasurer and Eagle County Treasurer during tax collection periods shall be governed by State of Colorado and Eagle County investment policies and are not subject to the provisions of this policy. SECTION III. INVESTMENT O&7ECTIVES Each investment transaction shall first seek to ensure capital losses are avoided, whether they are from default of securities or erosion of market value. The Town, as its second major objective, - 3 - SECTION III. INVESTMENT OBJECTIVES (Continued) seeks to attain market rates of return on its investments. Market rate objectives must be consistent with constraints imposed by the primary objective of the safety of principal, internal cash flow considerations and any Town of Vail ordinance, restricting the placement of public monies. Speculative investments will not be allowed. Speculative investments are those attempting to gain market premium appreciation through short term market volatility resulting in increased risk and loss exposure. The Town will not purchase a security which cannot be held to maturity. This does not mean an investment cannot be sold prior to maturity. SECTION IV. DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY Management responsibility for the investment program is held by the Town Manager and appointed designees. No employee may engage in an investment transaction except as provided under the terms of this policy and any procedures which may be established by the Town Manager. The Town Manager shall review aad-ap}~~e~re the monthly investment report (see section XIV). It shall be the duty of the Controller to manage the day-to-day. operations of the portfolio, and place actual purchase/sell orders with institutions. In the absence of the Controller, the Administrative Services Director shall assume these duties. The authority for the investment philosophy and selection of investment managers for the Town of Vail Employee Pension Plan and the Town of Vail Police and Fire Employees Pension Plan shall be the responsibility of the Pension Plan Trustee as defined in the pension plan document. SECTION V. INVESTMENT PRUDENCE Investments shall be made with reasonable financial judgement and care, under circumstances than prevailing, which persons of prudence, discretion and intelligence exercise in the management of their own affairs, not for speculation, but for investment, considering the primary objective of safety of principal as well as the secondary objective of the obtainment of market rates of return. Investment officers acting in accordance with written procedures and exercising due prudence shall be relieved of personal responsibility for an individual security's credit risk or market price changes, provided deviations from expectation are reported in an timely fashion, and appropriate action is taken to control adverse developments. - 4 - SECTION vI. INVESTMENT INSTRUMENTS The Town shall invest in the following accounts, or securities: 1. Fully collateralized or insured interest bearing checking accounts, savings accounts, and certificates of deposit at commercial banks with amount not to exceed $100,000 if the bank is not designated as a qualified institution by the Investment Committee. Collateral shall be limited to treasury bills and notes, municipal-bonds, and government agency bonds and notes. Real estate mortgages are prohibited for use as collateral. A commercial bank may use any securities authorized by the Public Deposit Protection Act as collateral under the following circumstancese When money is being wired from one bank to another and for some reason the transaction is not completed and in order to protect the Town's funds it is necessary to deposit them into an account for one banking day. plus any consecutive days that fall on a Saturday, Sunday, or a holiday. 2. Certificates of deposit at savings and loan associations insured by the FSLIC or other agency of the federal government with amount not to exceed $99,000. Deposits with savings banks insured by the FDIC with amount not to exceed $99,000° 3. Treasury bills, treasury notes, treasury bonds and Federal agencies securities which are guaranteed by the full faith and credit of the United States of America. 4 . ~~~per~ =c3~ Vii=sec-~r~t =r~c~g =~~~~ =t`PFe =F~cl~raF ~om~ -~Qan Ba~rlt- -gyp -t:rte -FI~P~r. The following U.S. Government Agency Securities: Discount securities Farm Credit Consolidated System-wide discount notes Federal Home Loan Banks discount notes Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (Freddie Mac) discount notes Federal National Mortgage Association (FNMA) Variable-rate securities Student Loan Marketing Association (Sallie Mae) - 5 - Coupon securities Federal National Mortgage Association (FNMA) Federal Farm Credit Bank Federal Home Loan Bank Federal Land Bank 5. Colorado Public Investment Pools. The Town may participate in a Colorado Public Investment Pool, the Colorado Local Government Liquid Asset Trust or other similar local government pools organized in conformity with Part 7 of Article 75 of Title 24, CRS, which provides specific authority for pooling of local government funds. 6. Money Market accounts which primarily invest in treasury notes, bills and bonds and governmental agency securities for which shares may be purchased for $1.00 and liquidated for $1.00. Repurchase agreements - with either qualified commercial banks or a primary securities dealer for which a properly ex- ecuted master repurchase agreement has been entered into by the Town. Repurchase agreements involving pooled collateral shall be avoided. The securities used as collateral shall be safekept in accordance with Section IX on Safekeeping and Custody. The Town will concentrate its investment efforts in, but not to be limited to, U.S. Treasury obligations, certificates of deposit and interest bearing checking accounts issued by financial institutions located in the Town, Eagle County and the State of Colorado. SECTION VII. COMPETITIVE SELECTION OF INVESTMENT INSTRUMENTS If a specific maturity date is required for cash flow purposes, bids will be requested for instruments which meet the maturity requirement. If no specific maturity is required, a market trend (yield curve) analysis will be conducted to determine which maturities would be most advantageous. After selecting a type of instrument at least two bids should be obtained from similar institutions. Two bids are not required if treasury bills or notes are purchased at a treasury auction or for overnight or open-term repurchase transactions. The Town may place an investment with a local institution that is not the highest bidder, provided the bid is not more than 25 basis points below the highest bidder. ~e - 6 - SECTION VII. COPgPETITIVE SELECTION OF INVESTMENT IPISTRUMEIdTS (Continued) The rate of interest must be at least equivalent to the average rate of return available in the market place. It is the responsibility of the Controller to demonstrate compliance with this section. A local institution is defined as a bank or savings and loan association doing business inside the corporate limits of the Town of Vail and/or Eagle County. SECTION VIII. INTEREST ALLOCATION P~ETHOD All investments will be in the name of the Town of Vail and in most cases it will be a general policy of the Town to pool all available operating cash into a Treasury Cash Management investment portfolio. However, a specific investment purchased by a specific fund shall incur all earnings and expenses to that particular fund. Interest earnings from pooled funds shall be allocated to all participating funds in the following order: A. Payment of interest earnings shall be allocated to designated funds from its specific investments. B. Payment to the General Fund of an amount equal to the total annual bank service charges as incurred by the general fund for all operating funds as included in the annual operating budget. C. Payment to the General Fund of a management fee equal to 5% of the annual pooled cash fund investment earnings. D. Payment to each fund of an amount based on the average monthly cash balance included in the common portfolio for the earning period. SECTION IXe SAFEKEEPING AND CUSTODY All investment securities (which are held in book entry form) purchased by the Town shall be held in third-party safekeeping by an institution designated as primary agent. The primary agent shall issue a safekeeping receipt to the Town listing the specific instrument, rate, maturity and other information. Securities may be purchased from the primary agent's brokerage department and safekept by the same bank's trust department. -~- SECTION X. PORTFOLIO DIVERSIFICATION The Town will diversify use of investment instruments to avoid incurring unreasonable risks inherent in overinvesting in specific instruments, individual financial institutions. Maximum Percent of Portfolio Diversification by Instrument: Money Market & Interest Bearing Checking Accounts with Commercial Banks 50% Money Market Accounts 50% U.S. Treasury Obligations (Bills, Notes & Bonds) 1000 U.S. Government Agency Securities (per Section VI.4) 100% Repurchase Agreements 75% Certificate of Deposit Commercial Banks or 100% Savings Banks Certificate of Deposit Savings & Loan Association 25% Local Government Investment Pool 100% Diversification by Financial Institution: Repurchase Agreements No more than 50% of the total investment portfolio shall be secured in Repos with any one institution. Certificates of Deposit - Commercial Banks No more than 20% of the total investment portfolio shall be secured in any one commercial bank's CDs. If the amount of any of the above investments are in excess of the percentage allowed, it is not considered a violation of this policy if the amount is corrected within 30 days. - 8 - SECTION XI. P~ATURITY SCHEDULING Investment maturities for operating funds shall be scheduled to coincide with projected cash flow needs, taking into account large routine expenditures (payroll, bond payments) as well as considering sizeable blocks of anticipated revenue (sales tax, property tax). The average maturity of the portfolio shall never exceed 2 years. SECTION XII . QUALIFIED INSTITUTIONS AND I'~tIi~It3t'- ~A7~2S BROKER/DEALERS Qualified banks - can only be commercial banks and the Town's investment with the bank may be in excess of $100,000. The Town's Finance Controller shall obtain and review the bank's quarterly consolidated report of condition ("Call" Report) - the annual audited financial statements, the monthly listing of securities pledged for collateralization, and the independent bank evaulation, quarterly, to determine that the bank meets the standard selection criteria established by the Investment Committee. Non-qualified banks - can be either commercial banks or savings and loans or savings banks and the Town's investment with the bank is or will not be in excess of $100,000. The Finance Controller shall inquire with bank officials and/or review an independent bank evaulation to determine the bank meets the standard selection criteria established by the Investment Committee. The Town shall select a primary bank, the bank the Town uses to process daily deposits and checks, every two years beginning in 1990. A formal request for proposal should be used in the selection process. Securities dealers not affiliated with a bank shall be required to be classified as reporting dealers affiliated with the New York Federal Reserve Bank, as primary dealers. Broker/dealers which are not primary dealers may be used if they have been approved by the Investment Committee. The Investment Committee shall develop and document the methodology for qualifying non-primary broker/dealers. SECTION XIII< INVESTMENT COMMITTEE There is hereby created an investment committee, consisting of the Town Manager, Administrative Services Director, and the Finance Controller. Members of the committee will meet at least quarterly t - 9 - SECTION XIII. INVESTMENT COMMITTEE (Continued) to determine general strategies and to monitor results. Minutes of the decisions made by the investment committee shall be kept on file in the Town Clerk's Office. The committee shall include in its review and deliberations such topics as: potential risks, authorized depositories, rate of return, maturity structure and investment transactions. SECTION XIV. REPORTING REQUIREMENTS The Finance Controller will submit a monthly investment report which. discloses investments on the last day of each month. This report will be distributed to the Town Manager, Town Council Members, and the Administrative Services Director. The Finance Controller will present at least semi-annually the investment report to the Town Council. SECTION XV. MONITORING AND ADJUSTING THE PORTFOLIO The Finance Controller will routinely monitor the contents of the portfolio, the available markets and the relative values of competing instruments, and will adjust the portfolio accordingly. SECTION XVI. INTERNAL CONTROLS The Finance Controller shall establish a system of written internal controls, which shall be reviewed annually by the independent auditor. SECTION XVII. POLICY REVIEW The investment policy shall be reviewed annually by the Investment Committee and the Town Council. The effective date of this policy shall be the day of 19 ~~ Kent Rose, Mayor gagy September 18, 1989 Ms. Pam Brandmeyer Town Clerk Town of Vail 75 S. Frontage Road Vail, Colorado 8165? Dear Pam: I am writing to you to formally apply to renew my position on the Local Liquor Licensing Authority. My current term expires in October, and as you know, I have held this term for two years. I believe I bring experience, dedication and insight to the Authority, as evidenced by my election last summer as the Board's Vice Chairman. My familiarity with the service of alcohol, as well as personal friendships with many people in the restaurant business in the community, enhance my credibility as a Board member and facilitate excellent relations between licensees and the Board. Pam, I enjoy very much my work with the Local Liquor Licensing Authority, and hope to continue this association for a long time. Thank you for your consideration. erely, Betty Nea TOPIC 8/1 BANNERS IN THE VILLAGE (request: Slevin) 8/1 STREET ENTERTAINMENT 8/8 TIVOLI LANDSCAPING 8/8 UTILITIES UNDERGROUNDING FOR ARTERIAL BUSINESS DISTRICT 8/8 WEST INTERMOUNTAIN ANNEXATION (request: Lapin) 8/8 POST OFFICE BUILDING REMODEL/ACCESS 8/15 VVCWD/TOV LAND CONTRACT 8/15 POINT OF SALES TAX COLLECTION (request: Lapin) WORK SESSION FOLLOW-UP QUESTIONS 9/29/89 Page 1 FOLLOW-UP SOLUTI PETER: Arrange location and placement of permanent banner pales at any location other than Pepi's. PAM: No more rock 'n roll. Perhaps no more jazz? PETER: What is the status? KRISTAN: Provide costs to individuals to convert to underground. Provide firm number for TOV's portion by budget time. Inventory all above- ground wiring. .LARRY: Provide more enforcement power to Holy Cross to require undergrounding. (LARRY: Proceding w/legal requirements for annexation. STAN: Redesign access w/CDOH as relates to remodel. IRON: Contract in final stages of negotiation CHARLIE/STEVE B.: Schedule discussion. 