Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004-06-01 Support Documentation Town Council Evening SessionTOWN COUNCIL EVENING MEETING 6:00 P.M. TUESDAY, JUNE 1, 2004 NOTE: Times of items are approximate, subject to change, and cannot be relied upon to determine at what time Council will consider an item. 1. Pam Brandmeyer Item/Topic: I-70 Sinkhole: One Year Anniversary, Update and Joe Russell Review (10 min.) John Gulick Greg Hall ' Larry Pardee Background: It was exactly one year ago today that a culvert beneath I-70 in East Vail. gave way, causing a large sinkhole to form in the westbound lanes of I-70 and the subsequent flooding of Bighorn Creek into the neighborhood. The incident caused over $2 million in damage to public and private property as emergency responders worked more than 18 hours to contain the flooding. The one-year anniversary provides an opportunity to commemorate the community's response, review lessons learned, and to thank the community and participating agencies for their outpouring of support and cooperation. Action Requested of Council: None. 2. ITEM/TOPIC: Citizen Participation (5 min.) 3. ITEM/TOPIC: Consent Agenda, Minutes from 05.04.04, 05.18.04 (5 min.) 4. Russ Forrest ITEM//TOPIC: Update on Vail Conference Center and a request Kent Logan to move forward with the following requests: 1. Authorization to engage Piper Jaffray as the town's Investment Banker on the conference center. 2. Authorization to issue a Request for Qualifications for design team assistance on the conference Center 3. Request to move forward with a negotiated guaranteed maximum price process for engaging design and a general contractor. This essentially means that both the architect and general contractor will work for the Town of Vail. 4. Request for the Vail Town Council to approve the next phase of an owner's representative contract. The preconstruction phase of the contract would cost up to • $155,774. However, the Conference Center Advisory Committee is only requesting $93,212 (Includes fees and reimbursables) to fund this function until a decision is made by the Council on whether to issue bonds, which is anticipated in the November/December 2004 time frame. (30 min.) ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Approve the above mentioned next steps and funding authorization for an owner's representative. BACKGROUND RATIONALE: The Town Council on April 20~' authorized a series of next steps which included interviewing owner's representative firms for the conference center. On April 29~'; the committee met to interview five owner's representative firms. On May 18"', 2004 the Town Council authorized the Town Manager to execute a contract with ARC as the town's owner's representative and funding for the first phase of this contract or $8;510. The Town Council also authorized the Committee to negotiate with both Piper Jaffray and Kirkpatrick Pettis for being the town's investment banker on this project. The Committee met on May 26, 2004, and made the above mentioned recommendations. Recommendation The Conference Advisory Committee unanimously recommends that the Vail Town Council approve the above mentioned requests. 5. Greg Hall ITEMlTOPIC: Village Streetscape Update (5 min.) 6. Pam Brandmeyer ITEM/TOPIC: Out of cycle council funding requests (15 min.) Stan Zemler CURRENT GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES A. Red Sandstone multi-use recreation facility Please see memorandum RETT CAPITAL FUNDING PROGRAM B. AIPP-Artist in Residence Building BACKGROUND INFORMATION: AIPP is requesting the town partner in its effort to renovate the Anholtz Ranch cabin located on the lower bench of Ford Park. The goal of the project is to turn the cabin into an artist-in-residence program. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Fund $40,000 of $78,000 request, utilizing RETT funds. COUNCIL CONTRIBUTION C. Channel s BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Earlier this year in a status review re: Channel 5, Council directed Channel 5 to return in June for an out-of--cycle funding request for equipment upgrades and replacement. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Deny Funding D. WCTB Community Host Program BACKGROUND INFORMATION: In order to get the WCTB.in sync with current .year and '05 requests, staff has asked them for separate .submittal for parking passes for the '04-05 ski season, and then Council will see the WCTB back in August for the '05- '06 ski season. In the past, the Community Host program has been funded through a 25 blue parking pass contribution from the Town of Vail, as well as a matching 25 Merchant Ski Pass contribution from Vail Resort, with the WCTB providing oversight and management of the volunteers. In addition to the 25 blue parking passes, you will note a request from Suzanne Silverthorn attached asking for nine more parking passes to cover the '04-'05 fall/spring construction volunteers. The additional 9 parking passes. will allow the WCTB to staff the following days and times that you originally requested being two people from Sept 7 -Oct 17, 10am - 6pm (eight hours/day) and one person Oct 18 - 30,same hours. This would be 744 hours total for the fall. Each host works 80 hours to fulfill their requirement for a ski pass/parking pass, subsequently the WCTB requires an additional 9.3 blue passes to facilitate the Hosts during the fall. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Fund 34 blue parking passes for '04-'05 ski season. FUTURE GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES E. Department of Justice ADA Requirements BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Staff has received a preliminary estimate (attached) for the town's ADA compliance costs of $116,822. Since the estimate was received at 9:00 A.M. Thursday, May 27, staff has not had the opportunity to research how to pay for these federally mandated requirements. A portion of the requirements are directly related to • parks and recreation facilities that the town oversees, so an estimate of costs appropriate as a charge-back to AIPP will be suggested. Additionally, staff will look at current capital projects already funded in '04 to evaluate whether Council might consider moving those into '05 in order to reallocate funding. Also, there may be some additional cost savings based on "interpretation" of the law and we wilt continue to work with the Department of Justice to understand the requirements. Staff will return on the 15th of June for further discussion of funding sources. 7. Stan Zemler ITEM/TOPIC: Consideration of approval of Viele construction as low bidder for the Red sandstone multi-purpose recreation facility. (15 min.) 8. Jack Hunn ITEM/TOPIC: A request authorizing the Town Manager to execute Jay Peterson an easement with Vail Resorts to allow for the construction Tom Braun new bridge on a portion of Tract K, Glen Lyon Subdivision and the unplatted parcel of land located directly to the east of Tract K. (10 min.) ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Approve, approve with modifications, or deny the request authorizing the Town- Manage to execute the easement. BACKGROUND RATIONALE: Vail Resorts needs to create a water connection to Vail Mountain. The pump house located on Forest Road which has provided snow making capacity on Vail Mountain has now been demolished. Vail Resorts and town staff have agreed that given a letter sent to the Glen Lyon Subdivision homeowners in 1996, that Vail Resorts shall pursue a amendment to a Special Development District to obtain final approval for snow cat access across Tract K, Glen. Lyon Subdivision. In addition, Vail Resorts would like to first obtain the support of the subdivision to amend the covenants which prevent the creation of the planned snow cat- access. However, this may take 2-4 months and VR needs to move forward with snow making facilities this summer. The bridge would provide the means to bring a water line across the creek to interconnect into a new pump system (i.e. in an underground vault). Vail Resorts could then place a water pipe under Gore Creek. However, they anticipate building a bridge for the snow cat access which would also support the snowmaking utilities for the Mountain. On May 18t'', 2004, the Vail Town Council approved of .two of the three easement requests necessary to facilitate snow making on Vail Mountain.. Those two easements included: • easement for the vault (encloses snowmaking pumps) is on an unplatted parcel -Book 272, Page 663 (this is the stream tract/hillside parcel) -description is NW 1/4 of NW 1/4 of section 7, township 5 S, range 80 west), and • easement for the snowmaking water line on Tract K. 9. Bill Gibson At the applicant's request, the Vail Town Council tabled consideration of a bridge easement until discussions occurred between adjacent property owners. Those discussions have occurred and Vail Resorts is now requesting that the bridge easement be approved.. ITEMlTOPIC: Ordinance No. 10, Series of 2004, an ordinance amending Title 12, Zoning Regulations, Vail Town Code, to amend the Gross Residential Floor Area (GRFA) regulations in the Hillside Residential (HR), Single-Family Residential (SFR), Two-Family Residential (R), Two-Family Primary/Secondary Residential (PS). (45 min.) ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Approve, approve with modifications, or deny Ordinance No. 10, Series. of 2004 on first reading. BACKGROUND RATIONALE: On September 8, 2003, the Town of Vail Planning and Environmental Commission voted 6-0 to forward a recommendation of approval for proposed text amendments to the gross residential floor area (GRFA) regulations for Vail's residential zone districts. This item was tabled for further discussion from the Town Council's May 18, 2004, meeting. 10. Stan Zemler ITEM/TOPIC: Town Manager's Report (10 min.) • Verbatim Book Sign Code Town staff has met with interested parties and continues to work toward a resolution. • Expenditure explanation for Pro-Cycling Tour event Please see attachment. • Berry Creek Sports Complex Feasibility update At the direction of Eagle County Board of Commissioners, Ballard, King and Associates, Recreation Facility Planning and Operation Consultants, Denver Colorado, have undertaken a feasibility study for an indoor recreation center to be located in the Berry Creek area of Edwards. The study, expected to be completed in the fall, will include an inventory and needs assessment of recreational facilities located within Eagle County. The firm has also begun collecting input from various taxing jurisdictions that are recreation providers located within the Vail Valley. Open forums for the public to add input are also planned. In a meeting with the consultant on May 21; staff stated the town would not be interested in seeing any duplication of services currently provided by other recreation providers, e.g., Town of Vail, Town of Avon, Town of Eagle, Town of Gypsum, Vail Recreation District, or Western Eagle County Metropolitan District, to name a few, nor would the town want facilities constructed that actually eroded, compromised, or otherwise competed with facilities these communities have used their own town-specific revenues to construct, maintain and staff. As an observation, staff added the addition of the athletic fields seemed an appropriate recreational use in that the other communities did not have the acreage available to add more fields to their current inventories. County dollars should be used toward facilities that do not currently exist in the county. • Intergovernmental Agreement for Emergency Response with the State of Colorado In your packet is a copy of an Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) for Emergency Management that the State Office of Emergency Management is urging all jurisdictions to sign. This IGA formalizes the existing mutual aid and regional .mobilization systems to send or receive aid in the event of a disaster or critical incident. The State has indicated that future Homeland Security grants may require that this document be signed and filed with the State before funds can be approved for a jurisdiction. Matt Mire, Chief Gulick and Henninger are all in agreement that the Town should enter into this IGA. Over seventy-five Colorado jurisdictions have already signed this agreement. If there are no disagreements to participate in this program, I will ask the Mayor to sign the formal IGA document. 2004 VAIL VALLEY ATHLETE COMMISSION On May 14th, the Vail Valley Athlete Commission met to discussion funding requests for the spring/summer/fall of this year. You will find an attachment to the Town Manager's Report showing current funding requests, past requests; and fund balance. This commission has been operational for the last ten years, with the joint funding partners of Vail Resorts, Inc. (VRI); Beaver Creek Resort Company (BCRC); Vail Valley Foundation (WF); and the Town of Vail (TOV). The partners have tried unsuccessfully over the past years to include the Town .of Avon and Eagle County. Because of economic factors, contributions from both VRI and WF have been reduced from $10,000 annually to meet the contributions from BCRC and the town. In script, you will find the funding allocations as agreed to by the partners for the summer program. In budget cuts from two years ago, the town's contribution was pared down five percent to follow other allocations across the board. • INFORMATION SIGNS AT VILLAGE INFORMATION CENTER Council will recall a Council-generated request to make improvements to the signs at this information center at a ._ meeting last fall. VVCTB, the current contractor for services, set about getting bids to upgrade the signs on the exterior of the building. The final bid came in around $8,000, but also required a several thousand dollar electrical upgrade for its back-lighting, at which time Council directed staff to get involved due to the complications and funding issues. Staff ended up making the signs currently installed, and altogether, was able to accomplish this for approximately $600, both labor and materials. In a meeting earlier this week, the staff at the center commented they were very pleased with the outcome, so if you're driving by, please take a look and let us know whether anything further should be done. • Update on private contributions streetscape development 11. ITEM/TOPIC: Adjournment (8:05 P.M.) NOTE UPCOMING MEETING START TIMES BELOW: (ALL TIMES ARE APPROXIMATE AND SUBJECT TO CHANGE) THE NEXT VAIL TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR WORK SESSION WILL BEGIN AT 2 P.M. ON TUESDAY, JUNE 15, 2004, IN THE TOV COUNCIL CHAMBERS. THE NEXT VAIL TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR EVENING MEETING WILL BEGIN AT 6 P.M. ON TUESDAY, JUNE 15, 2004, IN TOV COUNCIL CHAMBERS Sign language interpretation available upon request with 24-hour notification. Please call 479-2106 voice or 479-2356 TDD for information. • Vail Town council Evening Meeting Tuesday, May 4, 2004 6:00 P.M. TOV Council Chamber The regular meeting of the Vail Town council convened at approximately 6:00 p.m. on Tuesday, May 4, 2004. Council Members Present: Kent Logan, Rod Slifer, Dick Cleveland, Kim Ruotolo, Diana Donovan, Greg Moffet Not Present: Farrow Hitt Staff Members Present: Stan Zemler, Town Manager Pam Brandmeyer, Asst. Town Manager Matt Mire, Town Attorney 1. The first item on the agenda was Citizen Participation. There was none. • 2. The second item on the agenda was an update on the Village Streetscape project. Public Works Director, Greg Hall, announced that the project was proceeding as planned with no unanticipated problems, and that anticipated completion would occur on .or around June 19, 2004. Mayor Slifer requested that town staff continue to provide reports of what groups of visitors might be in town, and what businesses remained open. 3. The third item on the agenda was the Consent Agenda. Ruotolo requested that the minutes from the Tuesday, April 15, 2004 special meeting reflect the appropriate start time of 4:00 p.m., and Donovan had a minor addition to the minutes from the April 20, meeting. Moffet moved, Cleveland seconded, passed unanimously, 6-0. 4. The fourth item on the agenda was an update on the Vail Conference Center and request to move forward with negotiation to hire an owner's representative for the Conference Center. Russ Forrest provided a report, focusing on rising interest rates and the subsequent impact upon dollars that can be used for construction. Forrest also announced that ARC and Western Skies have been selected as the two finalists to serve as Owner's Representative on the project. Forrest stated that interviews with the firms would take place on Friday, May 7, at .2:30 in either the Community Development Conference Room or the Town Council Chambers. Moffet moved and Logan seconded, to authorize the Town Manager to select and hire one of the two firms as recommended by the committee, for a sum up to $10,000. Motion passed 5-1, with Donovan voting • against. 5. The fifth item on the agenda was a discussion on the formation of a Capital • Committee. Zemler provided a description of how he would envision the process working. Council agreed to move forward with the formation of the Committee. 6. The sixth item on the agenda involved a discussion of whether the TOV would join the I-70 Central Mountain Transportation Corridor coalition. Moffet asked if an elected official would be needed to act as a representative. Hall stated that an elected official carries more weight than a staff member. Moffet volunteered to serve as the TOV representative. Moffet moved, Ruotolo seconded. Motion passed, 6-0. 7. The seventh item on the agenda was a presentation on the TOV's Wildfire Preparedness. Zemler announced that on May 17th, a table top wild fire (mock exercise) would be performed to assist in preparing TOV emergency responders. Gulick explained fire threats to Vail, and what Vail is doing to protect itself from such events. 8. The eighth item on the agenda was an update on the TOV West Nile Public Information Program. Bill Carlson discussed the history, potential risks, and basic prevention measures that can be taken to help stop the spread of the disease. 9. The ninth item on the agenda was the discussion of a proposed utility easement along the earthen berm on I-70 in. East Vail. The easement allows water line relocation to complete the earthen berm along the north side of I-70 in the Bald • Mountain Rd, vicinity. Moffet moved, Ruotolo seconded, the authorization of the neighborhood to move forward with negotiations to create a utility easement along I-70 not to exceed twenty feet in width. 10. The tenth item on the agenda was Resolution No. 16, a Resolution approving the P3 Development Agreement between the TOV, and Vail Holdings, a subsidiary of Vail Resorts Inc. The agreement pertains to the development and respective rights and responsibilities of the Town and Vail Holdings in relation to the development site owned by Vail Holdings and consisting of Lot P3. Zemler stated that staff supported the resolution and recommended that Council move forward. The consensus that the TOV needs to improve loading and delivery plans dominated the discussion. Paul Johnston, owner of the Christiania Lodge on Hanson Ranch Road and Jim Lamont of the Vail Village Homeowners Association appeared before the Council to offer support for Council's approval, noting that an interim plan for loading and delivery, which includes the addition of a part-time Code Enforcement Officer to be funded by Vail Resorts, is .far better than the status quo. Council voiced much concern regarding the continuation of development and the finalization of the Vail Front Door project. Jay Peterson, legal council for Vail Resorts, continually reiterated that a hard commitment was not possible because the project hinge on a United States Forest Service decision. Sally Johnston, of the Christiana, also voiced concem for the safety and experience of people walking down Hansen Ranch Road. Adam Aaron, Vail Resorts Inc., announced that $300 million in real estate • construction would occur in Vail over the next 36 months, and asked for Council approval. Mire, addressed the matter of Slifer purchasing two stalls in the 2 • proposed garage. Mire stated that he had determined there was not a conflict of interest pursuant to state statute or town charter. The only. issue would be impartiality. Mire asked Slifer if, despite interest in the project, could fie still. perform his duties as a public official and remain impartial in this decision. Slifer answered yes to both questions. Moffet moved, and then amended the motion, Logan seconded. Motion passed unanimously, 6-0. 11. The eleventh item on the agenda involved the 2"d reading of Ordinance No. 11, Series of 2004. No discussion occurred. Moffet Moved, Logan seconded. Motion passed unanimously, 6-1. 12. The twelfth item on the agenda was Adjournment. Moffet moved, Ruotolo seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 6-0. Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk Minutes taken by Corey Swisher. Rodney Slifer, Mayor C7 Vail Town council • Evening Meeting Tuesday, May 18, 2004 6:00 P.M. TOV Council Chamber The regular meeting of the Vail Town council convened at approximately 6:00 p.m. on Tuesday, May 18, 2004. Council Members Present: Kent Logan, Rod Slifer, Dick Cleveland, Kim Ruotolo, Diana Donovan, Greg Moffet Not Present: Farrow Hitt Staff Members Present: Stan Zemler, Town Manager Pam Brandmeyer, Asst. Town Manager Matt Mire, Town Attorney The first item on the agenda was the presentation of the Town of Vail Youth Recognition Award and the Vail Youth Ambassador award. Mayor Rod Slifer presented the Vail Youth Recognition Award. Jenna Tjossem of Battle Mountain High School and Sylvan Ellefson of Vail Mountain School will each receive $1000 awards. The award is based on scholastic achievement, success in the arts or athletics, as well as exhibiting sound citizenship. The Vail Youth Ambassador Award winners were also announced. McClees • Stephens of Battle Mountain High .School and Patrick Scanlan of Vail Mountain School will have the opportunity to live with host families iri Australia for six weeks. The town provides round trip air fare, housing, a job, as well as $500 in expense money. The second item on the agenda was Citizen Participation. There was none. The third item on the agenda was a Village Streetscape Update. Greg Hall, Public Works Director, announced that Lower Bridge Street would be gravel by the end of the week and will be ready by .Labor Day. Hall also stated that P3 construction would begin on 05.19.04. The fourth item on the agenda was a Conference center Update. Community Development Director, Russ Forrest, announced that an Owner's Representative contract was given to ARC. The Town Manager is subsequently authorized to spend up to $10,000 for ARC's services for the first phase of the project. The fifth item on the agenda was new appointments for the Vail Local Licensing Authority and the Vail Local Housing Authority. - New Appointments Vail Local Licensing Authority (VELA), Two year term Candidates: Robert Rothenberg Kaye Ferry Moffet moved, and Hitt seconded, for the appointment of both Kaye Ferry and Robert • Rothenberg to the VELA. Motion passed unanimously, 6-0. • - Vail Housing Authority (VLHA Candidates: Thomas Dubois Tom Gorman Ethan Moore John Schofield Brandmeyer announced that Connie Knight withdrew herself from consideration for the VLHA. Cleveland moved, Ruotolo seconded, for the appointment of Ethan Moore to the VLHA. Motion passed unanimously (6-0). The sixth item on the agenda was Ordinance No. 10, Series of 2004, an ordinance amending Title 12, Zoning Regulations, Vail Town Code, to amend .the Gross Residential Floor Area (GRFA) regulations in the Hillside Residential (HR), Single-Family Residential (SFR), Two-Family Residential (R), Two-Family Primary/Secondary Residential (PS), Residential Cluster (RC), Low Density Multiple -Family (LDMF), Medium Density Multiple-Family (MDMF), High Density Multiple-Family (HDMF), and Housing (H) zone districts, and setting forth details in regard thereto. John Schofield (former PEC Chairman) provided an overview of the Planning and Environmental Commission's (PEC) review process and its recommendation for the proposed amendments to the. GRFA regulations. He also recommended the Council consider a joint work session with the PEC to discuss the details of the proposed GRFA amendments. Ed Zneimer spoke in support of the modifications to GRFA. He based his • opinion on several points, including the changing needs and demands of present and future Vail residents. John Neilsson and Ann Louthan also spoke in support of the proposed GRFA modifications. Jim Lamont, Vail Village Homeowners Association, concluded the public comment conversation. He noted that the Council's GRFA discussions have focused primarily on single-family and duplex homes, and he voiced concern that further discussion is needed to consider the impacts of the proposed amendments on multiple-family homes. Greg Moffet moved to approve, on first reading, a modified version of Ordinance No. 10, Series of 2004, that would only apply to the Single-Family, Duples, and Primary/Secondary zone districts. Kent Logan seconded the motion. The motion failed by a vote of 3-3, with Logan, Moffet, and Slifer in favor and Ruotolo, Donovan and Cleveland against. Council members Ruotolo, Donovan, and Cleveland expressed their desire to resolve all questions and issues related to the specific language of the proposed ordinance prior to approval of the first reading; rather than resolving those specific issues between first and second readings. The Council voiced its unanimous support for the general policy direction of the proposed GRFA amendments. Kim Ruotolo moved to table the first reading of Ordinance No. 10, Series of 2004. Diana Donovan seconded the motion. The motion passed by a vote of 5-1, with Slifer opposed. . The seventh item on the agenda was a request for Town Council to approve the execution of three easements to facilitate snowmaking on Vail Mountain and the creation of a bridge. The applicant voluntarily withdrew a request for the bridge easement, but requested easements for both the vault and the waterline which were granted. Moffet moved, Cleveland seconded. The motion passed unanimously (6-0). . The eighth item on the agenda was the request for approval of guard rails and handrails to be used in the Wall Street streetscape redevelopment. Leslie Pickling, Arts in Public Places Director, and Project Manager, Todd Oppenheimer displayed examples of the • aforementioned accoutrements. Cleveland moved, Moffet seconded. The motion passed unanimously (6-0). At this time, Councilman Farrow Hitt joined the meeting. The ninth item on the agenda was a request for approval for Earl Eaton Plaza Playground design. Pickling and Oppenheimer displayed and explained the proposed art to be used as well as an overall site design explanation. Donovan and Cleveland expressed displeasure with the design, specifically the use of water features, and requested that staff reevaluate the proposal. The tenth item on the agenda was the Town Manager's Report. Greg Moffet moved and Farrow Hitt seconded the approval to send a letter to the Eagle County Commissioners in support of Bair Ranch Open Space Preservation, a vote was taken. Council also asked Zemler to come back with an acceptable or different proposal regarding Council Packet distribution. Council was reminded of an upcoming Battle Mountain High School Awards Presentation on May 20, 2004. The meeting adjourned at 9:00 pm. Rodney E. Slifer, Mayor • Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk Minutes taken by Corey Swisher. :7 MEMORANDUM TO: Vail Town Council FROM: Conference Center Advisory Committee DATE: June 1, 2004 SUBJECT: Update on the Vail Conference Center 8 request to move forward with recommended next steps. Planner: Russell Forrest 1. PURPOSE The Vail Conference`CenterAdvisory Committee (Committee) is requesting that the Vail Town Council authorize Town staff and the Committee to move forward with the following actions: • 1. Authorization to engage Piper Jaffray as the Town's investment banker on the conference center. 2. Authorization to issue a Request for Qualifications for design team assistance on the conference center 3. Request to move forward with a negotiated guaranteed maximum price process for engaging a design team and a general contractor (as opposed to a design build process). This essentially means that both the architect and general contractor will work for the Town of Vail. 4. Request for the Vail Town Council to approve the next phase of an owner's representative contract. The preconstruction phase of the contract would cost up to $155,774. However the Committee is only requesting $93,212 (Includes fees and reimbursable) to fund this function until a decision is made by the Council to issue bonds which is anticipated in the November/December 2004 time frame. On May 26, 2004 the committee unanimously agreed to forward with the above mentioned recommendations to the Vail Town Council. • r (' ~1 2. DESCRIPTION OF REQUESTS Authorization to engage Piper Jaffray On March 30, 2004 the Committee interviewed the following four investment bankers for the conference centers: • Kirkpatrick Pettis, • Hanifen Imhoff, • Piper Jaffray, and • George K. Baum (Steve Jeffers) The purpose of these interviews was to determine what creative ideas existed among alternative financing institutions and to determine which investment banking institution could provide the best service at a competitive cost to the Town of Vail in financing the conference center. These interviews raised several new questions and ideas. The primary issue that was discussed at the interviews was that several of the bankers strongly suggested that the Town of Vail "back stop° the debt service for the conference center with new growth in sales tax dollars. This would provide improved interest rates and better coverage factors for the issuance of the bonds. However, the Committee strongly believes that the financing for the conference center should be completely independent from the Town of Vail and that only the dedicated lodging and sales tax revenue approved for the conference center should be committed to the construction and operation of • the facility. The investment bankers also provided options that would only commit the dedicated lodging and sales tax for the conference center. There were also questions about the interrelationship of issuing debt for the conference center and existing debt the Town of Vail has and whether it would impact future bonding capacity for other projects. Follow-up questions were prepared for both our bond council, Dee Wiser, and the investment bankers. On Aprit 8, 2004 the Committee met again with • Kirkpatrick Pettis, • Piper Jaffray, and • George K. Baum (Steve Jeffers) All three firms developed financial plans for both paying for the debt associated with a $42.5 million project and the anticipated operational deficit. All three firms felt confident that they could fund both the debt service and still have money left to fund the projected operational deficit for the conference center while building an operational reserve. In addition all three firms proposed a financial structure that would fund the conference center bonds solely from conference center taxes without pledging other funds from the Town of Vail. Dee Wiser has concluded that with this type of financial structure, the issuance of debt for the conference center will not impact the Town's future bonding capacity. The critical deal points for the committee in further evaluating the investment banker's proposals included: • Debt service coverage ratios • 2 • Ability to provide insurance/surety policy • Interest Rates • Underwriter Fees (Discount Rates) • Ability to maximize the operational reserve for the facility • Interest in and ability to facilitate a public auction for the issuance of the bonds. After the follow-up interviews and a subsequent committee meeting on April 13, 2004 and then on May 27, 2004 the Committee unanimously recommends asking Piper Jaffray to be the Town's investment banker. Attached is a summary of Piper Jaffrays final responses to questions from the Committee (Attachment A). Also you will find at the end of Attachment A a summary of a cash flow model using current interest rates. You will note that this cash flow model includes debt service, paying an operational deficit, and paying for capital maintenance while still providing a significant cash balance for unanticipated costs. At this time the committee is not recommending issuing bonds until more information is available on the design and the cost of construction for the proposed conference center. Request for Qualifications The Conference Center Advisory Committee is requesting that the Town issue a request for qualifications for design.teams (See attachment B). The Committee feels it is critical that the teams have outstanding design talent, a strong background in conference center design, and members of the team have strong circulation and parking structure design expertise. The circulation and parking • design expertise is critical in that any design for the conference center needs to be integrated into the existing parking structure. This would begin the selection process for a design team. The Conference Center Advisory Committee would recommend that given the high level of interest from the design community that we begin to collect qualifications for working on the conference center. Then the Committee plans on coming back to the Vail Town Council on June 15', 2004 to review a recommended request for proposals with the Vail Town Council. On June 15~' the committee will also provide a recommendation on how to address the two potential methods of constructing the conference center (i.e. either over the Lionshead parking structure or on the Charter Bus lot). The Committee is also working on an inclusive and transparent process to solicit input on the final selection of a design team and the development of that design. At this time the Committee is considering a three step process: a) Request for qualifications b) Top firms then requested to respond to a Request for Proposals where they would provide their fee structure for the project. c) Based on the teams qualifications and fee structure, the finalists would be invited to submit their design concepts for the project iri a public process. • Method for engaging a design team and a general contractor: The Committee has reviewed three basic methods for engaging a design team and • a contractor. Those methods included: • Design-Bid-Build: This process has the architect and general contractor both working directly for the Town (owner). This process would engage the general contractor through a request for bids at the end of the design process and provide a guaranteed maximum price (GMP) once construction drawing are complete. • The negotiated guaranteed maximum price process involves the architect and general contractor both working directly for the Town (owner). The difference between this process and adesign-bid-build process is that the general contractor selection occurs after a conceptual design is developed early in the design process. This way an initial guaranteed maximum price can be obtained very early in the process. When construction drawings are completed it is also possible to reduce that GMP (but not increase it) based on the final design. • A third option is a design build process. This works well when the scope of service is tightly defined. In this process the architect is working for the general contractor.. The Town would have significantly less control of the design of the facility with this process. The Committee does not feel that this is an appropriate process for this project. A fourth variation similar to the third option is to engage an operator with the general contractor and architect. After reviewing these options the Committee is recommending that we move forward with a Negotiated GMP process. This process allows the Town to obtain a GMP sooner in the process and determine whether the project should move forward based on a hard construction cost and the current interest rate at the time this initial GMP is obtained. It is estimated that with this process the. GMP would be available in October of 2004 and then the Vail Town Council could decide on whether to issue bonds for the facility with that GMP and the current interest rate. Move forward with the next phase of a contract for an Owners Representative: The Committee is unanimously recommending moving forward with the next phase of an owner's representative contract. The preconstruction phase of the contract would cost up to $155, 774. However the Conference Center Advisory Committee is only requesting $93,212 (Includes fees and reimbursable) to fund this function until a decision is made by the Council to issue bonds which is anticipated in the November/December 2004 time frame. See summary of fees (Attachment C) r~ • . 3. PROPOSED NEXT STEPS The following is a list of proposed next steps. The committee anticipates further refining recommended next steps and presenting them to the Vail Town Council on June 15, 2004. 1. Issue Request for Qualifications on June 2"d. We will receive responses back on June 17, 2004. 2. On June 15, 2004, the Committee would propose coming back to the Vail Town Council to discuss a draft request for proposals and obtain approval for a public involvement process in the design team selection process. 3. On July 6, 2004 staff anticipates that the committee would be able to make a recommendation on which design teams should receive a request for proposals. Then on July 7~', those proposals could be issued to the selected teams. 4. In August, 2004 staff anticipates further narrowing the field of design teams after reviewing cost proposals and inviting the finalists to present their design concepts to the public, the Committee, and the Town Council. The Conference Center Advisory Committee anticipates making a recommendation to the Vail Town Council in August or September of 2004 on which design team should be selected for the conference center. 5. The Conference Center Committee, with full consultation with the Vail Town Council, will also begin a general contractor selection as the design team selection is concluded. • Attachment A: Material from Piper Jaffray & Cash Flow Model (last page) Attachment B: Request for Qualifications Attachment C: ARC fees F:\Users\cdevlCOUNCILIMEMOS\041confernce center 060104.doc • Attachment A: Material from Piper Jaffray & Cash Flow Model (last page) C7 ~.:t t_" :.~3 ~.., . ~~ ~ r. ~z ~~ ,.. I~ ~~. ~ ~: (_... ~r$~ ~. v s y ~ 1 ~ -~-~. _ ~ . .. ' 4 t _ ~^~f?~. ~ ._ ~ +; ~ '~ ~ { 1 ~~ ~ .1 l ~ k ' J YC yy r ~~- • .may 'r '• ~ ~~~~' ~ - F rat ~ C - r~F J I :S'af P t' ti. ~~ IiA: ,. ,~.~t ~,~; ~A~9 y:~ ~ ~~,~ ', K~;~ lira ~~~ f ~ ~ t i'_ ~ ` ,a ~ '' ^a ~~ :~ ~~~~ ; ~~ PlJ ~LIC FINANCE ~'i ~~ ~~, ~0~~ Cc~n~'er~~c~ C~n~~~ C~~e~si~t C~~~t~~ Fi~~~~~~ ~ub,ra~p ~spons~ Town of Vail, Colorado 7UNNQFVAa, GUIDES FOR n • THE JOURNEx~ 1 1 er affra p Y ~_ :~, f :~ F ~~ ~` v.r.~. :~ ~, . , ~r ~_~ 3 r ~ _ ~~;,1 ~. ~ e y _~ ~ r ~, ~;.. ~~ ' ~~~ ,a ~` a 3 ~ d !~' J: _' ~ T t ~ ~- «f ~; ~4 ~ ~-~ ~ ~ r ~_ ~ ~~.. J ~ € ~ ~ v`1 ~~ , .:~ ?~ ~"" ~ .~ ~~ • J ~ ~~ =~ Ly ~= y'l. Pi' t fil 3i , Z ~~~ }~ '. t ~~~ 3 ~ ~ ~ $.Sr 1 Y: ~ Y _. ~ t V Y * ~ i S .~,~+ E ~i rt1 ¢ j. a.L-3 __ ,~,~o y,~ ~ * ~ E ! s t 7'~"~4s L. a P ~~ 1 V ~ ,/ 4 t,.~ ` ~ ' ~- ?~ ~ t " T ,~ ~ ~ ' ,_ ~ r , ~ r s ~;: t ,,~+; ~a.~~ ,c,, ti ~.. 1 ~ ' ~ ~ 4 t _ ~ F` tR -- 3 F+va~ ~:~ Table of Contents ~:t.. • .. _ ., , Page # I. Recap of Debt Structure Recommendation .................. II. Discussion of Bond Insurance ............................................. ~ III. Discussion of Surety Bond ...................................................2 IV. Discussion of Cash Management ........................................3 Discussion of Public Auction ...............................................q. V . VI. Potential Conflicts of Interest ..............................................g VI I. Fee Structure ...................................................................... ~o Appendix A: Estimated Timetable Appendix B: Debt Service Numbers • • • Investment Banking GUIDES FOR I PiperJaff ray. THEJOURNEI' Y h~ 4 '( s ~j~~iL ~i ~ 3. ' ~ TS R w 3.1~r~ I~y~tl`7 4 ~_ v 4 rr~ .y e F X. ,~ f~.. ~' ~< ~ - ~~ ~-_ ~., , ~~` ~ t~ / - , r ,. k~; As long as the Town incorporates a debt service reserve policy and the additional bonds test is adequate, the insurance company will most likely not require any additional terms. Typically, in order to achieve an - - investment grade rating from a ratings agency, the issuer will need to commit to terms that the insurance companies would require. Once the policy is issued it is good until the bonds mature or are defeased. c. What is needed to guarantee coverage? Insurance coverage is not guaranteed until a municipal bond insurance company specifically offers to provide coverage. This offer is the only way to guarantee coverage. Obtaining an underlying rating does not guarantee coverage, however the majority of bond issues with an investment grade rating typically will receive offers from insurance companies. III. Discussion of surety bond a. Do you recommend surety bond or debt service reserve? (Please bring cost benefit analysis.) We recommend the Town of Vail use the option that provides the lowest overall cost of borrowing. The only way to accurately compare the two options is to have the exact fee quote from the insurance provider. Until these costs are known, we can only base our analysis on assumptions. We have prepared a brief analysis, which is presented below, based on current market rates and our best estimate at the surety policy fee. For this analysis we have assumed the debt service reserve fund will be invested at 5.55 %. Once the true costs are known, we will rerun this analysis. Since the costs can only be known by receiving a bid from an insurance company, we recommend the Town apply for a surety policy. If the Town does so and receives a bid offering such services, it is in no way committed to accept the policy. Rather, once this bid is received the Investment Banking 2 GUIDES FOR THE JOURNEI' I PiperJaffray. I. Recap recommendation for best way to structure the debt (Piper • jaffray) The recommended s±ructure Piper Jaffray is presenting is based..on issuing fixed rate bonds in mid to late July with the bonds closing late July. The bonds will be amortized over 30 years. We have also recommended net funding the construction fund so that the Town may invest bond proceeds until the funds are required. The current structure assumes a cash funded debt service reserve, however we will work with the Town to reanalyze the debt service fund once the cost of a Surety policy is known. Based on this structure and the current market rates the bond issue would have a minimum of a 1.2x coverage ratio and the average annual debt service would be $2,647,000. Please see Appendix B for the estimated Sources & Uses, Net Debt Service Schedule and the cash flow. II. Discussion of bond insurance a. What coverage ratios are required to obtain AAA rating? Based on the Town's sales and lodging tax revenue projections and the required project funds, in order to obtain an AAA rating it will need to have the bonds insured by one of the four major municipal bond • insurance providers. If one of these insurance companies provides coverage of the bond issue, then the bonds will be rated AAA based on the credit of the bond insurance company. In order to secure such policy, the insurance providers will require that the Town of Vail receive an underlying investment grade rating from Standard & Poor's, Moody's or Fitch. Based on our past experience and preliminary discussions with one of the ratings agencies, Sales Tax Revenue Bonds typically require 1.2x or greater coverage. While the coverage ratio is important, the rating agencies will look at many other factors as well, such as the sales tax revenue history, the health of the local economy and the additional bonds test. b. What are costs and other terms of the insurance? The insurance company will charge a one time upfront fee for insuring the bonds. This fee will be quoted in basis points and based on the total principal and interest on the bonds. The investment banking, team has ~LQ influence on the cost of this insurance. The fee is calculated by the insurance companies based on the underlying rating and each company's internal credit review. We recommend that the Town apply for insurance from two or more of the insurance companies and then select the company that offers the lowest fee. • Investment Banking 1 GUIDES FOR (PiperJaffray. THE JOURNEY` Town, along with its investment banking team, can run a cost benefit analysis and then 'make the appropriate decision. b. What are costs and other terms of the insurance? The cost of the surety policy is quoted as a percentage of the debt service fund requirement. The debt service fund requirement is generally the lesser of the following three amounts: 1) 10 percent of the par amount of bonds issued, 2) 100 percent of the maximum annual debt service, or 3) 125 percent of the average annual debt service. The insurance companies typically charge 3 to 4 percent of this requirement as the fee for a surety policy. While this is the typical range, we have seen both higher and lower fees. These fees are determined by the insurance companies based on the underlying credit rating and the internal analysis of the bond issue. If issued, the surety policy will be good until the bonds mature or until they are prepaid. If the bonds are refunded, a new surety policy would need to be purchased for the refunding bonds. , IV. Discussion of cash management a. One advisor has recommended the use of a product that gives the Town cash now for the net present value of future conference center tax collections (a DSDA). b. Why did PiperJa,~ray not include such a product in your original proposal? Piper Jaffray briefly mentioned this subject on page 12 of our original presentation dated March 2004. However, due to the diverse nature of the Vail conference center board, we chose to focus the presentation on the basic fundamentals of the bond issue and our company, with the intention of exploring more complex topics with a smaller sub-group if we are selected to work with the Town. We do believe the use of a debt service deposit agreement presents an excellent opportunity for the Town to add economic value to this bond issue. With a Debt Service Deposit Agreement the Town has two options. The first option would be to receive an upfront payment, which would be applied to the bond issue. The second option would be to receive a guaranteed interest rate on the funds, in which case the Town would receive the interest earnings over the life of the bonds. With either case the Town would be required to make regular deposits with the provider Investment Banking CiUIDE$ FOR 3 THE JOURNEIG' PiperJaff ray. i t i I ~_ ,: '' ~, { ~~ ~~ f, `. `~ <~ ;~ ~~; ~~ ~~ A ,. .~ .i'- {~~{ ,~ } , S.