8/7 Have asked Ampersand for design for Lionshead east entry. Will explore with Ampersand alternative banner pole locations in Village. Review meeting held September 20. Business survey being developed. Developer does not wish to complete stone walls on east parking lot. CD will continue to push issue. Betsy is working with Bob Lazier. Received letter from New Electric detailing casts for each property. Community Development will write letters to property owners for their response. Council will discuss on Oct. 17. Prepared memo for Town Council on utility wire under- grounding. Holy Cross has provided additional information. Annexation map is being produced. Annexation should be completed by Jan. 1st so Intermountain can be included in our census count. When space needs are determined, access redesign will be done. Larry and Jim Collins are working on contract. Will be addressed on Oct. 10. •'~ WORK SESSION FOLLOW-UP Tnnrr FCTT(1NC 9/29/89 Page 2 LLOW-UP SOLUTIONS 8/15 NO SMOKING ORDINANCE/RESTAURANTS 8/25 CASCADE VILLAGE LIGHT 8/25 VAIL VILLAGE INN TRIANGLE 8/29 VTRC HANDRAILS (request: Slevin) 8/29 SIGN NEAR SKI MUSEUM (request: Lapin and Cathy Douglas) 8/29 HIGHWAY RESEEDING OF FILL AREAS (request: Steinberg) 8/29 WILLOW CIRCLE LANDSCAPING (request: Steinberg) 9/5 GATEWAY PROJECT SIGNAGE 9/5 DOG CONTROL (request: Steinberg) RON/SUSAN: Schedule for WS. Compile stats on success/compliance/problems with towns currently under such an ordinance. STAN: Light missing at the intersection of West- i haven and South Frontage Road. PETER: Landscaping inappropriate. STAN: John and Ron feel they are in terrible shape. Handrails are going to be treated or in some way fixed before winter. STAN: Some type of dead end indication sign needs to be placed on Vail Road as you are approaching the Ski Museum from the north indicating that a that a right turn is a dead end. STAN: Could wildflower seed be mixed with grass seed and the reseeding program for all the fill areas along the Interstate. STAN: Please contact Joan Whittenburg concerning improvements in Willow Circle. PETER: Developer wishes to place explanatory sign, although he does not have a building permit. (DICK/PETER: Better signage required. Research underway. A synopsis of what other municipalities have done is being prepared. Susan has contacted Aspen & Telluride, and has their ordinances. She will be contact- ing businesses in these communities to find out pros and cons. The No Smoking Group is responsible for developing their request to Council. Susan plans to make her report to Council on Oct. 10th. Peter has sent Andy a letter asking if he'll pay us to put one in. Joe Staufer has agreed to concrete triangle this fall. Cost estimates received. Replacements ordered. Will be installed before winter. Sign ordered to say "No Through Traffic" with arrow to the right. Installation approximately 10/15/89. Contacted CDOH landscaper in Grand Junction, and revege- tation plan was requested. Presented Council's request to him. CDOH has all information on wildflower seeding under consideration. Stan tried to call Joan three times. Letter sent to Joan in Kentucky. AMOCO has been contacted re: placement of sign stating some- thing similar to "Pardon my dust." CD will follow up. Ampersand to design a more aesthetic sign and placement at entrance of Ford Park Lower Bench, as well as parks/paths/ etc. TOPIC 9/5 AUON STOLPORT (request: Lapin) 9/5 RUDER-REINEKE BUSINESS LICENSE (request: Cacioppo) 9/5 CALL UP PROCEDURE FOR PEC AND DRB DECISIONS (request: Steinberg) 9/5 GUIDELINES CLARIFICATION FOR SEPARATED STRUCTURES 9/12 MARK SPEED DIPS (request: Cacioppo) 9/19 LIGHT SYSTEM IN FORD PARK (request: Steinberg) 9/19 TREE CUTTING ON STREAMTRACT (request: Steinberg) 9/26 NONCONFORMING ISSUES (request: Lapin) WORK SESSION FOLLOW-UP S 9/29/89 Page 3 LLOW-UP SOLUTIONS RON/CHARLIE: Consider long-range impact on Vail. PETER/DANI: Are they operating illegally in East Vail? LARRY/PETER: Work out wording to disallow the call up procedure for PEC and DRB decisions to be allowed without consensus. PETER: Look at the question of a clarification for separated structures and focus on the issue of single family, duplex, and primary/secondary homes. ',KEN/STAN: Should more warning signs and same sort of yellow lines be used to alert drivers? STAN: Lights on during the daytime. PETER/KEN: Sonnenalp and Village Center cutting down trees on streamtract adjacent to their property. 'PETER/MIKE M.: Whenever a nonconforming item is approved by PEC (and becomes even MORE nonconform- !~ ing than it was in the first place), Council ' should be notified, i.e., more specific notifi- cation than what occurs through the general PEC report. Contacted Bill James 9/7/89. Meeting w/Continental Express scheduled Monday, 10/3/89, 5:00 p.m., at Avon Municipal Building. Community Development investigation of zoning matters in process. Letter sent to Ruder. Resolution is being developed. Will be a part of the zoning code revision. All speed dips are signed appropriately. Interdepartmental will discuss striping. PW has fixed. Pete Burnett and Matt Hecker (PD) took pictures, and Matt is doing a police report. PD, CD, and Larry will decide appropriate action. Handled as a part of PEC report. C'D SEP 2 9 X989 Vail Town Council Town of Vail 75 S, Frontage Rd. Vail, CO 81657 Dear Town Council Members: As a merchant at Crossroads Shopping Center, I am writing to let You know that I oppose the following proposals regarding the Village parking structure: 1) Elimination of free parking for the first 9Q minutes in the Village parking structure, as this will create more the Crossroads parking areas from non-customers of Crossroadsn which will hurt our business. 2) Elimination of the west entrance and exit. This will eliminate a steady flow of prospective customers, which will hurt our business. I am in favor of the following: 1) Installation of public restrooms near the west end of the parking structure. 2) Retention of an auto entrance and pedestrian exit at the west end of the parking structure. 3) Better lighting, more police protection acid more consistent bus service at Ford Park, to encourage locals to park there. Thank you for your consideration of these matters. Sincerely, zC(~ G ~ a,.Q ~ C® ~ ~ ~ S$ ~'OS~P29~89 Vail Town Council Town of Vail 75 S. Frontage Rd. Vail, CO 81657 Dear Town Council Members: As a merchant at Crossroads Shopping Center, I am writing to let you know that I oppose the following proposals regarding the Village parking structure: 1) Elimination of free parking for the first 90 minutes in the Village parking structure, as this will create more pressure on the Crossroads parking areas from non-customers of Crossroads, which will hurt our business. 2) Elimination of the west entrance and exit. This will eliminate a steady flow of prospective customers, which will hurt our business. I am in favor of the following: 1) Installation of public restrooms near the west end of ttie parking structure. 2) Retention of an auto entrance and pedestrian exit at the west end of the parking structure. 3) Better lighting, more police protection and more consistent bus service at Ford Park, to encourage locals to park there. Thank you for your consideration of these matters. Sincerely, F LL~~~~~~wVC!" ~~ lCeY171~t/L 1~-l /~'OG/!19 ZZ C. ~ X43 ~astMeadowD~,Su~2P3~S•1~a~7.C0 8~65~ U Cl-c,Q 1..2,~s~-~.. REC'~J SEP 2 91989 Vail Town Council Town of Vail 75 S. Frontage Rd. Vail, CO 81657 Dear Town Council Members: As a merchant at Crossroads Shopping Center, I am writing to let you know that I oppose the following proposals regaz•ding the Village parking structure: 1) Elimination of free parking for the first 90 minutes in t}ie Village parking structure, as this will create more pressure on the Crossroads parking areas from non-customers of Crossroads, which will hurt our business. 2) Elimination of the west entrance and exit, This will eliminate a steady flow of prospective customers, which will hurt our business. I am in favor of the following: 1) Installation of public restrooms near the west end of t}ie parking structure. 2) Retention of an auto entrance and pedestrian exit at the west end of the parking structure. 3) Better lighting, more police protection and more consistent bus service at Ford Park, to encourage locals to park there. Thank you for your consideration of these matters. Sincerely, (Ja.~.Q , C'~ d' ~ ~ S ~ RECD SAP 2 9 X89 Vail Town Council Town of Vail 75 S. Frontage Rd. Vail, CO 8165? Dear Town Council Members: As a merchant at Crossroads Shopping Center, I am writing to let you know that I oppose the following proposals regarding t27e Village parking structure: 1) Elimination of free parking for the first 90 minutes in the Village parking structure, as this will create more pressure on the Crossroads parking areas from non-customers of Crossroads, which will hurt our business. 2) Elimination of the west entrance and exit. This will eliminate a steady flow of prospective customers, which will hurt our business. I am in favor of the following: 1) Installation of public restrooms near the west end of the parking structure. 2) Retention of an auto entrance and pedestrian exit at the west end of the parking structure. 3) Better lighting, more police protection and more consistent bus service at Ford Park, to encourage locals to park there. Thank you for your consideration of these matters. Sincerely, ~~~-~~~ ~A11. QRIpJ'~INCq INL, cJ~.Q , C'~ 8 ~ ~ s 7 Id~C'D SEP 2 9 X989 Vail Town Council Town of Vail 75 S. Frontage Rd. Vail, CO 81657 Dear Town Council Members: As a merchant at Crossroads Shopping Center, I am writing to let you know that I oppose the following proposals regarding t}~e Village parking structure: 1) Elimination of free parking for the first 90 minutes in the Village parking structure, as this will create more pressure on the Crossroads parking areas from non-customers of Crossroads, which will hurt our business. 2) Elimination of the west entrance and exit. eliminate a steady flow of This will prospective customers, which will hurt our business. I am in favor of the following: 1) Installation of public restrooms near the west end of the parking structure. 2) Retention of an auto entrance and pedestrian exit at the west end of the parking structure. 3) Better lighting, more police protection acid more consistent bus service at Ford Park, to encourage locals to park there. A ~ c~~ ~~ -to Po.,,~ ~_ ~ q'.CSS~w. ~.A;LtM.c-ul~' v l Thank you for your consideration of these matters. f Sincerely, _.._ /~`~ U~« PIeI~JT}q}~~ ~Afe. (~ 3 ~ ~ M ~A-A o cJ .n ~.~ ~ ~ RECD SEP 2 9 1989 Va i 1 Town Cour~c i 1 Town of Vail 75 S. Frontage Rd. Vail, CO 81657 Dear Town Council Members: As a merchant at Crossroads Shopping Center, I am writing to let You know that I oppose the following proposals regarding the Village parking structure: 1) Elimination of free parking for the first 90 minutes in the Village parking structure, as this will create more pressure on the Crossroads parking areas from non-customers of Crossroads, which will hurt our business. 2) Elimination of the west entrance and exit. This will eliminate a steady flow of prospective customers, which will hurt our business. I am in favor of the following: 1) Installation of public restrooms near the west end of t}Ie parking structure. 2) Retention of an auto entrance and pedestz•ian exit at the west end of the parking structure. 3) Better lighting, more police protection and more consistent bus service at Ford Park, to encourage locals to park there. Thank you for your consideration of these matters. Sincerely, ~_ ~~r~ ~~. ~-io ~? ~ - ~ I ?a A~'D SAP 2 ~ 1989 Vail Town Council Town of Vail 75 S. Frontage Rd. Vail, CO 81657 Dear Town Council Members: ~~ As a merchant at Crossroads Shopping Center, I am writing to let you know that I appose the following proposals regarding the Village parking structure: 1) Elimination of free parking for the first 90 minutes in the Village parking structure, as this will create more pressure on the Crossroads parking areas from non-customers of Crossroads, which will hurt our business. 2) Elimination of the west entrance and exit. eliminate a steady flow of This will prospective customers, which will hurt our business. I am in favor of the following: 1) Installation of public restrooms near the west end of the parking structure. 2) Retention of an auto entrance and pedest exit at the west end of the parking structure. y ~~~~ Pr~~~-y ~ ~cf 3) Better lighting, more police protection and more consistent bus service at Ford Park, to encourage locals to park there. Thank you for your consideration of these matters. Sincerely, r,• v~ i~r`.c~.s.~. a-~...a.ti.,.,,. 'Q SEP 2 91989 Vail Town Council Town of Vail 75 S. Frontage Rd. Vail, Ct~ 81657 Dear Town Council Members: As a merchant at Crossroads Shopping Center, I am writing to let you know that I oppose the following proposals regarding the Village parking structure: 1) Elimination of free parking for the first 90 minutes in the Village parking structure, as this will create more pressure on the Crossroads parking areas from non-customers of Crossroads, which will hurt our business. 2) Elimination of the west entrance and exit, This will eliminate a steady flow of prospective customers, which will hurt our business. I am in favor of the following: 1) Installation of public restrooms near the west end of the parking structure. 2) Retention of an auto entrance and pedestrian exit at the west end of the parking structure. 3) Better lighting, more police protection and more consistent bus service at Ford Park, to encourage locals to park there. Thank you for your consideration of these matters. Sincerely, ~ ~~~~, THE :~Cn~ri?a~,!Al~l~;l~~ ~E~OT CiGSSFQ~,~~ iti?.4LL 143 EAST ME~~OtN DRIVE VAIL, CO s1657 (303) 476-6036 5~LE5THh F'~bi~ed: 9/29/x9 TU`='i ~ 'vr:' 1 ~( EFi3f!gt ! Lh3nge 1999 1939 sro;:~ from ~'~TN ---------- i9a0 ----------- i93i ----------- 193 ----------- irya3 ------- 193$ 1r+35 i93b 1937 l93a ~ aliii+:ET RCTii~L u3f13f1CE 19aa audg~; Jdil~_3p7' h26 d~a : " 5!4 ii' ~ ~ 6'75 tab ,_ ---- 69F '`? J,%... ----------- 74? n6.~ a,~ - ----------- ~o, X04 VL,_ ----------- ^r{; `;;5 ~~r.,J ------------ , ;;rte ~ L,.J.j,lr6 ------------ , 1,1;.6,496 --- 1 ----------- ., 1,~i0,00v ------------ ~; 1,43=,.~L3 ------------- , , 2~6,j28 --------- _.: 21. _i; ------- 13.77: i °~~i!'f"'r X24 v4s , 59'' `:'ice , 6°7 '9~~ ~ ,1 751 ~_ ,,J_~6 iii) a24,b= cis 913,1._4 /, «'7 94,_, 7^ l,l.~°,1x6 '7(c 1,L1~,1{)1 1 .c• , I,.~iv,OtO c~.~ 1,~~,~,~5U ~ r.c 18~ ,:<<u ~ L7.1?: c'f 13.~~~. ~a 'h i:" .} 63_`i':'` ' ' 691,64 ~_~,,6y~~ "" '" r'' ° r; 8 8 , L , ' 1 t3, 314 , , 1 1 '' °' ,-'JI,-. LO ,L" ;J_,~ "' '_' 1,'- , , i ,7a 73~ 1- 1 _ {}5 1 91 7' ,= : ., ~ Qii 1 b4 U ~ , rr ~ 1 i~4 91 , ,< , 1 f 4- 2`.1 <, 14.. ?': . i,r 2t 7. J ~ fil P ""=4: ~i~> ,- - 4'_ '-''-L, ~`~ :;55 .;til ,- i ` 31 ,~4b 9 nil 4~i,c 4 ~~'t ~ ,66a 'r; ' 4_~~,a'; ,. 4~.~,961 c ~ c .150,LU. . c 4~d{ iiUO OOti 55t! i •.n 1'10 v.:U .0'l. 22.L-: ~f3y 89,130 135,774 147,373 1`6,`59 166,2{)! 162,912 244,937 245,51a 170,567 , 24G UUU , :'+?1,031 , 1 Oai 17.9'r', .5: ,<<~f~e 176,i}44 245,2{74 247 326 ~ 257 744 ~ 262 696 1 230 a-'a 1 L 361.67' 1 ''1,581 .j._ 329 ,t{J9 , , t) ~{U 36 r' f,:, ~: ;' 4'~',6t-6 , {I 47,6.6 ~yq 23. '' 3.27: 1 ilia LNi 346 339 413 , 349 ,iib {n 1 47,,4'4 4;6,462 r S 447,1.` 479,507 n ~~~ 47T,L!{1 cc ~.19,ba3 1 c S,iU,UOt{ 610,:546 . 6:),645 9.1': 11.0: . ,14+ ~~a__ ---------- ~~3 if5-~ L~~ 1 _t ----------- __;'~ 72 ,~, 4 ----------- 5 3,4x,7._6 ----------- ~ 3a4,_,.3e ----------- 4~''' y~ .L,rL -- --- '3 q: 5 _ 6, a ~~ , 5" •_Li.l., ,,:r,~i{; ~" -:4 . 5, 7 `7 Ha 5 n ,r B.,Ut 1 fl ;},{ 64:., ~ t {~ {;,7{ 6., ~ 7 11.1:: ,,_;;; Ii 5~i~`0131 ri:ic 43{7 ~', _, 167 41_4 3, , 3 F64 502 ",_ ,_ ''S' x'15 3,r~~,aL~ - ----- 4 ''1 {".3(} ,.Jt-,- ----------- ?'~ 4,:y1,186 ----------- c , , ,i,s83,30t ------------ c cn rry _~,~ib,1L9 ------------ ~ 4,1Oa,ba~ --- 1 ----------- ~ ,- 6,34,.,ULi{ ------------ ~ 1,36L:2t{2 ------------- 1: r^ l,U.{ <?t --------- ~;. c•; ~,(.~., ------- r•' 16.x: ---------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ------------ -------- , Sepiembar 176 t?;i, , -' ` r ~`~_,i13 ~. ° _ ~_, L :9a r .6'0 3~4. ; ,, .'94,564 , ;>~. 34.,1.E ~~lr, 374, ".L,. --- {:r~ 442,4 ------------ 11 ~,,_ 4=',`)' --- ------------ r nt ~t; 441,. ----------- ------------- --------- ------- yy JC I~~L~C~ 137,3'6 C25,!!24 ' , ..i3,iJ..li~ lyr,rl4 ] LUr, 143 ~ (.!~91 i3C i:'r,5~i4 L:/3, .~51 G91yC~~4 1 ( L~S, UII I~ P. ri-t i~L1YF ~_f i, /,"' 14`; _~.jCt ^ ,c,; ill1,_s~ r~.tc ni a :!,ui't - 1 i~a,7t!4 31{,cu3 - :~z ^'-{,(i7.' ~ `cam _'6,n i,' 33_,27x1 376,235 i 33Q,i{l1(1 IiRf R F Q..1 ~~_f Sri) ~ ~ f ,L4 r '7 ~i:{, 7OL -" c:,: ll.ji,jl/:_ ~_' i' :J Vy ~~": ~~ ='~L cr ~~{. 'J 7~IV ~ ' _- ,il~,i ~_, r 1 1.+~f J,' C 1 1~ 51~ CC 1 4 J 943 1 = l 1 1,45._1 t. Tr3T4L ti 4,.39.7b3 ?i;•? ', 4,, .,._72' =.. {; '3i. _,_4. i. 5 61_':,L14 1 -;~ ,:.,,. 6 i:: ._.J'~ G, 6,4_,,:_<<3 ~ '+ 1 X38 x~L ' ' 7 4 ~ 4 , i ' 8 `4 57 ~ {~ e x82 n{ '~' 7 ',~'. ^ij~ ' 1 { u - t''' ~U2 , 1 I - i f Is _ L 1- , : 1 , i•_LL,L L ,-. i., NCO SAP 2 9 ~8g September 26, 1989 Vail Town Council 75 Frontage Nord Vail, Colorado 81657 Dear Sirs, I just want to register how pleased I was on my visit to vail during the fourth of July Vail Lacrosse Shootout tournament. I'm an old lacrosse enthusiast and was thrilled to think I could see such a high level of playing in such a fabulous setting. In fact, I centered my summer vacation around it and stayed. in Vail for seven days. My whole family had a great time as we took full advantage of the many fine restaurants, hiking trails and other attractions like rafting, fishing, and golf. The tournament itself seemed very well organized and was quite impressive in terms of the number of teams and quality of play. I think we'll come out to ski this winter and we'll definitely be there next summer for more lacrosse. Many thanks to the organizers and Vail officials responsible for the event. Yours truly, Constance Buchanan 2100 Chomedey Montreal, Quebec H3H 2A9 C O L O R A D O AT~VAIL®BEr1VER CREEK FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE September 27, 1989 BRAVO! COLORADO GUILD TO HOLD ANNUAL MEETING VAIL, Colo. -- On h~ednesday, October 4 ut 7:30 p.m. at the Vail Public Libraryo Media Room, the Bravo! Colorado Guild will install its new officers and honor its 1989 Volunteer of the Year, Nancy Knill. The public is invited to attend, along with. all members. A donation from the Guild to the Bravo! Colorado Board of Directors will also be presented formally, For more information, please call 476-0206, - 30 - O MASTERS OF MUSIC CONCERT SERIES JOHN W. GIOVANDOIGENERAL DIRECTOR ®IDA KAVAFIANIARTISTIC DIRECTOR 0 P.O. BOX 1288 / VAIL, COLORADO 81658-1288 ® TELEPHONE (303) 476-0206 ®(505(984-8548 ~ • -a SEP 2 7 X989 NATUR,~L EfVERC~Y RESOURCES COIV~PANY P. O. Box 567 o Palmer lake, Colorado 80133 ~ (719) 481-2003 o FAX (J 19) 481-4D 13 September 20, 1989 Senator Tilman Bishop, Chairman Water Interim Committee State Capitol Building Denver, Colorado 80203 Dear Senator Bishop: The attached paper on Colorado Water Planning and Development outlines an urgent need for state water legislation during the next session. We respectively request time at your October 5th committee meeting to explain why Colorado water planning should be given the highest priority by our legislative and executive branches. Sincerel , ;~ l `~~ ~ i Allen D. (Dave) Miller President ADM/bm Encl: Paper titled Colorado Planning and Development cc: Governor Romer, Legislators, Legislative Council Staff, Interim Committee O.n Independent Governmental Authorities D SEP 2 ? X989 September 20, 1989 Legislative Outline for COLORADO WATER PLANNING AND DEVELOPA4ENT Problems Colorado's Crater development is being seriously retarded because of the state's historic resistance. to statewide water planning, and the recent diffusion of accountability between the state agencies responsible for water planning and development. ractors Bearing On Problem: 1. In this age of environmental enlightenment, federal permitting agencies normally expect to evaluate specific •water development proposals within the context of state and regional water planning. 2. Colorado is the only Western state that has never developed any form of state water plan to serve as a guide and overall perspective for local, state, and federal decision makers. 3. Colorado's near exclusive reliance on its original "prior appropriation doctrine" tends to create a confrontational water development atmosphere, where protracted legal battles and political momentum are more important than objective engineering, environmental, and economic evaluation of alternatives. 4. Colorado's water development scene is largely dominated by non-technical water attorneys, instead of engineers and natural resource specialists. 5. An estimated 70°0 of the nation's water attorneys are required to administer Colorado's water structure, and this group generally adheres to the doctrine: "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." 6. Since its inception in 1937, the Colorado Water Conservation Board (the Board) has helped effectively plan, ~~ evaluate, finance, and promote over 200 water projects and studies using $159,868,437 in state funds. 7. In 1981 the Colorado Water Resources and Power Development Authority (the Authority) was established as a political subdivision of the state to specifically obtain low interest bond financing to acquire, construct, maintain, repair, and operate water projects for the protection, preservation, conservation, upgrading, development, and utilization of the state's water resources. z 8. Since its inception, the Authority has provided financing for only one water project (short-term bridge loan for Stagecoach Dam and Reservoir until federal funding received), and most of its effort has been devoted to 7 unrelated, inconclusive water studies that previously would have been handled by the Board. 9. Water studies by the Board and the Authority are only made in response to and controlled by local sponsors, whe are interested in promoting their o~•rn particular project or viewpoint. 10. Both the Board and the Authority deny any. responsibility or interest in conducting studies and state planning that involve the state's larger, controversial questions such as: balanced water use between basins, surface vs. ground water, statewide environmental protection for droughts, technical and legal incentives for city and farm conservation, availability of new water from improved irrigation techniques, alternatives for Metro Denver, and strategic long-range planning. 11. Although the Two Forks Dam proposal is probably the most important water issue in Colorado's history, neither the Board nor the Authority provided any statewide evaluation for the governor and other local, state, or federal officials. 12. Colorado's staff participation in the Tao Forks matter was limited primarily to narrowly defined areas involving water quality and wildlife. 13. Because of heavy local influence and past refusal by the Board and Authority to conduct individual studies within the context of statewide water planning, the overall quality and usefulness of Colorado financed water studies is generally very low. Legislative Solution: Reconsolidate all state water planning, financing, and development assistance (including waste water) under the Colorado Water Conservation Board, and direct the Board to prepare an initial advisory type state water plan by January 1, 1991. When debt financing is advisable for Colorado water projects, this technical function shall be assigned by the Board to the established Colorado Capital Finance Corporation for administration. Allen D. (Dave) Miller Natural Energy Resources Company P.O. Box 567 Palmer Lake, CO. 80133 (719)481-2003 ~~~~ ~N~I~~~RI~~_ i~~ Mr° Uli Kappus, Executive Director Colorado Water Resources and Power Development Authority Logan Tower building - Suite 620 1580 Logan Street Denver, Colorado 80203 ~`~g SEP 2 7 j9~y September 15, 1989 WRC File: 1662/13 Re: Upper Gunnison-Uncompahgre Basin Feasibility Study - Final Report Dear Mr° Kappus: On April 25, 1989 we provided to the Authority five pages of written input (WRC File: 1662/9) regarding the draft copy of the final report for the Phase I Feasibility Study of the Upper Gunnison-Uncompahgre Basin. One of our concerns related to the erroneous cost estimate for the siphon crossing the Arkansas River for the Union Park Project• Specifically our concern related to this item shown in Section 18 of our input, was stated as follows: "Pages 15-24, 15-25, 15-28, 15-29 / the cost estimate for the siphon crossing the Arkansas River is shown as approximately $51 million for a 4 feet diameter siphon° By comparison, the same crossing at exactly the same location for the Union Park Project is shown to be approximately $117 million for a 6 feet diameter siphon° The difference in diameter size represents approximately a 6°3 feet difference in the circumference, which clearly should not double the cost for conduits subjected to approximately the sane pressure, especially when the Taylor Park siphon is 1900 feet longer then the Union Park conduit°" Upon review of the final report issued by the Authority for the same study, we found that the majority of our April 25, 1989 comments were ignored including the concern over the subject siphon cost estimates• On August 1, 1989, via WRC File 1662/12, we provided further input and concerns regarding the subject cost estimates° Again this input was ignored by the Authority° Our continuing concern over the erroneous subject cost estimates presented to the public in the final report, led us to undertake the task of preparing a detailed cost estimate for the subject siphon° This cost estimate was based on the information developed by WRC's engineers, and private companies with experience in fabricating and installing such CONSULTING ENGINEERS 1660 SOUTH ALBION STREET • SUITE 500 • DENVER, COLORADO 80222 • (303) 757.8513 ° FAX (303) 758-3208 Mr. Uli Kappus WRC File: 1662/13 Page 2 facilities. Specifically we contacted Thompson Pipe and Steel Company of Denver, and TIC/The Industrial Company of Steamboat Springs to provide information for the development of the subject cost estimate. Thompson Pipe and Steel Company is a well known fabricator of steel pipe and TIC is experienced in pipe installation in mountain terrain. Based on the figures developed by WRC Staff and that received from the above two companies, we have estimated the construction cost of the siphon crossing (6 feet in diameter and 64,300 feet long) to be $43.9 million. This figure includes 25°,6 contingencies plus an additional 15% for engineering, legal and administration fees. The cost figure published by the Authority in the final report for the same siphon including 25% contingencies plus 15ry for engineering, lega], and administrative fee is $168.6 million. This figure is over 3.8 times the figure developed by WRC. Clearly an error was made by the Authority in estimating the cost of the subject siphon for the Union Park Project. We brought the matter to the Authority's attention before the final report for the subject study was published. However, our input was ignored and the erroneous figures were published in the final report. Our elected officials and the public deserves facts that could be used as basis for making sound decisions that would in turn be reflected in developing cost effective water projects in Colorado. Anything less would be of a great disservice to the ultimate water user in Colorado who will bear the brunt of paying for the extra costs with their .hard earned tax dollars. We will await your response to the contents of this letter. If we can be of help to you and your staff, please let me know. Thank you. Very truly yours, WRC ENGINEERING, INC. .C .~ti1 A. S. Andrews, P.E. President ASA/ j ed cc: Commission Tom Eggert / Arapahoe County h1r. Russ Duree / Gunnison Mr. Robert F. T. Krassa Mr. Paul Zilis Mr. Brent Uilenberg / USBR ~I~-~URA~ E~ERGV RES®URCES CCNIP/~~V P. O. Box 567 ~ Palmer Lake, Colorado 80133 ~ (719)481-2003 ~ FAX (119) 481-4013 September 14, 1989 Councilmembers and Councilmember Candidates City of Aurora 1470 South Havana Street Aurora, Colorado 80013 Dear Councilmembers and Candidates: The time seems overdue for the City of Aurora and Arapahoe County to start cooperating on development of the vast surplus flood waters of the untapped Gunnison Basin. As each of you may or may not know, Aurora and Arapahoe are actively competing in ~vater court for the same Gunnison waters. Our company and Arapahoe have also initiated a major civil complaint against Aurora over the competing Union Park and Collegiate Range development alternatives. The expected three week trial is now set for December 4th, 1989 in Gunnison District Court. The cost of these major legal actions is rapidly becoming astronomical, and we sincerely believe this expenditure is completely unnecessary and not in the public's interest. The enclosed material briefly describes the technical, legal, environmental, and economic advantages of Arapahoe's Union Park Project, which is designed to maximize benefits for all concerned, including Metro Denver and the West Slope. To avoid respectfully partners in a environmental slopes. continued major waste of public resources, we suggest Aurora and Arapahoe take the lead as equal cooperative Metro Denver effort to maximize the and economic benefits of the Gunnison for both Sincerel ,, Allen D. (Dave) Miller President ADM/bm cc: Arapahoe County Enclosures April 3, 1989 ' TIIE GUNNISON ALTERNATIVES EPA's farsighted veto' of Two Eorks Dam is certain to focus Colorado's attention on the vast surplus flood flows of the overlooked Gunnison Basin. Colorado is entitled to these unallocated flows under the Colorado River Compact, but this valuable untapped water resource is curre~ltly being lost to the down river states. The two competing Gunnison diversion alternatives for Metro Denver are Arapahoe County's Union Park Project and Aurora's Collegiate Range Project. The following briefly explains why Collegiate is not feasible, ~ahile Union Park is Colorado's grater project for the 21st Century: 1. Collegiate's constant flow diversion from above Taylor Park Reservoir would directly conflict with the operation of Union Park's original 1982 pos~~er decree. This decree gives Arapahoe County the right to fill and refill Union Park Reservoir from Taylor during flood periods to enhance ti4est Slope power, fish, and recreation flows during multi-year droughts. 