~ x" j, F `; ~ ~~.._ K ,~ _ ~._~_ of the agreement. The interval would most likely be monthly deposits equal to 1/12 of that year's total debt service. While receiving an upfront payment from a debt service deposit_~ agreement could help'lower the bond issue amount, we recommend the Town consider the second option and lock in a long term rate at which the funds can be invested. If the Town decides to receive an upfront payment, it will receive the present value of the projected interest earnings on the deposited funds. This present value is in essence a loan from the provider, which is secured on the future interest earnings on the fund. The loan rate or discount rate used to calculate the upfront payment is based on a taxable borrowing rate, which would be two to three hundred basis points above the Town's cost of funds. Piper Jaffray typically recommends that issuers use a debt service deposit agreement for an upfront payment when they need extra funds and have no other source to provide the requirement. This situation is sometimes faced when issuers sell General Obligation bonds and are limited to the par amount of an issue, but still require a small amount of additional funds. In the Town of Vail's situation, it is not limited to the par amount of the bond issue. We realize the additional source of funds could be applied to reduce the size of the issue, which would have a small impact on coverage ratios, however we believe the Town would be better off in the long-run to enter into an agreement that allows it to keep the future interest earnings. These interest earnings can be applied towards debt service or towards the annual operational expenses. If selected as underwriter, we will work with the Town to fully analyze each option and then work to select the appropriate solution. V. Discussion of public auction compared with negotiated sale a. How does a public auction work? In a public auction, the financial advisor ("FA") works with the issuer to prepare the bonds for a public sale. Part of this preparation process is assisting bond counsel with document preparation. The FA also works with the issuer to present the bond issue to the ratings agencies and municipal bond insurance companies. Additionally, the FA will advise the issuer on the structure of the bond issue. As the sale date • • approaches, the FA and issuer will finalize the bond structure and publish the information s0 that it is available for potential bidders. This information is typically posted two weeks prior to the sale date. On the day of the sale, the FA will receive and verify each of the bids. Once this Investment Banking 4 GUIDES FOR I PiperJaff ray. THE JOURNEIG' verification process is finalized, the FA ranks the bids based on the true interest cost and then selects the bidder that offers the lowest yield. At this point, the FA will use the winning bidder's coupon and yield structure to calculate the final debt service schedules, which are then distributed to the working party. After the sale is complete, the FA works with the issuer and bond counsel to prepare the final documents and coordinates the bond closing. b. What are the roles of the issuer, financial advisor, underwriter, bond counsel, and others? Issuer Financial Advisor Public Auction • .Provides information to bond counsel for documentation • Works with FA on the terms and structure of issue • Discusses issue with and provides information to rating agencies and insurance providers • Advises issuer regarding the structure of the bond offering • Works with issuer to present the bond structure and credit features to the rating agencies and the insurance providers • Works with bond counsel on the preparation of legal offering documents • Sets up and conducts public auction • Coordinates the bond Negotiated Sale • Same roles as in public auction • ~ Decides whether or not to accept underwriters purchase offer on the day of the sale N/A Underwriter • Reads offering documents • Submits bid based on bid parameters • Delivers bond proceeds on the day of closing • Advises issuer regarding the structure of the bond offering • Works with issuer to present the bond structure and credit Investment Banking S ~'iUIDES FOR THE JOURNEY' ~ Pipedaff ray. ~,s;;r ,., 3 ~~ ~, ;: ~~ ~ ~: f h fM ~~ ~ ,~~~- ~ ' ~,. ,~'~~' ~ ¢ fi ~` . ~~' _ ` , ~ 1 ~~ ~~, ~: °3'~ s ~ f ~ ~ ~ k ~ F ~~ ; , r w~ ; a ~.' - ~ ., r ~ ~ iz _h'~V ~ ~ ~ J ~ ~.; _ .~ `: ~ ; `~i^ ~~ ti; ~; f x ~,. ;~, ;; ,~ ~ - ~. ~. ~, ~ - ~ ti , r ~ 4 3 ~~ t h L~ i ~~~ &fi s #~ y~ ~ ~~ 1I F~~ s'S a ' ~°~~ ' , 'x J 3 } "X x features to the rating agencies and the insurance providers . Works with bond counsel on the preparation of legal offering documents • Markets the bond issue to potential investors and answers any questions regarding security • On the day of pricing, works with the issuer to determine the final structure of the bonds based on the current _ market conditions • Negotiates the interest rates and purchase price with interested purchasers • Presents an offer to purchase the bonds to the issuer based on the market interest • Facilitates the closing process and on the day of closing delivers the bond proceeds to the issuer Bond Counsel Prepares legal offering • Same as under public sale documents • Reviews bond insurance documents • Prepares closing documents • Certifies the tax exempt status and legality of the bond issue Investment Banking 6 GUIDES FOR THE JOURNEY' PiperJaff ray. r~ • • !T ~.: c. Which alternative do you think is better for the Town of Vail and why? We believe the Town will achieve a better debt service structure if the bonds are issued through a negotiated sale. This recommendation is based on the complexity of the transaction. One of the Town's concerns expressed to us is the annual level of debt service. With a competitive sale, the financial advisor can only provide an approximate structure for the debt service, as the winning bid will determine the ultimate debt service. With a negotiated sale, the underwriter has the ability to work on the debt service structure with the issuer throughout the entire process of the sale. This structure may even be changed during the actual sale process so that the issuer ends up with the desired results. Outlined below are some of the advantages and disadvantages under each method.. Complexity of Bond Issue A major factor to consider when deciding between a competitive and negotiated sale is the complexity of the bond issue. Competitive sales offer a very efficient process for distributing simple bond issues. General Obligation bonds, particularly school district issues, are well suited to competitive sales because the credit is straight forward and easy to understand. As the bond issue becomes more complex, a negotiated sale is more beneficial. Revenue bonds typically fall under the more complex category. When a complex bond issue is sold through a negotiated sale, the investment banking team is able to work with its sales force to explain the credit and source of revenues to the potential buyers prior to the bond sale date. If these buyers understand the credit, they are more likely to purchase the bonds at lower yields. Credit Strengths of Bond Issue In a competitive sale, the purchasers of the bonds are not known until after the sale is complete, thus it is difficult to explain the credit to the potential buyers. With a competitive sale, it is difficult to sell the potential buyers on the strengths of the issuer and they end up assuming that the bonds are similar to other comparable rated issues. As mentioned during previous meetings with the Town, Piper Jaffray has a strong track record Of success issuing bonds throughout Eagle County. Through this past experience; our firm has developed relationships with many buyers that have an interest in bond issues from this area and are often willing to pay a premium for these issues (lower interest rate). By conducting a competitive sale, the Town will not be able to fully benefit r ~__ Investment Banking ~ GUIDES FOR THE JOURNEY` ~ PiperJaff ray. ~:` from our firm's past experience and the competitive advantages we have • developed through marketing bonds for Eagle County issuers. Debt Service Structuring Flexibility An additional consideration is the loss of flexibility when using a competitive sale. When using a public sale, the principal amounts of the bond issue are locked in a few weeks prior to the sale. If the bond market moves before the sale, or depending on the coupons of the wining bid, the issuer's final debt service schedule may not resemble the desired structure. This is particularly important when coverage ratios are tight or when an issuer has a desired maximum level of annual debt service. With a negotiated sale, the principal amounts and coupon structure can be changed at anytime, including during the sale. Thus, with a negotiated sale, it is guaranteed that the issuer will have its desired debt service structure. Timing of Bond Issue A second factor regarding flexibility is the timing of the bond issue. In a negotiated sale, the underwriter may set a sale date or may list the date as day to day and then enter the market when the conditions are • optimal. With a public sale, the pricing date is set a few weeks in advance and is rarely changed. While an issuer can move a compet>.t>.ve sale date once it has been set, it is not recommended. Since the potential bidders must invest time in researching and selling an issue they may not even win, they become less interested if it appears the sale date is not firm. Distribution of Bonds Finally, if the Town would like the bonds to be made available to residents of Eagle County, a public sale would not be the preferable method. Under a public sale, the issuer does not know who the bonds will be sold to until after the sale. If the winning bidder does not have a retail sales force or is based in another state, it will most likely distribute the bonds to institutional investors only. If we are selected to sell the Town's bonds on a negotiated basis, we can start the sale with a retail order period, which will ensure that bonds will be available to local investors. Pricing of Bond The one advantage of a public sale is that the bonds are awarded solely • on the basis of the lowest bid. While this does not always result in a rate Investment Banking S GUIDES FOR THE JOURNEY.' PiperJaff ray. lower than what a negotiated sale would have achieved, it does mean that no allegations of preferential treatment can be made. However, since the Town is conducting a formal request for proposal process, it has put in place a system to choose an underwriter that should alleviate any potential questions regarding preferential treatment. Which ever sale method the Town decides upon Piper Jaffray is well suited to serve its needs. We would appreciate the opportunity to serve the Town as either a financial advisor or as an underwriter. d. What activities take place before an auction and what kind of time line could we expect? (Include consideration of any announcement dates that we might want to avoid.) Please see the attached Appendix A for an estimated timetable. Please note that with a competitive sale, once the sale date is set, it is not recommended that it be changed. Changing the date on short notice could have a negative impact on the bids received.on the actual day of the sale. e. What activities take place before a negotiated sale and what kind of time line could we expect? Please see Appendix A for the estimated timetable for the negotiated sale of the bonds. The only difference is that the sale date may be moved at any time to an earlier or later date. It is even possible to cancel the sale while it is in progress and reschedule it for another date. This type of situation is rare, but may occur when an unexpected event occurs or unanticipated economic information is released. VI. Potential Conflicts of Interest a. Does your firm have a policy regarding bidding for bonds when you are also acting as the financial advisor on the issue? Our. firm's policy is to provide the service that is requested by our client. Some of our financial advisory clients request that we bid on the bonds so that there are more firms competing for the sale, while other clients specifically prohibit us from bidding on their bonds when we serve as financial advisor. If selected to serve the Town of Vail as a financial advisor, our underwriting desk would like the opportunity to bid on the bonds, however we will honor the preferences of the Town. Investment Banking 9 GUIDES FOR THE JOURNEY.' ~ PiperJaff ray. ~_,. r :' L.. b. Does your firm have a polity regarding resale of bonds that you • acquire as the advisor on a negotiated sale? (For example, if you buy bonds at par on the offering and resell them at a premium, do you remit that premium to the issuer.) Our firm does not have a policy regarding the resale of bonds acquired from a negotiated sale. In a negotiated sale, it is the responsibility of Piper Jaffray to offer its clients with the best rates possible given the current bond market. In situations where the municipal market place does not absorb or purchase the entire issue, we will commit to purchase the remaining balances from the issuer so that it can complete the sale and know that the required amount of bond proceeds will be delivered on the day of closing. When Piper Jaffray does purchase some of the bonds into inventory, it will sell them through the secondary market and not pass on any additional premiums or discounts to the issuer. While these bonds are held in inventory, Piper Jaffray takes interest rate risk. If there is a dramatic change in the interest rate environment, our firm may end up selling these bonds at a higher premium or at a lower premium, possibly even a discount. On the day of pricing, a negotiated sale is not complete until the issuer has accepted the purchase offer from the underwriter. Once our • underwriting desk has marketed the bonds, it may offer to purchase any unsold balances to complete the sale. Through this process the underwriter makes an offer to the issuer to purchase the bond issue at a set price and set interest rates. At this time the underwriter can tell the issuer who the purchasers of the bonds are and the amount that has been sold, as well as the amount that will be taken into inventory for resale at a later date. It is important to note that this is an offer to the issuer. If the issuer is unsatisfied with the rates or the terms of the offer, it can refuse. In such a case the bond sale could be rescheduled for another date when the market conditions improve, or the underwriter may re- negotiate the sale terms with investors. VII. Fee Structure a. What is the best fee (underwriter's discount) your firm can o,~er the Town of Vail to underwrite the proposed issue in a negotiated sale? Piper Jaffray strives to provide a high level of service to every client and our goal is not to be a low cost low service provider. We believe that our fee of $6/bond, assuming insured bonds, is very reasonable and will • allow for a beneficial relationship between us and the Town. InvesUnent Banking to GUIDES FOR THE,JOURNEY.