2. Collegiate is only a partial water supply concept, as it depends on a Two forks type Fast Slope reservoir for multi-year storage necessary to increase Aurora's safe annual yield. Gwen if Two forks were built, its cyclic storage would be fully committed to Upper Colorado and South Platte waters. 3. Collegiate's small collection reservoir and low volume siphon would worsen South Platte flood conditions and increase Taylor Reservoir fluctuations. 'Phis is because it must divert continuously without regard to high and low flow conditions on either slope. Tn contrast, Union Park's high volume siphon and massive storage on the Continental Divide can be flexibly managed to lesson the impact of flooding and droughts on both slopes. 4. Collegiate's necessary replacement reservoir on the last River at Almost would inundate a state fish hatchery, major high~~~ay, ranchi-ig area, and winter habitat for deer and big horn sheep. The inundation impact of Union Park's unique, off-river, remote, sage covered site can be more than offset by its flexible capability to enhance river environments and wetlands on both slopes during the damagi~ig dro~.rght periods. 5. Collegiate's total cost per acre foot ~f safe yield (includitzg carryover storage) would be substantially higher than `I't~o forks. The Two Iorks yield cost is almost double that of Union Parlc. 6. Pre-trial discovery is substantiating Arapahoe County's and Natural 1?nergy's 38 page civil complaint that Aurora improperly purchased its Collegiate concept from one of our company's founders. 7. Aurora was rushed by its c•~ater experts into a quick 1986 purchase of the incomplete Collegiate concept, without evaluating its operational feasibility, total system cost, environmental impact, and legal rights of others. If the Gunnison's wasted flood waters were properly utilized for urgently needed Colorado drought insurance, the demise of Two Forks mould not pose a threat to agricultural water on either slope. Allen D. (Dave) Miller, President Natural Energy Resources Company P.O. Rox 567, Palmer Lake, CO. 80133 (719)481-2003, 1'AY (719)481-4013 Caryn ®stergard I~eevy, I'h.I~. AUDIOL(X;ICAI- CONSULTANTS 525 Forest Streer [~em~er, Colorado 80320 ~~°3> ;2'-077 REC'~ SEP 2 81989 September 25, 1989 Vail Town Council: It has come to our attention that the Vail Town Council claims to have never received a complaint about the snowcat and snowmobile traffic on West Forest Road. As a new resident, I find that almost impossible to believe unless things changed drastically in 1989 when we purchased our property at 736 Forest Road. We closed in November and spent our first evening there sometime that month. We were shocked by the first snowcat -- the combination of the vibration, noise and flashing lights gives one the impression that you have a Heliport on your patio. The snowmobiles are even worse in terms of noise level and speed of travel. At a shift change, the vehicles may come 10 in a row, and there is rarely a 15 minute interval in any 24 hour period that a snowcat or a snowmobile does not roar by. Aesthetics aside, the worst problem is that you cannot sleep. Our baby was 6 months old when we moved in, and he woke up screaming every time a snowcat or a snowmobile went by during the night. Needless to say, our first night in our "dream vacation home" was one of many tears and no sleep. The issue of safely is another problem. I believe you run the snowcats all night to have less chance of an accident with a skier on the slopes during the day. But what about auto and pedestrian traffic on Forest Road? A tragic vehicle/pedestrian accident is a very foreseeable hazard, given the volume of snow vehicles and skiers, tourists, and children on the street both day and night. Of course Vail Associates would bear the brunt of the expense and bad publicity of such a suit, but the tragedy would be on everyone's conscience. So, we have a ski resort property that cannot be enjoyed by us nor rented during the winter months because of aesthetic, economic and legal liability reasons. But wait, we are getting out of the city and its pollution, aren't we? What's all this complaining about a little lost sleep and fear of children being crushed by multi-ton vehicles traveling on a narrow street? Well, it seems that the diesel exhaust that these vehicles are blowing into Vail Town Council September 25, 1989 Page Two my living room 24 hours a day, 7 months a year, is seriously compromising my family's health. Talk about SWAMP LAND IN FLORIDA!!! There is another dimension to this issue that is worthy of your consideration. I don't have to tell you what a mess these vehicles make on the street and at the point of entry to the mountain under the gondola. This is the first area seen by new skiers riding the gondola and by visitors to Lionshead shops and restaurants. It's not a pretty postcard! Remember, you don't get a second chance to make a first impression. When we purchased our home, we had intended to immediately make improvements to the outside appearance of the structure and to do considerable landscaping. These projects have been deferred indefinitely as we have come to realize that we couldn't give this property away now that everyone is becoming aware of the noise and pollution problems (the diesel exhaust is also very hard on new landscaping). It occurred to me that other residents have made similar decisions to pass on improvements. My point is that I don't think Vail can afford to create a Ghetto in such a visible portion of her real estate. We have been advised to sue the selling agent for lack of disclosure and Vail Associates for loss of rights to "quiet enjoyment" of and SAFE access to our home. Such things are costly, time consuming and involve a lot of bad publicity. I still find it hard to believe the problem exists at all and there isn't a more logical place for these vehicles to be. Our newly-formed Homeowner's Association looks forward to hearing from you and welcomes an opportunity to speak to the council. I also extend an invitation to anyone who would like to spend a winter evening sitting in my noisy living room to see for themselves what we are talking about. Sincerely, L - G~,~ ~ ` / Caryn and Brian Deevy cc: Vail Associates Eagle County and Denver Assessors Offices Forest Road Homeowner's Association Public Works: Mr. Pete Burnett Town Manager: Mr. Ron Phillips r , '~ e~GENDA REGUT~R MEETING VAIL P~ETROPOLITAN RECREATION DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS MOATDAY, AUGUST 28, 1989, 3:00 PM - KRUEGER ROOM 1. Call to order - 3x00 PM 1 min 2. Approval of Minutes, August 9, 1989 5 min (see attached) 3. Employee Plus Program - Barb Masoner 20 min (see attached) 4. Financial Report - Brian Jones 15 min (see attached) 5. Swimming Pool Update - Morter/carton 20 min 6. EuroFair, 1990 - John Horncates 10 min 7. Bill Wright - Final Tennis Report 20 min 8. Golf Sub Committee Report - Dodson 15 min (see attached report) 9. Set date for bid approval on the FP tennis facility 8 min 10. Approval of landscaping plan for 10 min E. B. Chester property 11. Approval of PO°s 5 min 12. Adjournment: Attachmentso Minutes 8/9/89 Employee Plus Program Financial Report Golf Sub Committee l -~ AGEATDA REGULAR IrIEETI~dG VAIL PSETROPOLITAId RECREATIOPd DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS 1~ONDAX, AUGUST 28a 1989 - KRUEGER ROOPq EXECUTIVE SESSION - 2:30 PM 1. Swimming Pool 30 min RDC~JIAR M~'I'I~JG ~IAII, A3UIl~OI~LI'II~Ri 'I~d DIS'II2ICT AUGUST 9, 1989 A ~~~ Gail Molloy, Ken Wilson, George Knox, Merv Lapin P ~~: Tim Garton ~~ ~: Pat Ood-son, Sian Jones, Tin Salasky ~~ ~ ~~ The meeting was called to order at 3:05 PM. ~ OF : Lapin stated "Only 1 correction on the swimmirx~ pool -I don't believe that I said I want to model it after Hyland Hills.°1 Lapin made a motion to approve the July 24, 1989 minutes with the above correction, second by Wilson, Passed unanimously. 1988 AUDIT : See attached final audit report. Peron and Sipp perform the annual audit report for VMF2D. Jerry McMahon joins the meeting. He stated there were no violations of the Colorado Statutes to report, VMF2D is in goal financial cor~ition and the debt of VMRD is declining rather rapidly. Knox joins the meeting. ~P~ eked about the long term liabilities - general obligation bonds payable through 1991 - $60,000 for the next 3 years. Can they be paid in advance? McMahon said they could be prepaid, but it makes no sense to do so. Wilson asked about the foot notes on the cash in/cash out at the tennis courts and Golf Course. Dodson stated Brian Jones has corrected these steps with Kathy Payne at the Tennis Shop. Golf is a little different matter in reconciling the starter sheets to the cash sheets every day. Thompson explained last year the starter sheets were used to reconcile to the cash register tape -this was very difficult as it was all done in pencil with several erasures __and another problem is when reconciling, if the work does not match, it simply can be erased and made to match. The same person filling out the sheets was reconciling the cash. If a different person could reconcile there would be better control. The golf course has correct~i this by insuring a cash register ticket that has to be given to the starter - whi.ch is an added control. N~ahon suggested the best method is to work from the lowest level of data to reconcile, but realizes the starter sheet is a very difficult to work from. Thca~~~son suggested strongly enforcing that all play is rung up in the cash register and the starter has to have a cash register receipt before sending a player out. `This would be an acceptable accotu~ting pr~ooedure. Lapin made a motion no golfer is to play golf unless they give a cash register receipt to the starter, if starter does not ask for receipt it is a firing offense, second by Knox, passed unanimously. Wilson wants the receipt to be initialed by the starter and the player must keep the receipt on his/her person while playing golf. McMahon pointed out the restaurant lease stated their financial report must be prepared by a CPA. It was prepared by a public accountant arx3 Md~ahon feels this is adequate and suggested the board change the lease to reflect a public accountant. The board stated a report prepared by an accountant is acceptable and to amend the lease. Knox moved to accept the 1988 audit, second by Wilson, passed urtianimously. DOBSCd~I ARF3~ SUB ~II'I*I~ ~: Zbm Salasky joins the meeting at 3:30 PM. Tcan stated United Airlines is showing in its entirety Symphony of Sports on their flights. Salasky stated the Arena sub cc~nittee had their monthly meeting yeste..rc3ay and he wants to pass along high lights of the meeting. VRA has approached Dobson and wants to know the availability of DIA. 'They are putting together a "Meeting Planner Chide" that will go to national organizations in an effort to attract more conventions to Vail. Before they market they need Dobson's dates. Salasky told VRA the DIA would welcome any gro~~s they can bring in for the months of April, May, September and October - Vail's shoulder season. ~e other months at the DIA are booked with the ongoing oca~auiity Programs and in the s-~m~x there is the s-~nmrer skating school which we do not want to disrupt. Weekends are available during summer. In the meeting planner guide, pictures and information on the DIA would be included. Scheduling priorities at DIA: Zhis is becoming more and more of an issue within the unity because cc~rnsnity programs and special events are in cc~etition for the same time. 'There was a lengthly discussion, but no explicit direction was reached on haw to proceed. Hopefully as VMRD continues to work on its master plan and staff works through issues, some clear direction will be forthccaning. Because of this scheduling problem Salasky was asked by the Board to look into a second ice surface to alleviate the pres_s-ure on the DIA. He was to talk to a planner aril find out what questions needed answered in a study. Salasky has talJced to Jamar, Lapin, Dodson and held various meetings. Jamar is here today to give a proposal to the Board on a study of a second ice surface. Jamar joins the meeting 3:34 FTC! See attached Jamar proposal. Jamar gave the boatz3 a pro~sal that will research the suitability of 4 possible sites for a second ice surface - Golden Peak tennis courts, East side of DIA, West side of DIA and above Lsonshead Parking structure. This is a simple proposal analyzing the suitability of these 4 sites. During a sub oamznittee meeting the utilization of Dobson as a multi purpose facility vs. ice area came up. The sub ccmnnittee and Jamar felt the study needs to be expar~ied from just looking at the suitability of the 4 sites to studying DIA's future uses. -Put list together on DIA's ice related conflicts, conflicts with other groi.zps and events people can foresee hap~.ning at DIA "What grot~s can be attracted to DIR in the Vail market (Quayle or VRA people can tell us this) -i~lhat improvements need to be made to DIA - 1 ic~tir~ flooring etc - (azrhitects can answer this) Jamar feels this is the right way to conduct this study but realizes VMFtD has a limited baxlget. It will cost $20,000 to do this study and $5,000 to research the 4 sites. Knox asked if Jamar was saying that it mi.c~t ~ best to push all the ice related events into DIR and build another facility? Lapin wants this clarified too. The sub committee is not talking about doing that. Lapin does not want to look at this as an option. The supposition Lapin is working on is DIA could be charx3ed in away so it had the capability of doing 80% of what the Congress Hall was scheduled to do - or what people wanted it to do on a less grar~liose scale, Lapin stated he wants to convert the DIA so it could do 80$ of the thirx~s the Congress Hall could do - 80$ is an arbitrary figure because he went tlurough the Congress Hall study and as he read through them a majority of the items could }~ done by DIA by having scxne convertibility. TKolloy stated not only are we looking at building a separate ice surface, but looking at upgrading the DIA. Lapin said "right we can°t do one without the other, If we were simply to build a second roe surface and not change DIA, the economics just are not there -there are demands 30 or 40 times per year for special events." Molloy asked if this project takes $1,000,000 is VMRD taking on too much at this time with the swimming pool. Lapin said "Yes and No - the problem is w+e have got to axne to closure on the discussion of wheather the DIA remains a multi use facility or remains an ice facility. 