` Piperf affray. ~; b. What is the best interest rate you can get for the Town of Vail in a negotiated sale? How is it decided? Is it o,~'of the Bond Buyers' Guide? Piper Jaffray can not guarantee any interest rate today as it will be determined by the market on the day the Town's bonds are sold. This rate will also be impacted by general economic conditions at the time of the sale. After the completion of a negotiated sale, we generally present an MMD comparison for our clients. The MMD is the Municipal Market Data, which is a national comparison of general obligation bonds traded or sold on a specific date. The MMD is published daily. Typically revenue bonds trade or sell around 10 basis points higher than GO bonds. We would be happy to show this comparison to the Town of Vail after the sale is complete so that the Town can compare its bond pricing to a national average. Additionally, if there are any other similarly rated bonds pricing the week of the sale, we -will prepare a comparison between these and the Town's bonds. c. What is the lowest fee your firm can o,$er the Town of Vail to act as our Financial Advisor in a public auction? The lowest fee we will charge to serves as a financial advisor for a public sale is $30,000. Please note that we do not charge an additional fee for the electronic bidding services. Some of our competitors use their own bidding platforms for which they apply additional charges. If the Town uses a public sale, we recommend using Parity for its sale. Parity does not charge the issuer, but instead charges each bidder a nominal fee. d. Is your fee lower if your firm also bids for the bonds in a public auction where you are the Financial Advisor? If Piper Jaffray serves the Town as financial advisor and also bids on the bonds, it will not lower the financial advisory fee. Since there is no way to know if we will win the bid, but must still perform the same financial advisory work, we must charge the same fee. Investment Banking 11 GUIDES FOR rFiE jouRIVEY• ~ PiperJaffray. APPENDIX A TOWN OF VAIL SALES AND LODGING TAX REVENUE BONDS -- - _.. SERIES 2004 TIMETABLE une S M T W T F S 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 S M T W T F S 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 Ne otiated Sale Public-Sale DATE DATE EVENT 5/20 5/20 Select Underwriter/Financial Advisor and determine sale method 5/22 5/22 Engage bond/disclosure counsel 6/4 6/4 15~ Draft of Documents Distributed ' 6/9 6/9 15~ Document Review 6/11 6/11 Revised Documents Distributed 6/15 6/15 Comments to Bond Counsel 6/17 6/17 Revised Documents Mailed to Rating Agencies and Insurance Companies 6/23 6/23 Rating Agency Conference Call 6/25 6/25 Receive Ratings 6/30 6/30 Receive Insurance Commitments & Select Provider 7/7 7/7 POS to Printer 7/8 7/8 POS Mailed 7/19 - 7/22 7/20 - 7/22 - Market Bond Issue - Town Adopts Bond Resolution 7/23 7/22 Final OS Distributed for Comments 7/23 7/23 Comments back to Bond Counsel by Noon 7/23 7/23 Final'OS Printed and Distributed 7/29 7/29 Closing Im~rtant Rvvsitc to rnsLC Garr • June 29-30 - FOMC meeting. ^ July 2 -Bureau of Labor Statistics releases unemployment rate. ^ July 5 -Fourth of July holiday, markets closed. ^ ,August 10 - FOMC meeting. • • 1 APPENDIX B _ • Preliminary $43,670,000 (-t j TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO ~::f i SALES TAX REVENUE BONDS SERIES 2004 Net Debt Service Schedule Date Principal Coupon Interest Total P+I DSR Net New D/S 12/01/2004 - - 787,177.44 787,177.44 (58,659.95) 728,517.49 ;,q 12/01/2005 720,000.00 1.600% 2,083,705.00 2,803,705.00 (155,798.76) 2,647,906.24 12/01/2006 735,000.00 2200% 2,072,185.00 2,807,185.00 (155,798.76) 2,651,386.24 f~ !2/01/2007 750,000.00 2.700% 2,056,015.00 2,806,015.00 (155,798.76) 2,650,216.24 12/01/2008 770000.00 _3 050%_..,,_ 2,035,765.00 2,805,765.00. (155,798.76) _ 2,649,966.24 12/01/2009 790 000.00 3.450% 2,012,280.00 2,802,280.00 (155,798.76) 2,646,481.24 ~,; 12/01/2010 820,000.00 3.700% 1,985,025.00 2,805,025.00 (155,798.76) 2,649,226.24 ~, 12/01/2011 850,000.00 3.900% 1,954,685.00 2,804,685.00 (155,798.76) 2,648,886.24 12/01/2012 885,000.00 4.100% 1,921,535.00 2,806,535.00 (155,798.76) 2,650,736.24 12/01/2013 920 000.00 4.200% 1,885,250.00 2 805 250.00 (155,798.76) 2649,451.24 12/01 /2014 960 000.00 _ 4.350% ,.. 1,846 610.00 _.. _ 2 806 610.00 _ (155,798.76) 2 650,811.24 12/01/2015 1,000,000.00 4.500% 1,804,850.00 2,804,850.00 (155,798.76) 2,649,051.24 12/01/2016 1,045,000.00 4.550% 1,759,850.00 2,804,850.00 (155,798.76) 2,649,051.24 12/01/2017 1,090,000.00 4.600% 1,712,302.50 2,802,302.50 (155,798.76) 2,646,503.74 ~ 12/01/2018 1,14Q,000.00 4.700% 1,662,162.50„ 2,802,162.50 (155,798.76).__ 2,646,363.74 ~ 12/01/2019 1,195,000.00 4.750% (,608,582.50 2,803,582.50 (155,798.76) 2,647,783.74 12/01/2020 1,255,000.00 4.850% 1,551,820.00 2,806,820.00 (155,798.76) 2,651,021.24 12/01/2021 1,315,000.00 4.900% 1,490,952.50 2,805,952.50 (155,798.76) 2,650,153.74 j 12/01/2022 1,380,000.00 4.950% 1,426,517.50 2,806,517.50 (155,798.76) 2,650,718.74 12/01/2023 1,445,000.00 5.050% 1,358,207.50._ _ 2,803,207.50._ _(155,798.76). _ 2,647,408.74 :~ 12/01/2024 1,520,000.00 5.100% 1,285,235.00 2,805,235.00 (155,798.76) 2,649,436.24 12/01/2025 1,595,000.00 5.150% 1,207,715.00 2,802,715.00 (155,798.76) 2,646,916.24 , 12/01/2026 1,680,000.00 5.200% 1,125,572.50 2,805,572.50 (155,798.76) 2,649,773.74 12/01/2027 1,765,000.00 5.200% 1,038,212.50 2,803,212.50 (155,798.76) 2,647,413.74 12/01/2028 1,860,000.00 5.200% 946,432.50 2,806,432.50 (155,798.76) 2,650,633.74 12/01/2029 1,955,000.00 5.250% 849,712.50 2,804,712.50 (155,798.76) 2,648,913.74 12/01/2030 2,055,000.00 5.250% 747,075.00 2,802,075.00 (155,798.76) 2,646,276.24 12/01/2031 2,165,000.00 5.250% 639,187.50 2,804,187.50 (155,798.76) 2,648,388.74 12/01/2032 2,280,000.00 5.250% 525,525.00 2,805,525.00 (155,798.76) 2,649,726.24 12/01/2033 2,400,000.00 . .,..,,.__5250%„_ _,,,405825.00_ , .,..,_.._2.805825.00, _-_ (155,798.76) _2,650026.24. ~~ ' 12/01!2034 5,330,000.00 5.250% 279,825.00 5,609,825.00 (2,962,983.76) 2,646 841.24 Total 543,670,000.00 - 544,065,794.94 $87,735,794.94 (7,539,807.7 $80,195,987.19 Yield Statistics Y^ Bond Year Dollars # _ $870,312.56 ' Average Life _ # 19 929 Years Average Coupon # 5.0632149% _, Net Interest Cost (NIC) # 50933213% `. True Interest Cost (TIC) # 50619163% ~ f Bond Yield for Arbitra a ses _ _ ... __. _.. 8..pu~_ .... _..... _ # _...... .. __ ___... _ ...... 5.1135610% _ .. . . . _ _ j All Inclusive Cost (AIC) # ... . ... . ............. 5.1835783% Smiea 2004 i SINGLE PURPOSE 15117/2004 i 4:28 PM APPENDIX B Preliminary I • $43,670,000 ~ TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO ~._4. SALES TAX REVENUE BONDS r-~~ ~ SERIES 2004 Sources & Uses Dated 07H5/Z004 ~ Delivered 07H5/2004 Sources Of Funds Series 2004 ~ SINGLE PURPOSE 1 5/172004 1 428 PM • - s Vail Conference Center Available Revenue, Debt Service, Coverage Ratios, and Fund Balance ear Sales Tax Revenue from Dedicated Taxes Cash Funded Additional Debt Service Payments Annual Funds Available for Debt Service Net Debt Service Payments Debt Service Coverage Annual Funds Available After Debt Service Annual Operating Loss Annual Funds Available After Operating Loss Capital Maintenance Reserve Contribution ther . Expenditures early Net Cash Flows ~ Cumulative Net Fund Balance 2003 343 447 3 - 3;343,447 - - 3,343,447 - 3,343,447 - - 3,343,447 3,343,447 2004 , , 3,274,466 - 3,274,466 (728,517) 4.49 2,545,949 - 2,545,949 - (210,000) z 2,335,949 5,679,396 2005 196 774 3 - 3,196,774 (2,647,906) 1.21 548,868 - 548,868 - - 548,868 6,228,263 2006 , , 3 330 929 - 3,330,929 (2,651,386) 1.26 679,543 - 679,543 - (500,938) s 178,605 6,106,868 2007 , , 557 418 3 300,000 3,857,418 (2,650,216) 1.46 1,207,202 (1,113,920) 93,282 (40,000) - 53,282 5,860,150 2008 , , 127 3 681 300,000 3,981,127 (2,649,966) 1.50 1,331,161 (940,046) 391,115 (70,000) - 321,'115 5,881,265 2009 , , 3 798 346 300,000 4,098,346 (2,646,481) 1.55 1,451,865 (827,939) 623,926 (80,000) - 543,926 6,125,190 2010 , , 920 224 3 300,000 4,220,224 (2,649,226) 1.59 1,570,998 (774,416) 796,582 (100,000) - 696,582 6,521,772 2011 , , 4,047,036 300,000 4,347,036 (2,648,886) 1.64 1,698,150 (743,293) 954,857 (135,000) - 819,857 7,041,629 2012 4,148,514 300,000 4,448,514 (2,650,736) 1.68 1,797,778 (765,592) 1,032,186 (220,000) - 812,186 7,553,815 2013 4,252,567 300,000 4,552,567 (2,649,451) 1.72 1,903,116 (788,560) 1,114,556 (250,000) - 864,556 8,118,370 2014 4,359,261 300,000 4,659,261 (2,650,811) 1.76 2,008,450 (812,216) 1,196,234 (275,000) - 921,234 9,039,604 2015 4,468,665 - 4,468,665 (2,649,051) 1.69 1,819,614 (836,583) 983,031 (300,000) - 683,031 9,722,635 2016 4,580,846 - 4,580,846 (2,649,051) 1.73 1,931,795 (861,680) 1,070,115 (350,000) - 720,115 10,442,750 2017 4,695,878 - 4,695,878 (2,646,504) 1.77 2,049,374 (887,531) 1,161,843 (400,000) - 761,843 11,204,593 2018 4,813,833 - 4,813,833 (2,646,364) 1.82 2,167,469 (914,157) 1,253,312 (415,000) - 838,312 12,042,905 2019 4,934,786 - 4,934,786 (2,647,784) 1.86 2,287,002 (941,581) 1,345,421 (420,000) - 925,421 12,968,326 2020 5,058,815 - 5,058,815 (2,651,021) 1.91 2,407,794 (969,829) 1,437,965 (425,000) - 1,012,965 13,981,291 2021 5,185,998 - 5,185,998 (2,650,154) ~ 1..96 2,535,844 (998,924) 1,536,920 (435,000) - 1,101,920 15,083,211 2022 5,316,417 - 5,316,417 (2,650,719) 2.01 2,665,698 (1,028,891) 1,636,807 (435,000) - 1,201,807 16,285,019 2023 5,450,154 - 5,450,154 (2,647,409) 2.06 2,802,745 (1,059,758) 1,742,987 (435,000) - 1,307,987 17,593,006 2024 5,587,297 - 5,587,297 (2,649,436) 2.11 2,937,861 (1,091,551) 1,846,310 (435,000) - 1,411,310 19,004,316 2025 5,727,931 - 5,727,931 (2,646,916) 2.16 3,081,015 (1,124,297) 1,956,718 (435,000) - 1,521,718 20,526,033 2026 5,872,147 - 5,872,147 (2,649,774) 2.22 3,222,373 (1,158,026) 2,064,347 (435,000) - 1,629,347 22,155,381 2027 6,020,038 - 6,020,038 (2,647,414) 2.27 3,372,624 (1,192,767) 2,179,857 (435,000) - 1,744,857 23,900,238 2028 6,171,698 - 6,171,698 (2,650,634) 2.33 3,521,064 (1,228,550) 2,292,514 (435,000) - 1,857,514 25,757,752 2029 6,327,223 - 6,327,223 (2,648,914) 2.39 3,678,309 (1,265,407) 2,412,902 (435,000) - 1,977,902 27,735,655 2030 6,486,715 - 6,486,715 (2,646,276) 2.45 3,840,439 (1,303,369) 2,537,070 (435,000) - 2,102,070 29,837,724 2031 6,650,275 - 6,650,275 (2,648,389) 2.51 4,001,886 (1,342,470) 2,659,416 (435,000) - 2,224,416 32,062,141 2032 6,818,008 - 6,818,008 (2,649,726) 2.57 4,168,282 (1,382,744) 2,785,538 (435,000) - 2,350,538 34,412,678 2033 6,990,022 - 6,990,022 (2,650,026) 2.64 4,339,996 (1,424,226) 2,915,770 (435,000) - 2,480,770. 36,893,448 2034 7,166,427 - 7,166,427 2,646,841 2.71 4,519,586 1,466,953 3,052,633 435,000 - 2,617,633 39,511,081 1 A portion of the funds accumulated prior to debt service issuance is used to augment debt service payments in years 2007 through 2014, these funds are. subtracted from the prior years cumulative fund balance 2 Project implementations costs of $210, 000, including consulting fees and owner's representative costs, subtracted from fund balance in 2004 3 Pre-opening expenses of $500, 938 subtracted from fund balance in 2006 P perJaffray 5/25/04 Public Finance Attachment B: Request for Qualifications C, • • To Whom It May Concern: Your firm is being considered as one of several to provide design team lead services for the Town of Vail -New Conference Center. The selection process will consist of this Request for Qualifications, followed by a request for Proposal and Oral Interviews. The selection process will be as follows: - 02 JUN 04: Issue Request for Qualifications for Design Team - 17 JUN 04: Qualification packages due from interested candidates - 30 JUN 04: Conference committee review meeting for RFQ responses - 06 JUL 04: ToV Council review & approval of short-list recommendations - 07 JUL 04: Issue Request for Proposals to short list - 13 JUL 04: Proposals due from short-listed candidates - 14 JUL 04: Conference committee review meeting for proposals - 20 JUL 04: ToV Council review & approval of oral interview list To allow the Owner and their Owner's Representative, Architectural Resource Consultants, Inc. to fully understand your firm's qualifications for this job, please carefully prepare a response based on the items listed in the attached request for qualifications. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, .~ • • Request for Qualifications !fail Conference Center I. Overview of the Project A. For the purposes of responding to the informational requests below, assume the project will be as follows: 1. 100,000 SF conference center (see attached program); 2. $42.5 million budget for hard and soft costs for above scope; 3. 125 parking spaces for the conference center 4. Potentially up to 275 public parking spaces from additional funding source; 5. The current schedule is to have 100% completed construction drawings ready to issue by June 2005, based on a Notice to Proceed to the design team of August 15, 2004. A 100% Civil Bid Package may be issued separately in early April, if desired by the Owner. II. Overview of the Firm • A. Please purchase AIA Document B431, Architect's Qualification Statement -1993 Edition, if your firm does not have one on hand. Present the information requested, following the instructions provided. B. Please provide a compiled financial statement for your firm including, at a minimum the following: An income statement for the current year to date, and full prior year. 2. A balance sheet for your firm. 3. This information should be prepared by an outside firm, preferable a CPA and should adhere to generally accepted accounting practice. 4. If your firm has multiple offices, please provide this information for the office from which your firm will be providing the bulk of the services for this project. C. Please provide a complete list of projects including size and dollar value that your . firm has completed, together with the contact person and phone number for the Owner and Contractor for each. © 2004 All rights reserved by Architectural Resource Consultants, Inc. Page 2 of 7 • II1. Specific In-House Personnel Dedicated to this Project A. The success of this project's team will rest. on the individuals assigned to the facility's completion. Good teams typically have strong leaders, together with highly qualified, dedicated support personnel. The Owner is very interested in the specific make-up of your proposed team, and their respective qualifications. Please provide the following information about the in-house employees your firm proposes for this project: 1. The presentation of the design team leader's qualifications should include at least the following information: Current resume. List of projects completed by this individual, together with owner and general contractor contact person and phone number for each project shown. Narrative of key qualifications that make this individual an ideal "fit" for this Owner and this job. • Minimum number of hours per week this individual will be specifically dedicated to this project during the design process. Minimum number of hours per week this individual will be specifically dedicated to this project during the construction process. Other projects this individual is currently scheduled for participation in through 01 SEP 06 as a member of the design team for your firm. Personal references for this individual in the community outside the construction industry. 