'Ib come to that conclusion we have to know what has to be done to it so it can effectively be a multi use facility and to truly make it work will require 2 to 3 million dollars of work (I am picking nwmbers frcen the air) on DIA." Molloy needs to know if VMRD can afford both the ice arena and the swimming pool. Lapin stated "It would not be prudent to at the same time do a (in my opinion) do a swimming pool with all the risk inherent in an aquatic center with the potential down side of anywhere from $600,000 to 1 million dollars a year and at the same time take on a second ice surface project, but if we did the aquatic center and if there was not that kiwi of dawn side and in fact it worked and all the projections were fine -then you would." _ Molloy arxi Knox stated they already know the DIA can be used as a multi pt~pose facility for 2 to 3 million renovation and feel its not necessary to pay for a study to tell them this. Knox stated he personally would like to see the secorr3 ice surface at the golf course and Lapin said we may end up going there because of the control VMRD has on that land. Dodson stated the driving range is not suitable for a year rau~d ice surface. Lapin stated part of the justification of building the second ice surface is what are we going to do with Dobson - so the second part of the study is going to be required at some point. Dodson stated the cost of the ,Tamar study would not be in the operating budget, but would have to ccsne from the fund balance - VMRD would have to reduce the fund balance by $5,000. Lapin made a motion to spend a figure not to exceed $5,000 for a study that will research the 4 locations of a second ice surface, sccorr3 by Knox, pa.~sed unanimously. SKI (ADDI~'IONAL~ I'I~ : Eric Steinberg joins the meeting 4:09 PM. Dodson stated in 1987 and 1988 Ski Club Vail was changed the rate of $850 for the arena. Ski Club Vail is a non profit grog which qualified for the DIA'S non profit rate of $1,200. Steinberg stated in 1988 they collected $14,600 in sales tax for the TOV and paid $850 per day rent on the Arena. He questions why the rent has gone to $1,200 ar~i does it actually cost $1,200 per day to run the arena. The Board indicated to Steinberg the a rena co sts A?JRE per day to run than the $1,200, they do not r~eive any sales tax money - it all goes to the TOV and they treat all ran profits grot~s the same - $1,200 par day. The Board declined to lower the rate of $1,200 for Ski Club Vail. BOO'IIi C~~ LAID - CIDI~'e Dodson stated he has researched the Vail Valley 13th Filing, tract A, 13 acres and the land is owned by the TOV. Satterstresn estimated a 9 hole par 3 golf course could possibly ~ built on this amount of land along with a parking lot and starter house. He would need to do scene research to give a good answer. Merv stated his reaon for researching this land is to find more arxi different activities for people to do while visiting Vail. Dodson asked for direction on how far he should proceed on this project . The Board wants him to conduct a title search, determine access, where located and have Satoh find out what could be put on the available land. SWIMMIZdG POOL REPOKPe Dodson handed out a memo from Phillips (see attached) . Item #4 stated the TC feels the swimming pool conq~lex should stand on its own, and all costs be included in the bond issue. This includes parking, landscaping and any other costs associated with the swimming pool. Dodson stated there are 4 times a bond election can be held. They are the first Tuesday after the first Monday in October, DecelnbPx, February and May. The Board had talked about a bond election in fir. I feel that may be too quick, but would like to wait until Tim returns. Lapin wanted to know how much lead time is needed prior to a bond election. Dodson said we need a miniirnun of two months and ideally three months would be better to start the entire process and we are at the two month time Period now. Lapin asked if everyone is comfortable with what we are going to the public with? Does everyone understand the proposal and details? The demographics? Wilson said we just added a lot of money to the pot when you are talking about parking and landscaping. Wilson said the pool is up to 6 millions. Wilson and Molloy wanted to know why the TOV turned down the request on the CIP. Dodson stated they wanted the swimming pool to go before the voters reflecting the whole package. Lapin indicated the TOV has more requests than money available from the real estate transfer tax fund. Dodson stated he has a letter fran Boetcher & Co. stating after checking with Mooney IriVestors Service, there is no reason the VMRD could not get the same rating as the TOV and thought we could obtain an 'A° rating for a general obligation bond. The Bond issue is definitely VMRD's issue; the TOV will not get involved in the bond issue - it would be 100$ VMf2D' s . Steve Connolly from the audience asked of Ken Wilson if he wants this project built? George Knox stated yes, he is. Wilson stated "I am not saying weather it is good or bad, aver the past years petitions have circulated, they originally approached the Town Council, thought it was great, the TC put it into our laps and wee have done studies regarding swinuning cai~lexes and all wee are trying to do is get it to the point that a decision can be made by the voters." Molloy explained to Connolly a series of public meeting will be held to educate the public on the swin¢ning cca~lex prior to the borr3 election. Connolly asked if the east softball field is still scheduled to be removed by this project. Lapin stated on the master plan of the T0~7 is a plan that will eventually eliminate that field with a proposed aquatic center. Whether that ends up being an aquatic center or equestrian center - a building is proposed there. That is according to the master plan, but the master plan can always be changed. Conolly asked if there will be another field put in same place. Lapin stated the Tt7V has been looking at buying additional land dawn valley - at Edwards is 100 acres - ar~d that is where additional fields would go. Also the Town is looking at putting a softball field on the lower benr-h of Donovan Park. Dodson stated who can vote in the bond election. A qualified elector is a person who is registered to vote in Colorado and one who has been a resident of the District for not less than 32 days prior to the election or who or whose spcx~se awns taxable real or personal property within the buries of the District or is obligated to pay taxes under a contract to gur~cha_se property situated within the District boiu~daries. Molloy asked if it will be up to Tim when the bond election is held. Dodson stated he is not saying it is up to Garton, but I think in respec,-t for Tim and his interest in the swimming pool that it probably should be something he should be present for when the vote is being taken. Molloy is concerned two months is not enot~ time. Dodson indicated several public meetings are scheduled as well as meeting with the Town Council. His feeling is that it is too quick. 'There is a gr~ who wants to do a phone campaign and a register to vote campaign. Doug Thompson asked, to date, how much money has been spent on the pool project. Dodson said the task force spent $1,300, BBC did a feasibility study for approximately $10,000 and the latest cost of design phase is $30,000. Thca~pson wanted to know what the building looks like. Dodson said approximately the end of August the building can be viewed via sketches and a model. The architect would be finished at that timo. POLSC`Y o Dodson said he is seeking boan~i approval on his memo included in the packet. Lapin stated he wants "pre apprweci" inserted into the policy - "Staff will have the right to negotiate or issue axis based on the aforementioned criteria with a full 'pre approves' disclosure to the board - in other words I don't want to know about it after the fact." Dodson stated we had talk~i about that before and you said you did not really care as long as you got notice before or after the fact. Lapin stated 01I am not concerned about things like concerts at Dobson when it is after the fact - but I will be watching the front door and their name had better be on the disclosure afterwards, because if I see staff letting people in and the name is not on the list, as far as I am concerned it is basis for dismissal . " Iapin and Dodson agreed pre approval will not be a problem for Program fees. I~pin made a motion to approve the cca~linentary policy dated July 31, 1989 be approved with this amer~,nt - Staff will have the right to negotiate or issue ocx~~s based on the aforementioned criteria with a full disclosure to the board "and pre approval of any Program cons.", second by Knox, passed unanimously. (see attached revised memo) . C~ ~ See attached Fillips memo. Dodson stag he attended the TC work session yesterday and requested the C'IP projects of VMF2D be considered. The items he addressed was the Rink-tex flooring, Building permit fees for Ford Park Tesinis project, fibber matting at the DIA and the swimming pool ccenplex. F3~illips memo recaps the ~ response to these items. Phillips also stated to DocLson the Ford Park sprinkler system would be upgraded over the next few years. Wilson had strong feeling that the 'IC7V should have paid for the $40,000 landscaping proposed around the tennis facility. In the future when any item goes More the 'PC the Board wants the Chairman or Boan~3 members to be present and not have Pat Dodson do the presentation. ~~~ a Hot S~urnner Ni ts: Ceil explained the banner saying Vail Metropolitan Recreation District will ~ put up next year. The banner cx~nany is so far behir~i this year she would not have been able to receive the banner until the final event and since she was instructed to cast money frcan her budget, this item made ser~se to cut. Golf Revenue: Dodson mead the July and YTD golf revenue to the board (see attached sheet). Trout Pond: Lapin asked if we had one. Dodson stated yes at Big Horn (no jurisdiction) and the 17th golf at Golf Course (no parking). Lapin wants this project looked into - possible combine efforts with the Nature Center. 'Dennis Court Revenue/Expenditure Report: See attached. Lapin stated the purpose of this report is to help the board make good decisions for next years budget. Budget Calendar Dodson handed out the budget cales~dar for 1990 (see attached). Runnir~g Track: Dodson stated there was $1,000 donated for sod and top soil. He spoke to Matt Carpenter arx~ asked him to get on with the project. Krueger has pitched in and done a lot of work. The track will be sod and the berm seeded. APPROVAL OF POs: Board wants to know why the podium built by Steve Arnett for the golf course cost $1,100 - Dodson will inquire. Knox moved to approve the purchase orders as presented, second by Wilson, passed unanimously. ADJUJRId~'lf~ND: Meeting adjourned at 5:50 PM Gail Molloy, Secretary F? E R~ O R A N D U I~ TOo VMI2D Board Members FROMe Barb Masoner, Joanne l~attio Eathy Payne, Tom Salasky DATEo August, 1989 REo Employee Plus Program Earlier this month an employee sub committee met to discuss a VP2RD employee recognition program o The purpose of the meeting was to develop a program that would reward outstanding employees and promote positive employee relations. An organization°s most important resource is its employees. Supporting and rewarding employees sets the tone for how they will interact with the customer/guest. It also helps to secure top notch employees. Examples in Vail illustrating this concept includee V.Ao°s Time-And-A-Half Pay for Seasonals on Holidays; The Town of Vail°s Employees Bonus Program; smaller businesses° Employee of the F~onth recognition programs, and End of the Season Parties. Overland and Express reward their employees with trips, dinners, cash bonuses (high producers), and management taking over shifts. The Mug Shop and Pizza Bakery offer cash incentives. Some ideas The Committee came up with, to enhance V1-iRD ° s working environment, includee 1. EMPLOYEE-OF-THE-MONTHe Thi their peers. A small cash added incentive for doing overseen by Supervisors. 2. ELIP~IPIATE THE $ V1hlKD EMPLOYEES . Tl District and would in 1988. s program recognizes employees by award of, perhaps, $25.00, is an a GREAT job. This program would be 5.00 GOLF/TENNIS PASS FEE ASSESSED is would not be a direct cost to the provide an added incentive that was free 3. HOLIDAY PAY FOR SEASONALSe When Vail°s numbers peak and when facilities are at capacity, staff must excell. What better way to reward good employees and add incentive for them to return. 4. END OF SEASON CELEBRATIONe A way to thank the staff after the Summer and Winter Seasons. Awards could be given to outstanding employees who made °°the ciifference.°0 This would establish a special tradition similar to TOV°s Picnic and Christmas Party. (2) 5. BUDGET $50.00 PER EMPLOYEE IN EACH INDIVIDUAL BUDGET. This money would be used by the Supervisor to reward excellent employee behavior. Vail Associates adopted this program and it has been an excellent staff booster. 6. ON THE SPOT RECOGNITION BY THE SUPERVISORS. Allow the Supervisor to reward the staff after a rough week (i.e. a Pizza Party). This allows the Supervisors to motivate for a minimal price. 7. BOARD MEMBER APPEARANCE DURING PROGRAMS: The employees would receive a sense of importance, seeing that Board members are interested in their programs. The Board would in turn receive a better understanding of the overall department. These are just a few suggested recommendations. Being successful business people you, no doubt, have other ideas on inspiring staff. Please let us know your feelings. 