2. The presentation of the balance of the in-house design team members should be identify the following information about each: Current resume. Current job description. • Minimum number of hours per week this individual .will be specifically dedicated to this project during the design process. © 2004 All rights reserved by Architectural Resource Consultants, Inc. Page 3 of 7 * Minimum number of hours per week this individual will be specifically dedicated to this project during the construction • process. * Other projects this individual is currently scheduled for participation in through 01 SEP 06 as a member of the design team for your firm. IV. Required Design Services A. The Town of Vail will require the project design team to include the following design and engineering members, at a minimum: * Architectural firm with multiple conference center experience; * Structural engineer with mountain and parking structure experience; * Civil engineer fluent in tight sites, utility relocations, and complex phasing; * Traffic engineer with extensive experience in public transportation facilities and resort communities; • * Parking consultant with demonstrated comprehensive structured , parking and circulation analysis ability. B. Prepare a list of all design services to be provided under your contract with the Owner that will be completed wholly or in part by personnel inside your firm. Indicate what portion of each of these tasks will be completed in-house. C. Prepare a list of all design services to be provided under your contract with the Owner that will be completed wholly or in part by organizations and/or personnel outside of your firm's employees. Indicate what portion of each of these. tasks will be completed in-house, if any. D. Prepare a list of all engineering, testing, consulting, and other services not provided by your design team that you recommend the Owner should provide to the project during design to insure its success. E. For responding to Part III of this RFQ, the Owner suggests, but does not require, • a format similar to the matrix reference in AIA Document B163 (1993 Version) for the purposes of clarity and comparison with other firms. ©2004 All rights reserved by Architectural Resource Consultants, Inc. Page 4 of 7 • V. Quality Control and the Design Process A. Please describe the steps that your firm recommends as the best for the design phase of this particular project, identifying one-time tasks, on-going tasks, points of Owner participation, milestones, etc. The methods used to insure timely delivery of internally consistent and externally coordinated documents should be emphasized. B. Please describe the methods used by your firm to minimize conflicts in the final construction documents and reduce change orders. Please provide documentation for .the amount of non-owner initiated change orders as a percentage of total project construction cost for your firm, both on a project-by- project basis, as well as an historical percentage. C. Identify your firm's desired involvement in the bidding. and construction process, and the methods used to achieve quality control in the field. • VI. Technology A. The ability to produce and revise drawings rapidly can be essential to maintaining aggressive schedules. Please identify the following capabilities of your firm: Prepare a list of all the computer hardware used by your firm, identifying each by the manufacturer, model number, year, quantity in use, and whether the equipment is leased or owned. Please be sure to include all CADD and PC terminals, plotters and printers. 2. Please prepare a list of all computer software essentia identifying the name, version, and number of copies of break the software list into the following use categories: I to your firm, each. Please - CADD - Specifications - Rendering - Scheduling - Word processing - Spreadsheet - Accounting - Database - Network - Other How long has your firm used each of these software packages? © 2004 All rights reserved by Architectural Resource Consultants, Inc. Page 5 of 7 3. At what point in the design process does your firm begin putting the • drawings on CADD? Please identify this milestone as a percentage of 100% complete construction drawings. VII. Town of Vail Standard Language A. Limitations of Multiple-Fiscal Year Obligations: All financial obligations under this contract subsequent to the fiscal year in which it is signed is contingent upon funds for this purpose being appropriated, .budgeted, and otherwise made available by the Town of Vail. This contract shall not be deemed to create any multiple-fiscal year direct or indirect by Section 20(4)(b) of the State Constitution (Amendment One). B. Right to Reject any and All Proposals: The Town of Vail does not obligate itself to accept the lowest, or any other proposal, and reserves sole discretion to reject any or all proposals, to re-advertise, and to waive formalities or irregularities in the process or of any proposal. When considering proposals and determining whether the Contract will be awarded and, if so, to which vendor, the Town of Vail, in its sole discretion, deems to be appropriate. C. Insurance Requirements: The Bidder shall take out and maintain at the Bidder's own expense the following minimum limits of insurance: 1. Commercial General Liability: a) $2,000,000 combined single limit b) $1,000,000 aggregate 2. Automobile Liability: a) $1,000,000 combined single limit b) $1,000,000 per person and $1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury and property damage. 3. Workers' Compensation and Employer's Liability: a) Workers' Compensation limits as required by the State of Colorado b) Employer's liability limits of $100,000 per accident. 4. Each insurance policy required by this clause shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be suspended, voided, cancelled, reduced in coverage or in limits, except after 30 days .prior written notice has been given to the Owner. and renewal notices shall grant the Owner the required to protect its interests. 5. The bidder shall provide Certificates in ACCORD format and all renewal notices for each insurance policy required by this clause to the Owner in a timely and proactive manner. Failure of the Owner to receive such certificates right to take remedial action as D. Hazardous Material: The Bidder agrees to indemnify and hold Owner and Architect harmless for any release or disposal of any kind of toxic wastes or hazardous material, ©2004 All rights reserved by Architectural Resource Consultants, Inc. • • Page 6 of 7 or any violation of any law or regulation of the Environmental Protection Agency or S Colorado Department of Health and Environment which is caused, in whole or in part by the contractor or any of the Bidder's subcontractors. E. Assignment: The successful Bidder is prohibited from assigning or subcontracting the whole or any part of the contract without the prior written consent of the Town of Vail. F. Appropriation of Funds: Owner affirmatively represents that its governing body has duly appropriated such sums which are equal to or in excess of the contract amount, and that such contract amount may be lawfully paid by Owner to Contractor subject to the terms and conditions of the contract documents. In the event that Owner approves a change order or other additional compensable work to be performed by Contractor, (other than that contemplated by the contract documents under any remedy- granting provision), Owner wilt issue a written assurance at the time of such approval that such additional compensation to be paid has also been duly appropriated by the Owner's governing body. I encourage you to direct any questions that you might have via email to Mr. Russell Forrest at rforrestCa~vailpov.com with a cc: to Mr. -Mark Huff (mark(a~arcinc.to), and Mr. Tim Brekel (tim(~arcinc.to). A single point of contact will generate the most clarity of direction and least confusion of intent. Phone calls, or direct contact with the Owner, Owner's • Representative, or the Owner's staff may disqualify the candidate, at the Owner's option. The committee will require ten (10) copies of your firm's response addressed and delivered by hand to: Mr. Mark Huff Architectural Resource Consultants, Inc. 4410 Arapahoe Ave. Suite 220 Boulder, CO 80303 Email or FAX submittals will not be accepted. Submittals are due no later than 4:OOpm, 47 JUN 04. Thank you for your time and interest in our exciting and unique project. L' © 2004 All rights reserved by Architectural Resource Consultants, Inc Page 7 of 7 Attachment C: ARC fees • Town, of Vai( Conference Center 'i Scope Of Services. -Executive Summary ._ _ . The "executive summary" for preconstruction and construction services is as follows: Services Fee Phase One (10 May to 01 June 04) One Time Tasks During Preconstruction 8,510 Overall Owner's Budget w/Above Programmatic Estimate w/Above Initial Design & Construction Schedule w/Above Initial Design Team RFQ & RFP w/Above Phase Two -Preconstruction One Time Tasks During Preconstruction 30,650 Conceptual Estimate w/Above Preliminary Cash Flow Report w/Above organizational Chart w/Above Schematic Cost Estimate w/Above Initial Value Engineering w/Above Preliminary FF&E Budget w/Above DT, GC, & FO Team Selection Processes & Contract Negotiation w/Above Constructability and Peer Review of Design w/Above Pre-Qualification of Subcontractor Candidates w/Above Bid Analysis and Award Recommendation w/Above GC's Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP) Validation w/Above Scope Coordination and Responsibility Matrix w/Above . Phasing and Bid Package Preparation w/Above Final FF&E Budget w/Above On-going Tasks During Preconstruction 9,710 I Month Phase Three -Construction On-going Tasks During Construction 18,340 /Month Reimbursable Topset (Billed Actuals + 10%) 717/month @Preconstruction & 997/month @ Construction • Page 1 of 1 Architectural Resowce Consultants, Inc. Town of Vai! Conference Center . '~ ~ Scope of:Services -Executive Summary ~}~:. The "executive summary" for preconstruction and construction services is as follows: Services Fee Phase One (10 May to 01 June 04) One Time Tasks During Preconstruction 8,510 Overall Owner's Budget w/Above Programmatic Estimate w/Above Initial Design & Construction Schedule w/Above Initial Design Team RFQ & RFP w/Above Phase Two -Preconstruction One Time Tasks During Preconstruction 30,650 Conceptual Estimate w/Above Preliminary Cash Flow Report w/Above Organizational Chart w/Above Schematic Cost Estimate w/Above Initial Value Engineering w/Above Preliminary FF&E Budget w/Above DT, GC, 8~ FO Team,Selection Processes & Contract Negotiation w/Above Constructability and Peer Review of Design w/Above Pre-Qualification of Subcontractor Candidates w/Above Bid Analysis and Award Recommendation w/Above GC's Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP) Validation w/Above Scope Coordination and Responsibility Matrix w/Above Phasing and Bid Package Preparation w/Above Final FF&E Budget w/Above On-going Tasks During Preconstruction 9,710 /Month Phase Three -Construction On-going Tasks During Construction 18,340 /Month Reimbursable Topset (Billed Actuals + 10%) Page 1 of 1 717/month @Preconstruction 8 997/month @ Construction Archftedural Resource Coruulfants, Inc. • • MEMORANDUM TO: Vail Town Council FROM: Russ Forrest DATE: June 1, 2004 SUBJECT: Request to authorize the Town Manager to execute an easement to facilitate the construction of a bridge directly south of the Waste Water Treatment Plant I. DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST Vail Resorts is requesting that the Vail Town Council approve of an easement which will allow the construction of a bridge that would support a water line. It would also provide • access to a new snow cat access if and when that snow cat access is approved by the Town of Vail. The snowmaking facilities that Vail Resorts has historically used were located on Forest Road. They have now been removed as grading occurs on the Forest Court Subdivision. Vail Resorts must now reconnect the snowmaking system to their waterlines along Gore Creek through the easements requested below. The easement request includes: Bridge and Utilities This easement extends from the ERW & SD property to the south bank of Gore Creek. It will accommodate the new bridge and related utilities (snowmaking water line will be suspended beneath the bridge). This is located on a portion of Tract K and an unplatted parcel of land. II. BACKGROUND The proposed snowcat access project implements a condition of approval for the previously approved Forest Court Subdivision. The new snowcat access will change the route taken by snowcats from the Holy Cross/Maintenance Facility to Vail Mountain and will result in the removal of snowcats from Forest Road. The following project approvals have been obtained from the Town of Vail: ^ Town Council granted VR approval to go through the Town's review process, • PEC approval of a variance request for height of retaining walls, ^ DRB design approval (final landscape plan still needs to be approved), • Town Council upholds PEC variance approval. To date, this project has been reviewed and approved as one project. Issues with private covenants (access road across Tract K) within the Glen Lyon Subdivision and recent • questions about process that were raised in a 1996 letter from the Town and VR to the Glen Lyon residents have come to light. Given the previous commitments made to the homeowners of this subdivision, Vail Resorts would like to proceed ;vith the project in two phases: Phase I The first phase is critical as it involves completion of the snowmaking elements of the project, specifically the new vault, intake, bridge and water lines up the mountain. Approval of the three easements requested will allow VR to move forward with reconnecting the snowmaking system on Vail Mountain. Phase II Phase II would involve construction of the snowcat access road up the mountain. This would occur after resolution of the covenant issue and after amendments have been made to the Glen Lyon Special Development District. These amendments would clarify any confusion regarding current and future uses permitted on Tract K. Following resolution of these matters, VR would return to the Council for approval of an easement for the snowcat access road. III. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Community Development Department recommends that the Town Council • authorizes the Town Manager to execute an easement that will allow for the construction of a new bridge on a portion of Tract K, Glen Lyon Subdivision and an unplatted parcel of land. Attachment 1: Easements F:\Users\cdev\COUNCILWIEMOS1041snowcat access060104.doc :7 Attachment 1 '= ~...~ _ ." F t .... \ ._.... ~.~ ~. Vii' _.!__. ~', ... ~ ~ i ~~. ~`\ :`'i./. ~~_ - .- ._ -7-~~ . / ~'~ ~,' „• ~ is ~~~ ! Yom...' \\~dU~ 4~:. .' `~ ~ .`° `~'. 7 ~;. ' -1. ` ~ 1 ~r-- ~/ ~,-r / ~! G. LOVEN, LLC ' RECEPTION No. 803775 %,° ~: '' i TOWN OF VAIL ~'--.. RECEP110N No. X2272-.' ~ ~ ~• ,~~. ' ~'~~`~y lA I '~ l! 5 ~ r ~ ~ r~;9'"" "'r' +{ 1 . /~ uai /~ /~ ~/ ~~ ~~'~~, -" f ~~~.. C% 1 ~~~- ~/~ i FUTURE SNOWCAT ASEMENT • /~ I~_ Z Q g ~ U w m ~ m ° W " U O Lu 3 ~z ~ ~ W ~' Q ~ w O ~ ~ ~ CC Cq W J m y Z O N ~ i f .I ' ~ I ~i ~ I oi ~ ~ ~ ~I z; i ~ I w I i ml j I i ~ ' ~ t O Z 3 ~ 3 i m U i V m ' ~ ) ~ ~ ~ ~ i i CS I I i ~ ~ ~ .} ~ i ( N ' ' ' O m O W W 2 Z C7 U W O O ~ U SHEET NOT TO SCALE 1 ,I o.~•,, o m "- ~~ o, :^ _ ~ ~ ~ ~~. / LOT 1 ~ ~ -~'! ~- ' EAGLE RIVER WATER & SANITATION DISTRICT ~ ~ t `lt~~ ~! RECE>? ON No. 871144 \ ~~ "1 ~~,~ ~ _ t~ \ ~~/" ~~ ,~ EASEMENT ~1- SNOWMAKING 1 i~.jakE' STORM DRAIN ~' ~ • GORE CREEK _~ ~ ~,, ~ ~ , / _ :.. i `` r', ~`' ~ ~=~i~ °"_'°~_ `E,45Ef_fECJ~: ~3 . BRIQGE.~' - ._AN0.U:31LITY --~ ..- ~~ 8001, ~7 =P_AGE'663 - ~ !=- ._ .. .- ,_ EASEMENT ~2- SNOWMAKING WATER LINES PCT Rocky Mountain Classic Timeline of Major Developments • Discussions begin with PCT _ ~~ February • 1St site visit by PCT executives • Event Presentations to Town of Vail, Vail Resorts, Eagle County • Event hosting contract finalized April • Media meetings in Denver • UCI event sanction received .7une • Formation of sponsorship packages July • First round of media/sponsor meetings in Denver • Vail operational visit from PCT • ucI event sanction received September • Event launch at PCT San Francisco October • Continued sponsorship meetings in Denver December • PCT hires Denver-based. salesperson • PCT sends a-mail regarding difficulty of sponsorship sales • PCT issues statement regarding optimism for sponsorship • Event deadline is extended to March 31 ~~~ February • PCT provides update to Town Council March • PCT operational visit to Vail • March 31 deadline is extended to May 15 April • weekly updates regarding sponsorship sales M~15 • Final deadline passes with no Title Sponsor • WCTB issues statement of 2004 event cancellation Pro Cycling Toi;r - Rocky Mountain Classic at Vail 2003 Town of Vail Funding Reconciliation Total TOV Funding Provided in 2003 Local Marketing District 50,000.00 Town of Vail Council 50 000.00 Total 100,000.00 ACCOUNTING OF FUNDS Local Marketing District Funds so,ooo.oD Timeline: 560,000 paid to wCTe on 8/8/03 WCTB ACCOUNTING REVENUES Local Marketing District 50,000.00 TOTAL REVENUES ~ 50,000.00 WCTB EXPENSES Marketing Materials Trade show Booth 32,517.00 video / dw Brochures/Rack Cards Giveaways website Events San Francisco Launch 9,699.00 Interbike veld Swap Vail / Denver Meetings Travel ~- 9,801.00 ~ '. TOTAL EXPENSES 52,017.00 NET INCOME (LOSS) (2,017.00) Town of Vail council Funds 50,000.00 Timeline: 1. 520,000 paid directly to Threshold sports on May 15, 2003 2. 530,000 paid to WCTB on 8/1/03 3. WCTB Paid Threshold 520,000 on 9/19/03 and f10,000 on 11/14/03 THRESHOLD SPORTS ACCOUNTING Revenues 5/15/03 Town of Vail 20,000.00 8/1/03 wcra 20,000.00 11/14/03 wCTe 10,000.00 TOTAL REVENUES 50,000.00 EXPENSES Legacy sports Group Management Fee 21,667.00 (see below) dedicated sales staffing 12,500.00 Technical/sanctioning 2,539.00 operations 360.00 Travel/Lodging 17,751.00 Promo/Adv. 609.00 Administrative 5,690.00 TOTAL EXPENSES 61,116.00 NET INCOME (LOSS) (11,116.00) LEGACY SPORTS GROUP ACCOUNTING Revenues (Threshold SPOrts) 10/1/2003 10,000.00 11/1/2003 10,000.00 12/15/2003 1,167.00 TOTAL REVENUES 21,167.00 EXPENSES dedicated Marketing Staff ~ ~ 19,417.00 unreimbursed Travel 2,867.00 Administrative 2,455.00 Returned t Fee 1 167.00 TOTAL EXPENSES - 2$,906.00 NET INCOME (LOSS) (4,739.00) Total Net Income (Loss) (17,872.00) • • ~~ A • INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT FOR EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT WITNESSET)EI THA7t': WHEREAS, intergovernmental agreements to provide functions or services, including the sharing of costs of such services or functions, by political subdivisions of the State of Colorado aze specifically authorized by Section 29-1-203 C.R.S. (1986) and other sections of the C.R.S.; and WHEREAS, establishment of an intergovernmental agreement will serve a public purpose and will promote the safety, security, and general welfare of the inhabitants of the jurisdictions; and WHEREAS, the jurisdictions hereto aze each authorized to provide, establish, and maintain disaster emergency services as defined by each jurisdiction; and WHEREAS, disaster emergencies may arise in one or more of the jurisdictions, resulting in greater demands than the personnel and equipment of that jurisdiction can handle, and WHEREAS, it is in the best interest of the jurisdictions that it may have service of and from the other jurisdictions to assist it in reacting to disaster emergencies; and • WHEREAS, other jurisdictions who provide similar resources may in the future desire to be included in this agreement, and WHEREAS, it is in the best interests of each of the jurisdictions to have access to emergency resources to supplement their own during an emergency; and WHEREAS, to receive the resources cited above, it is cost effective for each of the jurisdictions to make available during disaster emergencies, its own resources to other affected jurisdictions. NOW THEREFORE, IT IS MUTUALLY AGREED by and between each of the signatory jurisdictions as follows: 1. a. This Intergovernmental Agreement is promulgated under the provisions of Article 1, the relevant portions of Articles 5 and 22, Title 29, and 24-32-2105 C.R.S. The statute shall control in case of conflict between this agreement and the statute. Each and every term, provision, or condition herein in subject to and shall be construed in accordance with the provisions of Colorado law, the Charters of the various jurisdictions, and the ordinances and regulations enacted pursuant hereto. b. It is understood and agreed by the jurisdictions hereto that if any part, teen or provision of this Agreement is by the courts held to be illegal or in conflict with any law of the State of Colorado, or of the United States of America, the validity of the remaining • t Page 2 Intergovernmental Agreement for Emergency Management portions or provisions of the remaining portions or provisions shall not be affected, and the rights and obligations of the jurisdictions shall be construed and enforced as if the Agreement did not contain the particulaz part, term, or provision held to be invalid. c. All terms and words herein shall have the same definition as provided in Titles 24 and 29 of C.R:S. except as herein otherwise indicated. "Disaster Emergency" shall have the same definition as provided for "Disaster' at 24-32-2103 (1) C.R.S. Where-terms and words herein are not so defined they shall have the commonly accepted definition. 2 This Agreement provides for the joint exercise by the jurisdictions of the function or service provided herein, but does not establish a separate legal entity to do so, nor does it constitute any jurisdiction as an agent of any other jurisdiction for any purpose whatsoever. This agreement shall provide only for sharing or in-kind resources by the jurisdictions. 3. For and in consideration of the promises of each participating jurisdiction, each agrees with the others that in the event there aze disaster emergencies in the territory served by one jurisdiction which are beyond the capabilities of that jurisdiction, each other jurisdiction, subject to the limitations herein set forth, will assist the other, by causing and permitting its resources to be used in responding to such disaster emergencies in the other jurisdictions. The need for such assistance shall be determined by the jurisdiction requesting assistance, subject however, to the following limitations: a. Any of the signatory jurisdictions shall be excused from making their resources available, or continuing to make their resources available, to any of the other jurisdictions, in the event of the need of the resources of such jurisdiction within the territorial area of such jurisdiction or any other jurisdiction, or their prior use at any other place. Such decision of availability shall be made by the jurisdiction requested to give mutual aid, and such decision shall be conclusive and in the providing jurisdiction's sole discretion. b. Mutual aid response by any jurisdiction beyond the political boundary of the responding jurisdiction is hereby deemed to be approved by the respective Executive and Legislative governing bodies of the jurisdictions, and such response shall require no further approval by responsible officials of any jurisdiction, except as provided by the limitations in Article 3 - a. (above). 4. Each jurisdiction shall, at all times, be responsible for its own costs incurred in the performance of this Agreement, and shall not receive any reimbursement from any other jurisdiction, except for third party reimbursement under Article 7, and except as may be negotiated and agreed to separately, in writing, by both the requesting and receiving jurisdictions. • • •. .. Page 3 Intergovernmental Agreement for Emergency Managers 5. Each jurisdiction waives all claims and causes of action against all of the other jurisdictions for compensation, damage, personal injury or death occurring as a consequence, direct or indirect, of the performance of this agreement, to the extent permitted by, and without waiving any protection or other provisions of, the Colorado Governmental Immunity Act. 6. Each jurisdiction agrees to allow any other govenunental jurisdiction defined under Colorado law to join in this Mutual Aid Agreement after formal approval by its governing body and notification by the depository cited in Article 13 of such action to each of the other signatory jurisdictions to this Agreement. Each party who initially executes this agreement to the office of the person executing this Agreement, or such other parties as they may further designate in writing, the authority to execute such amendments as may be necessary in the future to accommodate the jointer of new jurisdictions to this Agreement, without change of any other terms or conditions of the Agreement. 7. Each jurisdiction agrees that it will reasonably pursue any legal reimbursement possible, pursuant to state laws, for incidents including, but not limited to, hazardous materials incidents, occumng within its jurisdiction, on behalf of all assisting jurisdictions. Upon • payment by the responsible entity, and after subtracting the reasonable costs of pursuing and collecting the reimbursement, the receiving jurisdiction will distribute the received funds in a fair and equitable manner to assisting ~unsdictions, based upon a pro rata share of their documented expenses for the involved incident. 8. Nothing contained in this Agreement, and no performance under this Agreement by personnel of the jurisdictions hereto, shall in any respect alter or modify the status of officers, agents, or employees of the respective jurisdictions for purposes of worker's compensation or their benefits or entitlements, pension, levels or types of training, internal discipline, certification, or rank procedures,. methods, or categories, or for any purpose, or condition or requirement of employment. Worker's Compensation Coverage shall be as structured in C.R.S. 29-5-109, if the request meets the requirements of C.R.S. 29-5-103 through 108, otherwise the claim shall be processed as if it were generated by any other work assignment within the providing jurisdiction. The providing jurisdiction shall remain responsible for processing any worker's compensation claims filed by their own resources. 9. This Agreement shall be binding upon the successors and assigns of each of the jurisdictions hereto, except that no jurisdiction may assign any of its rights or obligations hereunder, without the prior written consent oftwo-thirds (2/3) of the other signatory jurisdictions. 10. It is expressly understood and agreed that enforcement of the terms and conditions of the Agreement, and all rights of action relating to such enforcement, shall be strictly reserved to the named jurisdictions hereto, and nothing contained in this Agreement shall give or allow • any such claim or right of action by any other or third person on such Agreement. It is 4 Page 4 Intergovernmental Agreement for Emergency Managers the express intention of the named jurisdiction that ariy person other than the named jurisdiction receiving services or benefits under this Agreement shall be deemed to be an incidental beneficiary only. 11. Amendments to this Agreement may be made only upon unanimous consent by all then current signatory jurisdictions. Such consent shall become effective upon its receipt in writing at the depository cited below in Article 13. 12. Any jurisdiction hereto may terminate this Agreement, with or without cause, upon thirty (30) days prior written notice to the signature depository provided below. 13. This Agreement shall be executed by each jurisdiction on a separate signature page. Original signature pages will be held by the Colorado Office of Emergency Management (OEM) or its successor agency, at its offices at 15075 South Golden road, golden, Colorado 80401-3979 or at such place as OEM sha1T determine. Copies of signature pages shall be provided and certified by OEM to each party jurisdiction, and such copies shall have the full force and effect as if they were originals. OEM shall provide timely notice to all party jurisdictions of all additions to and withdrawals of party jurisdictions, as well as timely notice of the • effective date of any amendment to this Agreement. r~ • INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT FOR EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT As outlined in the foregoing Intergovernmental Agreement, the 'oeiow designated jurisdiction executes this Agreement on the most recent date indicated below. JURISDICTION: By: Title: Date: Approved as to: _ By: Date: . Approved as to• _ By: Date: OTHER: ATTEST AS TO SIGNATURES: Title: Date: ~i Vail Valley Athlete Commission Program -GUIDELINES what is it: Local Pepi Gramshammer originally conceived the idea for the Athlete Commission as a method for the Community to provide financial support for the Valley's deserving athletes. The program supports those athletes participating in international competitions with components of scoring and ranking. Currently, the commission consists of four funding partners: Beaver Creek Resort Company, Town of Vail, Vail Resorts, Inc. and the Vail Valley Foundation. Guidelines and criteria: All applicants must meet the following criteria to be considered for funding: 1. Applicants must compete in international competition, outside of North America. 2. Applicants must be residents of the community for a minimum of three • years. 3. Applicants must compete as individuals; no teams will be considered for funding. Team members may apply as an individual ONLY if his/her position on the team is based on individual ranking. - _. ,.~ 4. Applicants must be a minimum age at l5,years, youngaer compet}tors w-i1F be cc~nsideredl ~u an Individual basil _ In addition to these criteria, other consideration for funding will come from: 1. Athletes level of financial need 2. Level of competition in which the athlete participates While not a requirement, the commission hopes to honor those athletes that in turn honor their community. Whenever possible, representation of a community logo is expected and greatly appreciated. Funding is not available to athletes participating in fundraising and/or awareness events. Although the cause is most certainly worthwhile, the funding is designed for those participating in competitions of scoring and ranking. Additionally, funding is not available to seasonal athletes while they are coaching or attending seasonal training camps or to persons with a criminal record. Please note that the commission board reserves the right to review all applications and allocate funds on an individual basis. Ayylication Process: Two separate opportunities for application will exist, however applicants who meet the necessarX criteria can only receive fundin once per calendar year • For winter 2003, applications must be received by September 26`x, and funds will be distributed by November 1 ~`. • For summer 2004, applications must be received by Apri123`~, and funds will be distributed by May 31 S` All applications should be returned to: Vail Valley Athlete Commission Program • C/O Vail Valley Foundation P.O. Box 309 Vail, CO 81658 Fax: 949-9265 attn. Courtney Harris O BEAVER CREEK RESORT COMPANY ' ~~ ~/ A' I L RESORT 5" rmrrninnrn n L t7A TT t TA T T LRT 2004 Vail Valley Athlete Commission Financial Resort • • Name of Partner Amount ~~ . Comml-tte-c~ ._ Balance, to: #ate ~ ' ;` 2003.-Rollover funds : - - - - - .. __ $5056.84 - VailValle Foundation $5,000 $10,056.84 Beaver Creek Resort $4,000 $14,056.84 Town of Vail $4,750 $18806.84 Vail Resorts $5,000 $23,806.84 Name of ~t~hiete,= - Winter' Funds Amount distributed: Baiancnto ~:~ ~ ~ss~s ~ da`ti $a38os~~ 4 BJ A uilar $0 $23,806.84 Eric Archer $1500.00 $22,306.84 Nathan Asoian $2000.00 $20,306.84 Clair Bidez $750.00 $19,556.84 D Ian Bidez $500.00 $19,056.84 Chris Del Bosco $0 $19,056.84 - Ross Herr - $0 $19,056.84 Cod Jenick $2000.00 $17,056.84 Deacon Ross Malone $500.00 $16556.84 Robert McKend III $0 $16556.84 Josiah Middau h $500.00 $16056.84 Jonathan Morath $0 $16056.84 Jimi Mortenson $0 $16056.84 Sarah Schle er $4500.00 $11556.84 Eden Serina $1500.00 $10,056.84 Sabrina Ste-Marie $500.00 $9556.84 Rachel Van Sloun $0 $9556.84 Ste hen White $750.00 $8806.84 Dawes Wilson $750.00 $8,056.84 Julia Littman $0 $8,056.84 Vail Dail Full Pa a Announcement $520.00 $7,536.84 ~.b ` Name of` Athlete; Summer Funds - _ :~~ taw ~. , r Arnauht r dstrlbuted~~ ~ .,~. = ~ ~ -~k~gatanc~°to-~x ~~~ ~~ da~~~'~~~ ~~ $~53~.8~~ _ .,. ~~. Michael Janelle I , aG6 ** rren Lac Eric Lavi ne ** a Middau h James Mortenson J. DDG ** am Palmer Adam Plummer Nat Ross (, DO Daniel Weiland t~ bbb BALANCE AVAILABLE ~c ~ ~b~' ~ ~.a~~ 2004 mm Funds ~, - F 2003 Vail Vallev Athlete Commission Financial RPnr,rt IName~of I~artner-~. A~cun~ ~ommittect ;~~: .~B~alaneeto-date ~P r 2002 Rollover funds $1324.00 Vail Valle Foundation $5,000 $6,324 Beaver Creek Resort $4,000 $10,324 Town of Vail $4,750 $15, 074 Vail Resorts $5,000 $20,074 ;., .Name of Athlete, . Witter Funds ~ .,, ... Amount- disti~l'buted -~~ , . ~. A ;:Balance, tc~ date ~ $2oaia:ao r::. Eric Archer $1000.00 $19074.00 Tob Dawson $3000.00 $16074.00 Chris Del Bosco $1000.00 $15074.00 Chad Fleischer $2000.00 $13074.00 Kevin Anton Hochtl $1250:00 $11824.00 Stacia Hookom $1500.00 $10324.00 Anita Ortiz $1000.00 $9324.00 Sarah Schle er $3000.00 $6324.00 *Clair Bidez $500.00 $5824.00 BALANCE AVAILABLE: $13750.00 $5824.00 Name ot`Athtete, ~ Sumr~ter~~unds ~v'..un :v. ..