1989 REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES BUDGET REVISIONS AND RECONCILIATIONS PG i Vail Metropolitan Recreation District 1989 Revenues and Expenditures Budget ORIGINAL CONSOLIDATED REVISED 1989 BUDGET 1989 1989 BUDGET 1989 AFTER BUDGET (AS OF 4/89) BUDGET CUTBACKS Golf Revenues Golf passes 135,750 135,750 135,750 135,750 Green fees 663,400 663,400 663,400 663,400 Clubhouse tease 33,000 33,000 33,000 33,000 Net Range 12,000 12,000 12,000 12,000 Cart rentals 161,000 161,000 161,000 161,000 Total Revenue 1,005,150 1,005,150 1,005,150 1,005,150 Golf Expenses Golf Course Maintenance 292,041 292,041 305,233 293,559 Equipment Maintenance 43,700 43,700 43,700 43,700 Clubhouse Operations 187,187 187,187 188,255 185,846 Starter House 5,915 5,915 3,215 2,015 Carts 36,100 36,100 1,100 1,100 Total Expenses 564,943 564,943 541,503 526,220 Golf Revenue Over (Under) 440,207 440,207 463,647 .478,930 Expenses ---------------- ---------------- ------------ Tennis Revenue 30,800 30,800 30,800 30,800 Tennis Expenses 95,019 95,019 87,019 84,296 Tennis Revenue Over (Under) Expenses (64,219) (64,219) (56,219) (53,496) Ice Arena Revenues 465,650 497,030 450,630 463,130 Ice Arena Expenses 609,493 660,218 591,692 569,534 ]ce Arena Revenue Over (Under) Expenses (143,843) ---------------- ---------------- (163,188) ---------------- ---------------- (141,062) -------------- -------------- (106,404) -------------- -------------- Gen Rec Revenues 288,875 242,720 242,720 253,560 Gen Rec Expenses 391,850 391,850 435,002 495,578 General Rec Revenue Over (Under) Expenses (102,975) ---------------- ---------------- (149,130) ---------------- ---------------- (192,282) -------------- -------------- (242,018) -------------- -------------- e PG ~ ORIGINAL CONSOLIDATED REVISED REVISED 1989 1989 1989 1989 BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET Gen Rec Admin (TOV) 229,165 VMRD Administration 202,323 430,339 484,583 418,630 Total Operating Revenue Over (Under) Expenses (302,318) (366,669) (410,499) (341,618) Non Operating Revenue Interest Income 5,600 5,600 5,600 5,600 Town of Vail Contract 476,058 522,033 527,433 527,433 Property taxes & specific 432,000 432,000 432,000 432,000 Lottery proceeds 8,270 8,270 8,270 8,270 P9isc Revenue 131,000 131,000 16,000 16,000 1,052,928 1,098,903 989,303 989,303 Non Operating Expenses Debt Service 517,874 517,874 517,874 517,874 P9isc Expenses 517,874 517,874 517,874 517,874 Net Non Operating Revenue 535,054 581,029 471,429 471,429 Capital Projects Loan Proceeds-tennis constr 0 0 250,000 250,000 Capital Outlay Golf Course Improvements 22,000 22,000 22,000 12,000 Tennis Courts 200,000 200,000 461,015 450,000 Running Track 3,000 3 000 Golf Carts-Cap Res Accrual 35,000 35,000 Dobson/2amboni, Ref rig Cap Res 28,396 28,396 222,000 222,000 549,411 528,396 Total Capital Outlay 222,000 222,000 299,411 278,396 Total Revenue Over (Under) Expenses 10,736 (7,640) (238,481) (148,585) Beginning Fund Balance 1/1/89 246,414 246,414 246,414 246,414 Budgeted Fund Balance 12/31/89 257,150 238,774 7,933 97,829 P i~ RECONCILIATION OF ORIGINAL TO 4/89 BUDGET Original Budget: (taking TOV and VMRD recreation together) (Revenue over Expenses) $10,736 Less Additional Budgeted Expenses: - Dobson Ice Arena $50,725 ($50,725) Less Reduction in Budgeted Revenue: - VMRD Management Fees (Under General Recreation) $36,414 - Misc. General Recreation Revenue 9,741 ($46,155) Plus Additional Budgeted Revenue: - Additional one time TOV payment $45,975 - Dobson Ice Arena Revenue 31,380 $77,355 Plus Reduction in Budgeted Expenses: - Gen. Recreation Administration $ 1,149 $ 1,149 Consolidated 4/89 Budget - Revenues Under Expenditures ($ 7,640) RECONCILIATIOYd OF 4/89 BUDGET TO REVISED BUDGET P~'~ Consolidated 4/89 Budget Revenue under Expenses ~($ 7,640)' Less Additional Budgeted Expensese - Capital Reserve - Ice Arena $ 28,396 - Additional Professional Fees (Legal, Swimming Pool, Bus Plan...) 40,000 - Additional Worker°s Comp. Premium 23,261 - Running Track 3,000 - Additional VMRD Admin. Salary/Benefits 27,117 - Additional VMRD Administrative Cont. Labor 2,400 - Additional Employee Health Insur. Premium 30,779 - Additional Tennis Courts Construction costs funded from Cur Income 11,015 - One Time anticipated Administrative Expenses included in TOV payment ($10,830- VMRD Admin, 8,000 - July 4th Events) 18,830 ($184,798) Less Reduction in Budgeted Revenue: - VA Contribution to Tennis Court Construction (Recognized in 1988) $125,000 - Reduction in Figure Skating School revenue in excess of reduction in expenditures. $ 9,600 ($134,600) Plus Revised Budgeted Savings> - General Liability/Property Insurance Dobson Ice Arena $ 42,000 - Management Fees (VMRD) 20,457 - Repair and Maintenance - Starter House 2,700 - Tennis Court Repair and Maintenance 8,000 $ 73,157 Plus Additional Budgeted Revenue: - TOV Payment ($19,500 One Time Cap Reserve Payment Less 14,100 Coors Classic) $ 5,400 - Miscellaneous Revenue (Originally Under General Recreation - Never Entered 10,000 into System) $ 15,400 Revised Budget -Revenues under Expenditures ($238,481) * Not equal to Original Budgeted Revenue Under Expenses figure previously presented on financial reports. The original figure was never reconciled to the general ledger. RECONCILIATION OF REVISED BUDGET TO REVISED BUDGET - AFTER CUTBACKS Revised Budget before Cutbacks Less Additional Budgeted Expenses: - General Liability expenses paid by TOV for 1/89 - 6/89 $ 19,200 - Professional fees - for second ice surface study $ 5,000 Plus Reduction in Budget Expenses: - Reduction in tennis court construction costs funded from operating income $ 11,015 - VMRD Administrative expenses 8,606 - Health Insurance premiums (correction) 9,089 - Golf Course and Clubhouse 5,900 - Golf Course starter house 1,200 - Tennis Operations 4,600 - Dobson Ice Arena 17,696 - General Recreation - Ceil's Programs: Red Sandstone School, Gymnastics, Special Events, Potpourri, etc.... 2,125 - General Recreation - Barb's Programs: Volleyball, Soccer, Softball, Tournaments, etc.... 4,600 - Golf Course Maintenance/Improvements 20,000 - Youth Center 3,925 - Nature Center 2,000 Plus Additional Budgeted Revenue: - Dobson Ice Arena - General Recreation (Ceil's) - General Recreation (Barb's) $ 12,500 8,040 2,800 PG 5 -- ($238,481) ($ 24,200) $ 93,979 $ 23,340 Revised Budget after Cutbacks ($148,585) P 6 c~ RECONCILIATIOYd OF ORIGIYdAI, BUDGET TO REVISED BUDGET - I,IYdE ITEAiS Tot~n of Vail Contracto $476,058 TOV Subsidy-Orig. Bugt 45,975 Additional TOV payment 19,500 One Time Capital Res. pmt (14,100) Coors Classic $527,433 Golf Course l~aintenancee $292,041 2,500 552 8,466 (10,000) $293,559 Original Budget Professional Fees Health Insurance Worker's Compensation Salaries Cutback Clubhouse Operationso $187,187 Original Budget (1,208) Health Insurance 5,785 Worker's Compensation (5,900) Budget Cutbacks $185,864 Starter Housee $ 5,915 Original Budget (2,700) Repairs and Maintenance (1,200) Budget Cutbacks $ 2,015 Cartse $ 36,100 Original Budget (35,000) Capital Reserve $ 1, 100 Tennis Expensesa $ 95,019 Original Budget (4,600) Budget Cutbacks 1,877 Worker's Compensation (8,000) Repair $ 84,296 P~iscellaneous Revenuea $131,000 Original Budget (125,000) VA Payment - Tennis Courts (received and recognized in 1988) 10,000 Originally under General Recreation revenue; Moved to Miscellaneous. $ 16,000 Ice Arena Revenuee $465,650 Original Budget 31,380 Additional Anticipated Special Event Revenue 2,500 Special Event 10,000 Additional Misc Rev. (46,400) Figure Skating Revenue $463,130 (Contracted out) p~ ~ Ice Arena Expenses: $609,493 Original Budget 50,725 Additional Anticipated Special Event Expenses (42,000) Insurance (Included in VMRD Administration) (36,800) Reduced Expenditures associated with con- tracting out Fig Skating (18,825) Budget Cutbacks (2,416) Health Insurance 1,129 Medicare 8,228 Allocated Workers Comp. $569,534 General Recreation Revenues: $288,875 (36,414) 8,040 2,800 (10,000) 259 $253,560 General Recreation Expenses: $391,850 8,000 (2 , 000) (3, 925 ~2, 125) ~4, 600) 75,883 10,448 22,047 $495,578 VMRD Administration: $431,488 (1,149) 40,000 (75,883) 19,200 (10,700) 5,000 2,094 10,830 2,400 (20,457) 27,117 (2,500) 2,733 (11,543) $418,630 Original Budget VMRD Management Fee Additional Rev. (Ceil) Additional Rev. (Barb) Moved to Misc. Revenue Entry Error Original Budget July 4th Events Budget Cutbacks Na Cntr. Budget Cutbacks Y. Cntr. Budget Cutbacks (Ceil) Budget Cutbacks (Barb) Reallocation of Salary/ Benefit from VMRD admin. Allocated Workers Comp. Allocated Health Ins. .Original Budget Reduction in Budgeted Expenses (Mgmt. Fees) Professional Fees Allocated Salary/Benefit to General Recreation Additional G/L Insurance pd by TOV for 1/89-6/89 Budget Cutbacks Professional Fees - 2nd Ice Surface Study Additional Medicare Additional Expenses Included in TOV Payment Contract Labor VMRD Management Fees Additional Salary/Benefit Professional Development Additional Health Insur. Allocated Workers Comp. Golf Course %mprovementso Capital Reserve Accrualse Tennis Court Consta $ 22,000 Original Budget P ~ 10 000) Budget Cutbacks $ 100000 $ -0- Original Budget 35,000 Golf carts 28,396 D.A. Zamboni/Refrigerat. $163,396 $200,000 Original Budget 250,000 Expansion $450,000 MAIL METROPOLITAN RECREATION DISTRICT FINANCIAL REPORT FOR MONTH ENDING JULY 30p 1989 REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES BUDGET,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,PAGE 1-2 ACTUAL 7/30/89 SCHEDULE OF GENERAL RECREATION REVENUE & EXPENSES....PAGE 3 SCHEDULE OF ICE RINK REVENUES & EXPENSES t FOR PROGRAMS Sc ICE RENTALS,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,PAGE 4 SCHEDULE OF ICE RINK REVENUES & EXPENSES FOR SPECIAL EVENTS,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,;PAGE 5 CASH SUMMARY .........................................PAGE 6 Vail Metropolitan Recreation District pG 1 Revenues and Expenditures Budget-Ac tual Month Ending July 30, 1989 CUR PER CUR PER CUM YTD CUM YTD % of 1989 1989 ~' JULY 1988 JULY 1989 JULY 1988 JULY 1989 BUDGET BUDGET Golf Revenues Golf passes 5,153 8,985 110,138 105,225 77.5 135,750 Green fees 183,094 197,994 300,667 326,546 49.2 663,400 Cart rentals 45,799 43,040 84,697 85,438 53.1 161,000 Clubhouse lease 2,750 2,750 22,000 22,000 66.7 33,000 Net Range 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 25.0 12,000 Total Revenue 239,796 255,769 520,502 542,209 a' 53.9 1,005,150 Golf Expenses Golf Course Maintenance 34,975 32,877 163,976 181,976 62.0 293,559 Equipment Maintenance 2,934 9,254 17,629 40,346 92.3 43,700 Clubhouse Operations 37,523 29,389 98,695 103,346 55.6 185,846 Starter House 0 279 0 566 28.1 2,015 Carts 0 132 489 284 25.8 1,100 Total Expenses 75,432 71,931 280,789 326,518 ~ 62.0 526,220 Golf Revenue Over (Under) 164,364 183,838 239,713 215,691 45.0 478,930 Expenses ------------- ------------ ----- Tennis Revenue 11,148 10,790 20,624 19,819 64.3 30,800 Tennis Expenses 16,984 23,075 51,652 52,775 62.6 84,296 Tennis Revenue Over (Under) Expenses (5,836) (12,285) (31,028) (32,956) 61.6 (53,496) Ice Arena Revenues 39,068 35,235 190,173 267,207 57.7 463,130 Ice Arena Expenses 96,658 32,343 360,351 346,518 60.8 569,534 Ice Arena Revenue Over (Under) Expenses (57,590) 2,892 (170,178) (79,311) 74.5 (106,404) Gen Rec Revenues 73,228 58,448 188,434 183,217 72.3 253,560 Gen Rec Expenses 67,845 118,252 204,387 286,432 ~ 57.8 495,578 General Rec Revenue Over (Under) Expenses 5,383 ------------ ------------ (59,804) ------------- ------------- (15,953) ------------- ------------- (103,215) ------------ ------------ 42.6 -------- -------- (242,018) ---------- ---------- CUR PER CUR PER CUM YTD CUM YTD % of 1989 1989 JULY 1988 JULY 1989 JULY 1988 JULY 1989 BUDGET BUDGET VMRO Administration 46,174 8,932 250,112 204,0195 48.7 418,630 Total Operating Revenue Over (Under) Expenses 60,147 105,709 (227,558) (203,810) 59.7 (341,618) Non Operating Revenues Interest Income 1,617 4,196 5,427 16,252 290.2 5,600 Tewn of Vait Contract 0 0 0 203,593 38.6 527,433 Property taxes 8 specific 30,151 13,211 317,538 327,864 75.9 432,000 Lottery proceeds 0 0 312 0 0.0 8,270 F1isc Revenue 101 (826) 3,191 2,877 18.0 16,000 31,869 16,581 326,468 550,5860 55.7 989,303 Non Operating Expenses Debt Service 169,488 0 265,371 157,061 30.3 517,874 F1isc Expenses 0 0 0 1,200 169,488 0 265,371 158,261 30.6 517,874 ~ Net Non Operating Revenue (137,619) 16,581 61,097 392,325 30.3 471,429 Capital Projects Loan Proceeds tennis constr 250,000 Capital Outlay PG 2 Golf Course ]mprovements 21,629 1,128 138,729 4,931 41.1 12,000 Tennis Courts 0 8,557 0 23,532 5.2 450,000 Running Track 3,000 Golf Carts-Cap Res Accrual 3,000 21,000 60.0 35,000 Dobson-Zamb/Refrig Cap Res 742 24,690 86.9 28,396 Total Capital Outlay 21,629 13,427 138,729 74,153 26.6 278,396 Total Revenue Over (Under) Expenses (99,101) 108,863 (305,190) 114,362 -77.0 (148,585)8 Beginning Fund Balance 1/1/89 246,414 246,414 Ending Fund Balance 7/30/89 360,776 Budgeted Fund Balance 12/31/89 97,829 Schedule of 1989 General Rec Revenues & Expenses Month Ending July 30, 1989 --------- REVENUES --------- --------- EXPENSES -•------- PG 3 ACTUAL PERCENT ACTUAL PERCENT NET REV BUDGET Cum YTD YTD BUDGET Cum YTD YTD OR <LOSS> GEN REC PROGRAMS VOLLEYBALL TOURN 511,400 511,264 98.8 54,b00 59,521 207.0 51,743 SOFTBALL LEAGUES 523,900 522,290 93.3 525,255 516,949 67.1 85,341 SOFTBALL TOURNAMENT 518,100 58,916 49.3 57,820 51,171 15.0 57,745 SOFTBALL FIELD RENTALS 51,400 51,460 0.0 50 50 51,460 SOCCER LEAGUES 54,300 52,046 47.6 52,870 52,072 72.2 (526) SOCCER CAMP 563,700 561,830 97.1 557,900 539,625 68.4 522,205 LACROSSE CAMP 54,200 54,169 99.3 58,950 E1,186 13.3 52,983 FOOTBALL CAMP 54,000 5880 22.0 54,030 5800 19.9 880 BASKETBALL CAMP 51,200 5531 44.3 5800 5167 20.9 5364 VOLLEYBALL CAMP 52,000 50 0.0 51,650 50 0.0 50 SPECIAL PROGRAMS 512,000 54,000 33.3 513,700 513,718 100.1 (59,718) GEN REC RACES 59,500 55,008 52.7 57,250 52,588 35.7 52,420 5155,700 5122,394 78.6 5134,825 587,797 65.1 534,597 RED SANDSTONE PROGRAMS WEIGHTROOM 51,000 5420 42.0 5150 50 0.0 5420 AEROBICS 53,200 542 1.3 52,600 5300 11.5 (5258) SOCCER 5700 5700 100.0 5100 597 97.0 5603 BASKETBALL 56,000 5739 12.3 52,400 52,122 88.4 (51,383) VOLLEYBALL 52,800 51,464 52.3 5900 5465 51.7 5999 AFTER SCHOOL 58,000 54,143 51.8 52,400 5329 13.7 53,814 GYMNASTICS 512,500 57,088 56.7 516,500 58,220 49.8 (51,132) GYMNASTICS CAMP 516,260 511,799 72.6 510,800 53,248 30.1 58,551 OVERHEAD 50 SO 510,995 58,905 81.0 (58,905) 550,460 52b,395 52.3 546,845 523,686 50.6 52,709 POTPOURRI CAMP 528,000 522,925 81.9 528,200 518,115 64.2 54,810 NATURE CENTER SUMMER 56,000 52,619 43.7 549,258 523,817 48.4 (521,198) 41INTER 55,000 Sb,956 139.1 57,085 53,056 43.1 53,900 511,000 59,575 87.0 556,343 526,873 47.7 (517,298) 9 9 GEN REC OVERHEAD/MISC 592,859 553,123 57.2 (553,123) 5245,160 5181,289 73.9 5359,072 5209,594 58.4 (528,305) YOUTH CENTER 58,400 51,928 23.0 5136,506 876,838 5b.3 (574,910) 8253,560 5183,217 72.3 5495,578 8286,432 57.8 (5103,215) Schedule of 1989 Ice Rink Revenues & Expenses Programs and ice Rentals Month Ending July 30, 1989 REVENUES --------- - DIRECT EXPENSES ------ IO PUBLIC SKATING PASSES GUEST FEES SKATE RENTAL FIGURE SKATING SCHOOL SKATING CLASSES JR HOCKEY LADIES HOCKEY HENS HOCKEY DROP IN SUMMER HOCKEY CURLING BROOMBALL SKATING CLUB OF VAIL SUMMER HOCKEY SCHOOL VA[L EXPRESS EAGLE COUNTY SCHOOL CONCESS 8 VENDING SKATE SHARPENING LOCKER REVENUE RINK RENTAL SPECIAL EVENTS (See Page 4.) DOBSON OVERHEAD/MISC ACTUAL PERCENT ACTUAL PERCENT NET REV BUDGET Cum YTD YTD BUDGET Cum YTD YTD OR <LOSS> 55,000 8368 7.4 $50,000 524,804 49.6 515,000 59,111 60.7 570,000 $34,283 49.0 $34,283 533,600 $35,465 105.6 53,000 $2,638 87.9 $32,827 56,000 52,809 46.8 52,500 52,151 86.0 5658 515,000 5540 3.6 5750 5224 29.9 5316 51,500 53,520 234.7 575 0.0 83,520 53,500 51,270 36.3 5175 0.0 51,270 52,000 8154 7.7 5100 0.0 5154 54,000 50 0.0 50 81,600 50 0.0 g0 512,750 57,403 58.1 57,403 525,000 524,613 98.5 516,000 515,051 94.1 59,562 54,600 53,825 83.2 53,825 52,500 50 0.0 50 574,500 842,857 57.5 540,860 530,518 74.7 512,339 53,000 51,061 35.4 51,061 81,500 8824 54.9 8824 80 82,369 82,369 5261,050 5160,993 61.7 863,460 850,582 79.7 8110,411 8188,580 892,650 49.1 5134,000 569,712 52.0 522,938 8449,630 8253,643 56.4 8197,460 5120,294 60.9 8133,349 813,500 813,564 100.5 5372,074 5226,224 60.8 (8212,660) 8463,130 8267,207 57.7 5569,534 5346,518 60.8 (879,311) PG 4 Schedule of 1989 Special Event Revenues and Expenses Month Ending July 30, 1989 --------- REVENUES --------- ----- DIRECT EXPENSES ------ ~~ ACTUAL PERCENT ACTUAL PERCENT NET REV EVENT DATES BUDGET Cum YTD YTD BUDGET Cun YTD YTD OR <LOSS> WINTER CARNIVAL 1/b-8 54,000 SO 0.0 8500 SO 0.0 SO VA1L ROCKS 1/14 52,500 52,526 101.0 52,526 WC KICK OFF 1/19 5850 5898 105.6 5898 WC JOHN DENVER 1/29 5850 51,368 160.9 5660 5708 WC AMER GRAF 1/31 5850 5938 110.4 5938 WC CONCERT 2/4 5850 51,053 123.9 5660 5393 ORSER 2/6-8 535,500 531,550 88.9 529,800 531,750 106.5 (5200) WC BARB 2/9 5850 51,673 196.8 51,673 LITTLE WOMEN 2/11 52,500 54,000 160.0 54,000 WC BEACH BOYS 2/12 5850 51,088 128.0 51,088 SKI CLASSIC 3/3 5850 50 0.0 Sp SHOWTIME 3/4 52,500 52,684 107.4 5878 51,806 McNEIL 3/16 52,500 52,500 100.0 5226 52,274 JIMMY HUGA 4/7 51,200 54,814 401.2 54,814 VOLLEYBALL 4/8.9 52,000 51,986 99.3 51,986 NO CHECK TOURN 4/14-16 51,500 52,662 177.5 5418 52,244 SYMPH OF SPORTS 4/17-22 515,000 514,052 93.7 550,725 534,359 67.7 (520,307) GRADUATION 5/20 50 50 SD DANCE 6/9-10 51,500 52,241 149.4 5124 52,117 SKI SWAP 6/16-17 51,650 50 0.0 EO HORSE SHOW 7/1-2 55,000 52,907 58.1 5598 52,309 MARION LABS 7/11 52,500 52,500 100.0 52,500 FIGURE SKATE COMP 7/13-16 52,500 53,780 151.2 517 53,763 EXHIBIT OF CHAMP 7/17 E1,380 5240 17.4 5175 522 12.6 5218 LIMITED STORE 7/28-29 EO Sp JERRY FORD 7/31-8/1 E1,000 0.0 50 MICHAELS TRADE SHOW 7/31-8/3 55,500 5T, 190 130.7 57,190 MICHAELS ICE GALA 8/5 52,000 0.0 50 ICE DANCING 9/8-10 50 Sp COLD CURLING 10/6-8 51,200 0.0 50 WORLD WIDE 10/13-21 59,200 0.0 Sp VJH TOURNAMENT 10/28-29 SO Sp KRAFT WEST 11/10.12 59,000 0.0 __ Sp NUTCRACKER 12/16-19 57,000 0.0 Sp CHRISTMAS SHOW 12/27-30 564,000 0.0 552,800 50 0.0 50 NEW YEARS 12/31 SO 50 5188,580 592,650 49.1 5134,000 569,712 52.0 522,938 PG 5 ... .. Vail f~etropolitan Recreation District Cash Summary p9onth Ending JULY 31, 1989 NObI Payroll Account ------ Account Total Beg Balance 6/30/89 -------- 5410,775 ------------- (549,235) ------------ 5361,540 Receipts 5393,886 5223,784 5617,670 Disbursements (5347,862) (5223,132) (5570,994) Ending Balance 7/31/89 5456,799 (548,583) 5408,216 "~ PG 6 ° NOTE: This excludes a capital reserve of 545,690.~~ FINANCIAL REPORTS FOOTNOTES JULY 1989 1. New Budget numbers - see Budget to Budget and Line Item reconciliations for detail breakdown. 2. Golf revenue up approximately $20,000. 3. Includes newly allocated expenses (insurance, worker's comp). 4. Not a valid comparison against last year - includes newly allocated expenses (insurance, worker's comp, salaries/benefits formerly in VMRD admin. 5. Not a valid comparison against last year - excludes expenses allocated to other departments; includes $5,000 for second ice surface study. 6. Not a valid comparison against last year due to TOV payments. 7. New reserve accruals - done monthly. 8. New projected bottom line; when add back $125,000 tennis court money budgeted for '89 but received in '88, the new projected deficit is $23,585. 9. New Gen Rec overhead department - includes insurance, worker's comp, and salaries/benefits. 10. This is new report format - consistent with other reports in which budgeted and actual revenues/expenditures are presented. (Can still do cost accounting version.) 11. This money is actually in VMRD checking account, but is shown by the system as a separate capital reserve asset account. " GOLF SUB COMMITTEE The golf sub committee met on August 10, 1989 at 4 PM and made the following proposal. GOLF TOURNAMENT POLICY PRE SEASON: Men, women & No Name Cost of tournaments $5 green fee to VMRD (included in tourney fee) $10 cart fee (mandatory - paid separately by the participant to VMRD ) NOTE: Green fees may go to men/women golf association if a tournament player has already purchased a season pass and displays that pass at the time of tournament. SEASON: JFI Tournament Cost of tournaments No charge for green fees or carts NOTE: If a tournament is approved during the season then another rate will have to be established. The sub committee totally discourages any tournaments during the season. Any approved tournament by VMRD in the pre or post season will fall under the same fee structure that is proposed for the pre season. ~n~ MEMORANDUM T0: Town Council FROM: Ron Phillips DATE: October 3, 1989 SUBJECT: Colorado Municipal League Board Dinner The Colorado Municipal League Board of Directors is meeting in Vail on Friday afternoon, and is having dinner at the Lancelot Inn Friday evening. CML, City of Louisville, and the Town of Vail are co-hosting the dinner, and all Council members and your guests are invited to attend. We will be meeting at the Lancelot at 7:00 p.m. for drinks, and will be sitting down to dinner about 7:30 p.m. Please note on this memo whether or not you will be able to attend, then turn it in to me before the end of the Work Session. RVP/bsc .. ~ RFC'D 0 C T _ 3 1~p9 Vail Town Council Town of Vail 75 S. Frontage Rd. Vail, CO 81657 Dear Town Council Members: As a merchant at Crossroads Shopping Center, I am writing to let you know that I oppose the following pt•oposals rega2•ding the Village parking structure: 1) Elimination of free parking for the first 90 minutes in the Village parking structure, as this will create more pressure on the Crossroads parking areas from non-customers of Crossroads, which will hurt our business. 2) Elimination of the west entrance and exit. This will eliminate a steady flow of prospective customers,~which will hurt our business. I am in favor of the following: 1) Installation of public restrooms near the west end of the parking structure. 2) Retention of an auto entrance and pedestrian exit at the west end of the parking structure. 3) Better lighting, more police protection and more consistent bus service at Ford Park, to encourage locals to park there. Thank you for your consideration of these matters. Sincerely, ,"~ V t 6 ~ Gr~~. I J THE VILLAGE ftNARKET' 141 EAST MEADOW DRIVE VAIL, COLO. 81657 C'D OCT - 3 1989 NATURAL ENERGY RESOURCES CO~/iPANY P. O. Box 567 Palmer lake, Colorado 80133 • (719) 481-2003 FAX (719) 481-4013 September 27, 1989 Denver Water Board 1600 West 12th Avenue Denver, Colorado 80254 Dear Commissioners: Request the Denver Water Department (DWD) issue an immediate public withdrawal of its secret sponsorship of the video: WEnLTH OF WATER IN NORTIIERN COLORADO. As of this date, DWD has used public funds ($24,230) to hire a private contractor to produce and widely distribute this grossly misleading video to local, state, and national civic groups, leaders, and media. The public is not being told of DWD's financial and editorial control that is designed to enlist public support against EPA's Two Forks veto. This video represents a grave disservice to the non-technical public for the following irrefutable reasons: 1. The video's basic theme is that if Two Forks is not built, Northern Colorado's agricultural area will be largely dried up to meet Metro Denver's future water needs. EPA knows there are over 30 large and small water alternatives that were improperly disqualified in the Metro Denver EIS, and none of tYiese "overlooked", ongoing, projects are a threat to Northern agriculture. 2. The video states that Colorado's water exp~:rts subscribe to the "Northern Dust Theory", but Colorado State University officials have denied in writing that their studies support this unrealistic worst case scenario. In fact, CSU's water experts generally acknowledge that improvements in Western irriyation techniques are making substantially more water available for urban use via normal marketing practices, without adversely impacting agriculture . - 3. The video cites the City of Thornton's purchase of 110 irrigated farms as the only specific example of Denver's expected raid on Northern water. However, the video fails to mention that Thornton's commonly used City-Farm Recycling concept is designed to return 100% of the water to these same farms after it is first used in Northern Metro Denver cities. 4. The video improperly uses testimonies from Senator Bill Armstrong, Representative Hanl: Brown and Thornton's mayor to give credence to the above fallacies. Instead of continuing to use public funds to mislead the 2 public into supporting an outmoded concept, suggest the Denver Water Department direct its technical staff to quic}cly review the many alternatives that are progressing nicely to meet 1`ietro Denver's future needs. Our engineers and international contractors would be honored to Show how Arapahoe County's Union Park Reservoir and Siphon from the overlooked Gunnison Basin can provide drought protection for ttie environments on both slopes, while satisfying 1`tetro Denver's future needs at half the unit cost of Two Forks. Please advise regarding otzr .request for termination of the video, and our offer to assist in your evaluation of overlooked alternatives. Sinlcerely, %/ J l~ ~ , fj.,, Allen D. (Dave) Miller President ADrf/bm Encl: DWD letter dated May 11, 1989; letter to White House dated September 18, 1989. cc: local, state, and national leaders, media, and civic organizations. p~ER C Oq~ o _ ~~~o Denver Wator Department ~ 3~i~`~ `' rr;~n wcsr rzu+nvl_rnir_ ~ ur;rrvr.rr. cCtl_urrnrrr> tur~r~-r ~ rr~~~~~~, c~;n r,nuu nENVt-R May 11, 1~i3~ Mr. Richard IleryerL Rural Marketing Service I'.O. Box 2052 PJindsor, Colorado 130550 Dear Mr. IlergerL: !\ttached is a contrcrc;Lua1. ,?greenu:nt in the anx>unt: c, f: ;~;].G,000 f:c.~r y~ttr. :;cr.vice:; and Lh~tl: of Rural f~l~rlcel:incl ;;c~rvir.e (rc~nr l.hc l:inu~ crf cx~:trl: i ern c~l_ l_he ~rclrr:c:rn!.~n!. (.cr ,7u I y ;i L, I')f4') . I t•rou Icl I i.lcr: i:cr eml>has ire the f.ol lot•~.inc1 L>o.inL:; t•rh iLlr you ~tncl I have cl i :~t:u:t:;c:cl ~rncl mutually agree(? l:o wil:h re:;lrect l:o the conLr:ac:Lt.ral. ~rrJrernu~nL: 1) 11s an .independent contracl:or:, it :is iml~or.tant l:hat yott rerrtember Lhat you ar e not an emI>l.oyce, agent, or t;l~olce:;per:,un (r l: the Denver 13ortrd oC Walser Conun.i.ssi~ners . ItaLher, in yc:rtrr. activities r.elaL.i.ng Lo this ec7ucaLional pr.ojecL, you shorr.Lc3 nr,rke clear l:hat the views you are expressing and Lhe a ctiviL ic;s you undertake are tltose oL Rural Ma r.lceLing Sere i.ce. 2) The objective oC Lhis coal:ractua]. agr.r'emenL is Lo heap educate goverrunc,rrta] oCI_ic.iaa:;, rnc:dia, ci.L.i•r.en orclanirrtLiou:;, and others i.n L)re nor.Lhern and norl:heaster.n ~rr.ea oC Co.lor.ado (generally in pr.oximil:y I.o the South Platte V,allcy north an(1 no r.thea.~t of Metro Denver I.o the Co]ortrdo/Nc~br.a;;ka border) on l:hc gro~~osed '.Cwo Dock,, Darn I>cojct;L, and l:hc~ govcrrun~nta.l ahlrroval hrocess in which that Irroject i:~ nOW involvecJ. 3) In Eurl:herance oC that ec]ucaLi.onal project, it is expectec] that an educational video will be crcal:ed and aL1>r.oved by represenl:at.ives o[ Lhe Denver: Walser Dcparl.nrenl: (Id I'olcorney) and the Metropolitan Water. I'rov.i(]ers (Bob '1'onsing) . The video ~~~ill be used in present:at.ions and contacts with t:hc media, governmental oCLicials, and others in north and northeastern Colorado. ~) 11s the ConL- racl:or under the agreement , i t wi 11 be expecte(] that you will. inf:or.m Mr. L;c] ['okor.ney of: l:hc Denver Water. DepartrnenL oC l:he progress oC Lhis eclucal:iona.l project al: least: every two weeks, an(1 more Crec]uently i.C necessary or useful. 5) 115 described i.n your pr.oposa] oC May ~1, l~llc), it :r :, expected that: discussions will be held wil:h oCCici.als, c:iti•r.en groups, business, Farm interesl:s, and ol:hers in the Lol].owing counL.ies and C1t1CS: LarlmCr, 11(]dlrr:i, Weld, Morgan, hOyan, and Seddwick counti.c~:;; and l.hn ci.ti.c ; of. I?1:. (:01 1. i n;, (~crvr~Ianci, Longmont, llri.clbl.on, Cr.c~c~ly, Wind:;ol:, I~'l;. l,nl~l.:on, 1''L. I.1c)l:cl;ln, I}rush, SLer.l.incl, and J1+I~:;Ilur.g. T:t i:> c::l,cct:r_cl Lbal: yr,t+ cri I 1 also COnt:ac~t: al. ]. l:adt0, Lc.~lr.v:i.sion, and nctc•~:;I~al~er nlc~dirl i.n I.br listed counties and citi.e;; i.n an eif.ort I:o dai.n edncal:ion~+I. coverage of the hropo f,d '1':•ro r'or.l;s pro.jecl:, _nc~l.url.i.ny ttransmitting oC the video, PS11s, new;; conCc~rf.~nces, etc:. G) It is expected you t•Ti.ll malcc presental:i.ons to bus:i.nt:r:;.;c~:;, btls lneJJ gLOt.Ip5, C:balll])e T:S O~ COI111nC'rCe-', C.L t. ~.l. 'l.en gI:OIIpS, aclricult:ura]. ol:gani.zat:ion and other (~nttt i.c ;. ns an c:{anllrlc~ of: the lti.nds of. groups, t:he follow:inc] are ac~+:i.culLttral. of:ga111'7.at.1011;; wh.icl~ would 1~c conLac:tcd t:Ile C'otc)r.ado i'arnl Illtreau; Llle (cocky Mou-lta.in I'arnu~r:~' Un.i.on; the C~.lor.ado Call:le Pf~eder.s; the, Colorado Pork I'roducer.s; the Col.or.ado Vdool Gro~•rer:;; the Western Da i.l:ymc~n Cooperative, Inc. thr Col:n Gr.owere> 11 ssociat.ion; the Wheat Growers 11:;soci.ation; the Oni.c)n G1:ol•,f?rs It:~sociaLion; the Sugar Beet nssociaL-ion; tllf? Colorado c;rain and Ff~ed i~ealet:s; the Colorado l~arm EquipmenL I_)ealcrs; the Colorado L'ert:ili7et: Dealers I~ssoc..tatlon; and the Colorado Seed Grower:s association. 7) It is expected that- in f_urt-heranre of- the eclucaL-ional objective of this agreement, you will prepare the arr.angemenLs Cor such public meetings as are deemed advlsab].e, alld attract paT-ti.cipants Lrom various interest sector:; t:o such public meetings. It- is also expected L-haL- appropr.i.ate public oCEicials and concerned Wort:ber.n/port:beast: Co to r.aclo citizens ~•~:i17. be Lrroll<IhL toclc:tllf~r. Lo exc:hanc~e views L-or. Lurther. ecJucaLincl t:.he public on the proposed 'i'wo I'orl:s project and permit process. Should you have any yuesti.ons about the scope, nature, or objective of t:hi.s contractual agreernenL, please do not hesii:ate t-o call me at (303) G2I1--fi506. Sitlc~rely, (~~~1 C T'dward );. Po)corney Coordinator, Intergovert}mental 11Etairs EEP:eze -?.- ~, ~~1 ..