~ R, .. Arn®utt '~ ' dls~ci~~fed 3'.," .a~" ,~/ s^°..v ."~ e~a~ariceao dafe:~; ~5s~a oo _u ~. .3 n '~~rt ~.., . .564 ~~ ,. ,_: Christo her Jones $750.00 . $5074.00 Chris Del Bosco $0.00 $5074.00 Breakfast $17.16 $5056.84 BALANCE AVAILABLE $5056.84 • • 2003 Summer Funds r wr f. . ,11~A it o • ._ ~ rea lvl ave w: _ ~~~~~SKIING FROM PAGE 1A Going downhiN loser look at what it perceived as THE DEI~'~'ER POST way to complacency, ski exec fop in out-of-state visitors. Since the 1996-97 season, Colorado has experienced a steady decline in the h%fe the reporlsmakes no recom- number of out-of-state and international skiers visiting the state. ierdations, it has provided resort ~zl' utives with the _ Information Out-of-state skiers •••°• , International •••••• ~.hte wanted to create a turn- Millions of skier visits r ~`nd strategy. The report, com- ted in June, is circulating only 7 ~ 7 01 rrfi~°ng a tight circle for competi- ~r ~=~ ~'~ ,°°=: 6 57 ~i~e~easons. l.~eanwhile, as Colorado's desti- ~ station skier visits slipped, visits to ~ d;anada and Utah were up. ~ j E But Colorado's corporate re- ' j j forts, pining for` more vacationers, ~ ' ~ l aye leaned heavily on frugal ~ ~ trippers with discount passes . j ped to their Gore-Tex. Al- ~ ? 1 ~1h~ggh hordes .of day skiers from 1 ~ tie Front Range have swarmed 1 ~ 1 `the Interstate 70 corridor over the ~ 1 1 past five years, they have not fully ~ J stemmed the loss of destination ~ l , spending. 1 1 ~~"`I think the bloom came off the ~ rose in Colorado because we got i ~ ~inplacent," says David Perry, ~ 1 fihief operating officer for Aspen ~ i l skiing Co.'s four ski areas. "The i ~ second homes were growing, the i , ~ K 'd~sitors were more and more afflu- i -ettt. R'e kept charging more. It was like we never thought it would stop. Collectively, we were all 1996-97 1997-98 1968-9 9 ~Ililt • in Colorado of losin sight of y g iwhat built our success: being cre- ative and being innovative." ,,. ; 9A fnre-season slide 6.07 - 6.15 6.08 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 Domestic Fewer skiers came to Colorado last season from its top five feeder states than during the 1996-97 season. _~-Blunt realization of the first sus- ` iii: N Y ~.a med decline in Colorado skiing . , ~ ~ - 49,528 -27,747 - - "- - - tstor now has resort executives y ~~ r _ : . as focused as Olympic medalist bode Miller carvin a Su er G _ i ~`` ~ ' ~,a } ~ - ~ '„ g . p _ ~ r - The prime directive to Rob Perl- ~ ~ ~ _ - ~ ~- an, president of Colorado Ski m ~ .~ ~ _' s Country, is to return the state to ~~ - }~s preeminent place among desti- -~ ~ _ , L ' L{-atton skiers. :-;`It's my mission in life," he says. _,-Colorado still gets more skier ~. ` "` -- `'`~ ': ' r: ' visits than -any other state. No- i ' • Calif. Texas Fia. 812 '82 '400 '186 353 '106 ei e else in the country even ~ l , , , comes close to the number and va- d'ifty Of 1tS TBSOrtS. Source: RRC Associates )3ut something isn't working for the state's once mighty ski indus- try; which has struggled to match its performance of the 1998-97 and °997-98 seasons. *R•~gsort leaders have plenty of ex- ~!ises. First, those seasons were "hf~h-water marks when all the st~r~ aligned," Perlman says. Christmas and New Year's holi- daysfell midweek for both extraor- dinarily snowy seasons, making for longer vacations. Easter break came early, bringing more skiers. Vail offered $10 ski days in May 1998. 4lesorts opened early and closed late. Then came five seasons of strug- gle, all highlighted by paltry to av- erage snowfall. The Y2K scare kept vacationers close to home. The Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks leveled the coun- try's tourism industry and crippled airlines. A national recession tight- ened skier budgets. alien American troops entered Iraq in March 2003, activity at re- sorts plummeted, and a ~ record start to the season melted away. All the while, the value of the dollar remained strong, making Colorado expensive for internation- al visitors. Industry Leaders say the uncon- trollable forces knocked the wind out of Colorado's ski industry. Out-of-state visits fell from 7.06 million in 1996-97 to 6.03 million last season. International visits fall from 954,949 to 749,715. Canada, Utah prosper Colorado's decline follows un- precedented investment by resorts. In the last decade, resorts poured more than;l billion into. on-moun- tain improvements, - including state-of-the-art snowmaking sys- tems. Almost $600 million of that came between 1996 and 1999 and went into new lifts, terrain expan- sions and mountaintop lodges. But ski resorts outside Colorado are flourishing. Skier visits nation- ally climbed to an all-time high of 57.6 million last season, besting pessimistic forecasts that weighed the impact of a softening economy and a nation at war. "There is definitely a national trend upward," says Michael Ber- ry, president of Lakewood's Nation- al Ski Areas Association. "Right now we are seeing vitality at en- try-level ski areas and, ultimately, that will translate into more busi- ness for the destination resorts. These are positive times for the in- dustry." While Colorado resorts have struggled, Canada and Utah are en- joying asnowy soiree. Utah resorts are relishing a 12 percent increase in destination business since 1999. Canada's resorts logged 18.86 million skier visits last season, mir- roring its record seasons of 2000-O1-and 2001-02. Canada has become an increas- ingly popular destination for Amer- ican skiers, especially with its dol- lar providing an almost two-for- one bang for a buck. In 1998-97, Canada's ski areas logged 860,000 American skier visits. Last season, they saw 1.95 million, a 127 per- centincrease. "Since 1996, most of our growth has come from the U.S.," said Colin Chedore, executive director of the Canadian Ski Council. "The dollar has been the major reason." Skiers in Colorado's core mar• kets of Texas, Florida, Illinois, Cal- ifornia and New York are not com- ing like they once did, with visits from each state declining between 7.5 percent and 21.5 percent in the last seven seasons. "It isn't that we are avoiding Col- orado, it's just that our opportuni- ties have broadened," says Sandy Ellison,. marketing chief for the Texas Slci Council. The same story holds for Colo- rado's core international markets, 5.03 i i Front Range skiers. . pack the slopes ... While out-of-state and international skier visits are down, increasing numbers of Front Range skiers are helping to keep Golorado's numbers relatively even. Front Range skier visits Other Colorado resident skier visits 3.07 !n mr7lians 2.87 2.77 2.39 2.45 P,40 ~ 1 2.17 ~ ~~ ~ ~, j I i ~~ '. ~ ~ ~ is ~< (` '961 '971 '981 ~'99/ '001 '01/ '021 97 98 99 00 ~. 01 02 03 ... but Colorado .--loses ground Colorado's share of the national ski market has slipped from 22.6 percent in 1996-97 to 20.1 percent last year. U.S, skier visits ®Colorado skier visits . !n mAlions 57.3 57.6 52.5 ~•1 52.1 52.2 54.2 _: i ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~ i { ~ ~ ~' ~j } 1 ~ ~~ I i ~ ~ , I ~1 .[',` . '96! '971 '981 '991 '001 '01/ '021 97 98 49 00 01 02 03 Source: RRC Associates - The Denver Post Canadian COmpetltl0tl a competitive one by the big public- ~ Canada's ski resorts have seen ty traded companies Vail Resorts and Intrawest. significan± growth in the number of "We really did find, perhaps, a American skiers venturing across the sweet spot between price and utili- 2002-03 northern border. In the past seven zation," says Vait Resorts chief op- seasons, Canada has seen a 127 crating officer Bill Jensen. "It has Foreign percent increase in American skiers. far exceeded our expectations. Skier visits from four of Millions of skier visits Now in hindsight, if we hadn't done Colorado's top five foreign markets were down last year from 1996-97. United Kingdom +20,424 Other European -86,000 Australia/ -85,85b New Zealand Latin America ......................... -40,445 ............. Canada -17,934 The Denver Post with visits from Latin America, Australia and Europe down any- where from 24 percent to more than 50 percent. ' ' Demographic factors such as ag- ing baby boomers are also cited as playing a part in Colorado's down- turn. The allure of cruise ships, beaches, Costa. Rican sea kayaks and lush golf courses is wooing ag- ing skiers away from an industry they created 30 years ago. In response, Colorado resorts, as well as resorts nationally, are fo- cusing intently on younger skiers. Terrain parks are everywhere. For- merly family-oriented ski areas, such as Keystone and Buttermilk, now thump with rail-sliding riders jibbing to blaring slopeside music. That shift from promises of fire- side cognacs to snowy raves may be contributing to boomers shely- ing their boards for good. "Pushing the older skier out, or allowing them to take themselves out too quickly, I think is a real mistake," said Trygre Myhren, a 20 st, we would have been forced to do something like it later." 1 8 Front Range destination resorts such as Vail, Copper, Breckenridge 1.6 and Winter Park logged a second- - best 7.23 million skier visits last 1.4 season, thanks largely to urban 1 2 day-trippers. But visits to the state's outlying 1.0 resorts, such as Steamboat, Crest- ed Butte, Telluride and Aspen, fell O.s to 3.77 million last year, down 14.5 0.6 `percent from the high of 1997-98. And since the 1998-99 ski season, o.a Crested Butte's sales tax revenues are off 12.6 percent, Telluride's 0.2 are down 5.5 percent, and Aspen's 0' ' ' ' ' ' ' are down 5.2 percent, according to 02- 96- 97- 98- 00- 01 • 99- research by The Post. 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 The deluge of discount passes Source: RRC Associates -The Denver Post also has hobbled the net income Colorado resorts have gleaned 66-year-old Denver skier who has " ° from ticket sales. They've sold so many discount passes that Colo- watched dozens of his ski bud- rado s ticket yield -the amount dies quit the sport. "I understand the need to get the of money earned from a lift ticket younger people, but that doesn't -- has dropped to 49.3 percent, the lowest in the nation mean you should lose your appeal . But skiers who live in the corri- to those people who tend to spend " dor from Fort Collins to Colorado more money ~ Front Range skiers-with season' Springs have helped by spending passes priced circa 1975 have ' -more time and money in resort towns. Their overnight visits s ski numbers bouyed Colorado since 1998 particularly resorts reached 1.18 million last season, a , flanking;Interstate 7 . n 1996-9.7, illion - th t~ s l ~2 ~=~~;,7 percent gain fiom 1997-98. n I always rent a room. Always, ose s iers ogge m says Larry Anderson 54, of Colo- days. Last. season, they delivered a 1 million visits record 3 , rado Springs as he gobbles steam- . . Colorado locals now make up ' -ing chili on a "slopeside deck at Breckenridge. Trying to do all more than 40 percent of the state s skier visits. Destination skiers this and then driving back, man, , who accounted for nearly 70 per- ~ m not into th t kind of stress oSk~- cent of visits in the mid-1990s, now . ing isn't supposed to be about make up less than 60 percent. stress ° V~rhile the timing appears fortu- . itous, the decision to sell season Avalanche of marketing passes for $200 to $300 and tur- bo-charge the market was mostly As the point man for the turn- around effort, Perlman packs solid credentials. Colorado Ski Country lured the born-and-bred Coloradan from a top marketing post at California's Mammoth ski area- last year. His strategy: narrow Ski Country's shotgun marketing approach to fo- cus campaigns in the state's core but dwindling markets. So far, he's put 24-page Colorado skiing inserts in every Ski and Ski- -_ing magazine sold in Texas, Illi- nois, Florida, New York and Cali- fornia. As a member of the Colo- rado Tourism Office board, he has, helped sway the state to support its first wintertime marketing cam- paign in more than a decade. "We are going narrower, not big- ger. We are concentrating our ef- forts on the existing skiers and snowboarders," says Perlman, an -expert skier who can work an ur- ban boardroom or a slopeside dis- n. ~i!tf Sunday, December 14, ~pQ3 --~ 1.7~ - C ' ~` D-~ Book~ngs, sno,~ wad m reports' ,err hopes fol• seas~~ .;.~ By Jason Blevins 'r: Denver Post Business Writer •i ~ C ASPEN - This could be thelcil- wether season for Colorado's ski in- dustry. No war. No recessiori:~l~a paralyzing fear of Havel. "Internally, we talk about th~s'Db` ing the year," said David Pei' •, chief operating officer for. A~p~r; Skiing Co. "If we have anot}}~~'"r down year for destination tr~fftc in Colorado, we will really hate"fo do some deep sou] searching." ;+o So far, so good. The snojR`,~.s deep, resort bookings are up a~td b weakening dollar makes. skiit'i~~~n Colorado more attractive l.o iiit~r- national visitors, i t:. "It's cheaper than skiing in'-~- rope right now," said Ian . A'fe~= ander of Hampshire, FnglanfJ,'~s he strolled through Aspen's pedes- trian mall over .the ThanksgipiAg holiday on his first ski trip to,{he U.S. "We are getting more dogqlass for our pound." I' Recent record seasons in'' ~.iie Northeast 'indicate skiers h~~B been lingering 'close to homd"for the past-few .years-and are itc~tiirig to travel. " ' '' "We've always wanted to chine here. We've always wanted to try Colorado," said Melissa Pant9jon, a lb-year-old from Piscata`ir2j, N.J., who recently spent a w~veek skiing at Breckenridge on her f~irii- ly's first ski vacation away `~i?om the East Coast. "We like this tt~r than Vermont. There's mor '. to do." ~' Resort-bookings across the ~tnie 3 ~}:. are up-from last year, which was the busiest November and De~cfn- ber in Colorado skiing history., The Front Range 'has agar de- voured the resorts season-pas o~- fBrings, even- with a slight u~itic7r In pT1Ce. - "If you ski at all, (the pass) i~ the best way to go," said Jerry B~- bernes, 68, of Denver, as he peeYed off his ski boots at Keystone.''`?~bn can get your `ski days down to~~0 OT IeSS." L u This is a leap year with an ektrh day in February. 1"`or-Vail-Re~~Yts that equals 60,000 more skiers Y%s- its at its four Colorado resorts at-d more than $1 million in net in- come. For the state, it could mean an extra 250,000 skier visits. ' Airlines such as United and Fron- tier have jumped on the leisure -- travel bandwagon, targeting skiing vacationers with a hos± of perks. Vail Resorts also has linked its website to United and Frontier, of- fering skiing and.lodging deals for fliers. - IIoliday bookings at Aspen's four ski areas and in the -Vail Valley are above last year, said resort of- ficials, noting that last year's holi- days were the busiest on record. - "I really think Colorado is post- - tioned very, very well for the long term," said Rob Perlman, presi- dent of Color9do Ski Country. co .with equal .verve. "We've nar- rowed our- focus- to make this the most important issue we face."- ResoTt towns across the state also have launched efforts to lure destination travelers. Businesses surrounding Aspen are united in n first-ever marketing push. Voters in Crested Butte and Telluride ap- proved tax hikes to fund market- ing programs -and bring consistent air traffic into local airports. "Next year? Now is next year: It's got to happen now,'° says John Norton, CF.O of Crested Butte ski area. "It it doesn't come back, you will see businesses in ,the community closing up. You will see vacant storefronts. You will see a portion on the local population pack up -and leave.° Special to The Post I Brett Goomer Gary Sutler of the Texas Ski Council will ski Big Sky, Mont., instead of Colorado this season. He's taking 390 Texans with him.