~ ~~~ ''{l'~~ o ~~ Il ~ ~~ ~ ~ `6--1'L ~1 11 Sept. 18, 1989 The Honorable Jolui Sununu Chief of Staff The White house Washington, U.C. 20050 Dear Sir: Citi-r.crt l:cltrc~ti~rt !^~'~ 'uhlic Uclit~eration „ I - i; jam, I~_a __- I~------,---___. ~ rile ~;,_ i. i ..6 .,~, ___,__.,.` Your aide for cabinet affairs, Juanita Dungan, reviewed our video THE WEALTIi OF WA'1LR IN NOR'I'llliRl•1 COLORADO and responded with a nice nova ou f;eptemoer 1Ltlt. ll~~,aever, in a pltc•~:a co,.versatii,n on September 1G, she politely refused to discuss the matter sayinf,, "I will have to write a report, if we talk." Sir, we feel that not only should a report be written, but an investigation should begin. We support this request with the following: The LPA report, signed by Lee Dehihns, states on page 21: "There is not clear evidence that an agricultural dry-up will occur....No documentation was provided which indicated that the historical trends in irrigated agriculture would change with, or without, T~JO FORKS DAP1..." Historical facts and events documented in our video clearly show the serious and devestating impacts on an entire region of drying up agricultural water - the Fourth Congressional District. The massive body of facts, testimony and events presented in our video were not considered. Because the proper evidence has not been acknowledged, we formally request establishment of a White House oversight team to specify to you and tl~e President the impacts on food production in Colorado, communities, schools, soils, wildlife, wetlands and tax structures if T410 FORKS is NOT built. Northern Colorado is the fourth wealthiest ag production center in the United States with hundreds of communities, 500,000 people and one of the most unique and most productive ag irrigation systems in the world -- yet this entire region appears to be ignored for some reason. Thus, we request a White House investigation and formal report. Thank you. J~ es E. Fra C%~ ~ zie~ Richard li. Hergert President Executive Producer 1200 Cnrouscl Drivc, Suite 124 ,Windsor, Colorrdo 80550 (303) 686.56R6 fAX (303) 686-5687 "Incrcascd Communication bctwccn govcmmcnt, ci~iuns and business" cc: Senator Armstrong i .. Dojo 0 75 south frontage road vail, Colorado 81657 (303) 479-2105 office of 4ow-n manager October 2, 1989 Mr. John J. Collins P. 0. Box 2598 Vail, Colorado 81658 Dear Mr. Collins: On behalf of the Vail Town Council, I thank you for taking the time to express your concerns regarding the proposed Vail Transportation Center expansion and renovation. The enclosed fact sheet on the issue clarifies many of the issues you have raised. Specifically, you conveyed concern that the burden of any deficit resulting from the project might fall on Vail taxpayer shoulders. The debt issue on the parking structure project is anticipated to be revenue bonds secured solely through sales tax and parking fee revenues and not secured by property tax. The Town of Vail has used sales taxes solely since the early 1970's to meet all of its bonding obligations and has never incurred a deficit requiring resident taxpayer remedy. The bonds will be insured under a AAA rating, the highest insured rating possible on a municipal issue. Additionally, you raised the issue of open air parking at Ford Park and the athletic fields. You might be interested to know that parking is available at both locations, with bus service provided into Vail Village. These parking lots, provided free of charge, are heavily utilized by both residents and guests during the winter season. The enclosed tact sheet addresses many of the financial aspects of the parking structure project. As you will note, the projected cost ($8,271,372) provides for site and road improvements, renovation of the existing parking facility, transit center reconfiguration and renovation, visitor center construction, and much more. Only $4,500,000 is actually allocated for the 400 additional parking spaces. .~ Mr. John J. Collins October 2, 1989 Page 2 Again, thank you for taking the time to express your concerns. Please feel free to let us know if you desire further clarification of this timely issue. Sinc ely, ondall V. Philli s Town Manager RVP/bsc Enclosure JOHN J. COLLIPIS P. 0. Box 2598 Flail, Colorado 81658 To the Members of The Vail Town Council September 17, 1989 I hope the Council has more encouraging facts and figures than appeared recently in the local press regarding the $8,000,000 Revenue Bond proposed for a new 400 "slot" Parking Structure. If there are about 100 days each winter when the two existing parking structures are at or near capacity, the New Structure would add about 40,000 slot/days per year, and thus would provide 400,000 slot/days to repay a 10-year revenue .bond. This indicates that each slot would need to earn $20 each day to repay the .$8,000,000. The foregoing omits the cost of interest payments on the bond (rate not published) , also the costs of maintenance and repairs on the Structure,. plus the cost of mf operating personnel, etc., which could total almost as much as the original $ 8 , 000 , 000 . Is it likely that motorists will pay from $20 t0 $40 per day to ski at Vail when they can PARK FREE at Copper *Stn, Breckenridge, Keystone, Arapahoe, and at the two Beaver Creek lots in Avon ? If there is a deficiency in revenue to repay the bond, would Vail's taxpayers be responsible for the deficie+~y.? . If the State threatens to prohibit free parking alongside of the Frontage Rosa, would it be ~ao-rthw~-iile to experiment ~:~i*_?: soma open.-air parking on the playing fields at Ford Park and the soccer field near the golf course,? Possibly the powder snow mashing equipment (from the ski trails) plus grooming and hard-packing every night (as on the ski trails) could make firm surface to support light cars. during freezing weather and absorb the free-packers. WiCh proper attention and care, the underlying turf should not be harmed. Meanwhile it would be helpful to understand the seriousness of the parking problem if the financial records of the two existing parking structures were published to demonstrate revenue and costs inpast years and to justify projections into the future. Respectfully submitted, John J. Collins AAI(I• ~.=~-~'r ~:. I~EN~T~I~ WELL~I-IIR,E ~I-IAP'I'E~ #2222 ~~c'o SEP 2 7 X89 Ob ~~~IC i~l"~i~~,~~i1~~~ i~~~~~i~!t~~~~~i~~ ~hi I~.~~i~l~ll~l~i~~ ~'Hi~~.~~~~1~~, ~IIC. ,~ ~..~,~ ~~~~~ ~ i~ .-~- Oe,~~w.~z~' }~~~'!~~ AAA/' ~%P=~ .:~ ~ Z~ ~.~- t~- a ;Cyr 7 '~¢;C ~~..fi~ .~a~ ., ~-art ~ ?Zed cQU '~a~oG ~'.~.~ ~~ ~«v,~ ~~~~~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~„,~P,~'~~p r Z~i~r ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ _ ~~ ~~~u ~ ,, ~~« ~ ~~ ~ o "AA~'P _. ,, ~~ RECD OCT - Z Vail Town Council Town of Vail 75 S. Frontage Rd. Vail, CO 81657 Dear Town Council Members: As an owner at Crossroads of Vail Coildominiuma, I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed elimination of fr°e pur:~irg for the first 98 minutes in the Village parking structure. T1iis will create more pressure on the Crossroads parking areas, which will create more congestion and problems at Crossroads. I am in favor of better lighting, more police protection and more consistent bus service at Ford Park, to encourage locale to park there. Thank you for your consideration of this matter. Sincerely, ex~~ ~ach~~f~ 5171 Idylwa I~ ~'Ya~l t~n,,l~~g, ~©lt~raclo ~U3OI ~C'G OCT - ~ 1989 0 Vail Town Council Town of Vail 75 S. Frontage Rd. Vail, CO 81657 Dear Town Council Members: As a merchant at Crossroads Shopping Center, I am writing to let you know that I oppose the following proposals regarding the Village parking structure: 1) Elimination of free parking for the first 90 minutes in t}ze Village parking structure, as this will create more pressure on the Crossroads parking areas from non-customers of Crossroads, which will hurt our business. 2) Elimination of the west entrance and exit. eliminate a steady flow of This will prospective customers, whic}1 will hurt our business. I am in favor of the following: 1) Installation of public restrooms near the west end of the parking structure. Retention of an auto entrance and pedestrian exit at t end of the parking structure. he west 3) Better lighting, more police protection and more consi us service at Ford Park, to encourage locals to stent park there. Thank you for your consideration of these matters. Sincerely, ~~~L~n, Pd ~ ~ ~~~~ .~~O~T°a Va i 1 Town Cour~c i 1 Town of Vail 75 S. Frontage Rd. Vail, CO 81657 Dear Town Council Members: As a merchant at Crossroads Shopping Center, I am wz•iting to let you know that I oppose the following proposals regarding tfie Village parking structure: 1) Elimination of free parking for the first 90 minutes in the Village parking structure, as this will create more pressure or_ the Crossroads parking areas from non-customers of Crossroads, which will hurt our business. 2) Elimination of the west entrance and exit. This will eliminate a steady flow of prospective customers, whic~l will }lurt our business. I am in favor of the following: 1) Installation of public restrooms near the west end of the parking structure. 2) Retention of an auto entrance and pedestrian exit at the west end of the parking structure. 3) Better lighting, more police protection and more consistent bus service at Ford Park, to encourage locals to park there. Thank you for your consideration of these matters. Sincerely, ~' i' i ~ ~ ~ J ~.~~ ~ p~ ~, -~i~ ~' ~~ 1 ~~~ ~o.~ a3p ,~`p OAT m 2 t9~~ Vail Town Council Town of Vail 75 S. Frontage Rd. Vail, CO 81657 Dear Town Council Members: As a merchant at Crossroads Shopping Center, I am writing to let you know that I oppose the following proposals regarding the Village parking structure: 1) Elimination of free parking for the first 9C- minutes in the Village parking structure, as this will create more pressure on the Crossroads parking areas from non-customers of Crossroads, which will hurt our business. 2) Elimination of the west entrance aild exit. eliminate a steady flow of This will our business. Prospective customers, which will hurt I am in favor of the following: 1) Installation of public restrooms near the west end of t}le parking structure. 2) Retention of an auto entrance and pedestrian exit at the west end of the parking structure. 3) Better lighting, more police protection and more consistent bus service at Ford Park, to encourage locals to park there. Thank you for your consideration of these matters. Sincerely, ,, ~.~.. i i L ~ / ~'~JY~f ~ ~~/~~~i~Y'C~ U~P, Cv ~ i ~ .~`~ September 27, 1989 Dear City and County ~~fficials: We are sending you this open letter to urge unified Club 20 support by all cities and counties in Western Colorado. There have been disturbing news reports that some counties are debating dropping out of this important organization. Now, more than ever, we need to stay united on key issues facing all of us: - Nat~.zral Resources . Club 20 needs to remain a strong voice for the balanced use and development of our natural resources. We are blessed with important wildlife, timber, recreation, and mineral resources. - Water. Club 20 needs to remain an advocate to preserve and protect weet slope water supply and quality. The future needs of Western Colorado should not be sacrificed by unmitigated out-of- basin diversions or Colorado water lost to lower basin states. - Tourism. Club 20 has helped get our new regional tourism groups started. Maintaining our economy and our natural resources is an important part of the tourism program. - Economic Development. Club 20 has helped keep the State Economic Development program focused on west slope opportunities. Seeping the State E.D. office open on the west slope is a high priority for Club 20. - Hi~hwavs. Club 20 has always played a key role to keep rural highways a high priority at both the state and federal level. Club 20 past-president Bill Cleary is now a member of the .State Higriway Commission. Last year Club 20 helped our legislators fend off proposed changes that would have shifted state highway funding to urban areas. - Reapportionment. We will need a strong Club 20 to face the potential reapportionment challenges the 1990 census may cause. We must maintain a unified voice against any loss of legislative representation. BOX 351 RIFLE, COLORAD081650 TELEPFiOIdE 303-625-1723 Club 20 provides an important forum for discussion of these and other west slope issues. The public hearings now underway to discuss wilderness proposals is a good example that will allow citizen input into a Congressional process. Club 20 Yeas an impressive 35-year history as an advocate for Western Colorado. It is a bi-partisan organization open to all cou,munitiee, industries and citizens. We urge each city and county to continue your financial support of Club 20. We have asked Club 20 to increase its advocacy role and to maintain a high public visibility on our behalf. Don't let us be divided and weakened as Club 20 embarks upon these activities. If you want further changes and improvements you should get involved and make your views known. Come to the hearings, come. to the meetings - but please don't drop out. Sinc ly, G~~PiF/ Peg~~"~cto Chairman Jin Evans, Director A RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF EAGLE COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT SPECIAL ELECTION. WHEREAS, the Eagle County School District Re50J has experienced enrollment increases of an average of five percent annually for the past five years; and WHEREAS, the current school building capacity is exceeded by current and future enrollment projections; and WHEREAS, the Citizens' Future Facilities Task Force has recommended the building of two new elementary schools; and WHEREAS, the Citizens' Future Facilities Task Force has recommended the expansion and renovation of two high schools; and WHEREAS, the Board of Education has determined that a Bond Election in the amount of $21,045,000 will be required to defray the costs of such new construction and improvements; and WHEREAS, the Board of Education has determined that property taxes will not be required to increase because of such Bond Election; and WHEREAS, the Board of Education has determined that it will be necessary to have an election to generate increased funds to staff, operate, and maintain existing and proposed schools and improvements; and WHEREAS, property taxes for $100,000 Residential Market Values will increase by $17.38 per year as a result of the question to increase operating funds. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE VAIL TOWN COUNCIL expresses support for both Election Questions and urges its residents and all citizens in Eagle County to vote "YES" on-both ballot questions on November 7, 1989. INTRODUCED, READ, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day of , 1989. ATTEST: Kent R. Rose, Mayor Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Town Clerk