HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 06/11/96
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
EAGLE, COLORADO
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
FORM 50 HOECKEL'S 387869
PUBLIC HEARING
JUNE 11, 1996
Present: George "Bud" Gates
Johnnette Phillips
James Johnson, Jr.
Sara J. Fisher
Chairman
Corrmissioner
Commissioner
Clerk to the Board
This being a scheduled Public hearing the following items were presented
to the Board of County Corrmissioners for their consideration:
Airport Tenninal Revenue Bonds
Bob Loeffler, Assistant County Attorney, stated the first item on the
agenda was the proposed issuance of Airport Terminal Project Revenue Bonds.
He introduced Jack Gardner of Hogan and Hartson.
Mr. Gardner explained the bonds to the Board. He reviewed the tax
history of TEFRA and the requirement for private activity bonds, there must
be substantial notice and a public hearing held in respect to the bonds and
public opinion be heard. Following the hearing, the Board must approve the
issuance of the bonds. Federal law does not specify ground rules for the
hearing but as an opportunity for public comment. There are no time
requirements imposed. Following the hearing there is a Resolution which will
approve the issuance of the bonds for $11,000,000 with interest being no more
than 8% per annum. The resolution will also approve several documents. One
is the confirmation of the ground lease which was approved yesterday. The
second is a project agreement which is required under federal tax law. The
main purpose of that agreement is to put on the record the requirement that
when paid off they will come back to the County. That requirement specifies
some rules be adhered too. The third is a management agreement between the
County and the Corporation with the County acting as the manager of
construction. All of these documents are in draft and the resolution will
allow for any changes. There is also incidental action, such as assignment
of contracts from the County to the Corporation in order to complete the
project.
Chairman Gates asked about the incidental changes and the need for
another public hearing.
Mr. Gardner stated that is not necessary.
Chairman Gates asked if this is a thirty year maturity.
Mr. Gardner stated they anticipate a shorter period.
Chairman Gates asked for public comment.
Kevin Pratt, a consultant to Fixed Base Operators, noted the FBO has
been trying to stay on top of this. It has not obtained any copies of the
project agreements, assi$I1ffients, or documents referenced by Mr. Gardner. They
asked for a recess at thls time to allow them to review the documents.
Because they are not able to intelligently comment, they would like to have
some time to make some sense of them. The other approach would be to go
through them in detail as part of the hearing.
Bob Loeffler, Assistant County Attorney, stated the principal issue is
the use of the bonds. The terms have been well publicized and the client is
intimate with those. He does not see there being a disadvantage to them not
having them.
Mr. Pratt stated there are four documents they have not reviewed and he
asked for them at this time.
Commissioner Johnson asked when does action need to be taken to move
forward.
Mr. Gardner stated action can take place at any time prior to issuance.
The sole purpose of the hearing is to let comment be made by the public on
the conce~t. The other documents have nothing to do with the public hearing.
Commlssioner Phillips stated she would prefer to have the documents
1
provided now. She asked how much time will be necessary to review the
documents.
Chairman Gates stated they should stick to the issue as defined by bond
council and address the item before them which is the bonds themself.
commissioner Johnson moved to approve the issuance of the Airport
Terminal Project Revenue Bonds.
Commissioner Phillips seconded the motion. The vote was declared
unanimous.
Chairman Gates stated the hearing is continued until 2:30 p.m. this
afternoon.
Plat & Resolution Signing
Kathy Eastley, Planning Technician, presented the following plats and
resolutions to be signed by the Board. She thanked the Board for the
allowing these files to now be heard on a weekly basis.
SM-1031-96, Arrowhead at Vail, Filing No 15, Lot 21. She stated this
was a Minor Type B Subdivision, a duplex split of Lot 21 to create lots 21E
and 21W. This plat does contain a duplex split caveat. Staff is
recommending approval.
Commissioner Philli~s moved to approve final plat, file number SM-1031-
96, Arrowhead at Vail, Flling No 15, Lot 21.
Commissioner Johnson seconded the motion. The vote was declared
unanimous.
SM-1046-96, Arrowhead at Vail, Filing 15, Lot 35. She stated this was a
Minor ~e B Subdivision, a duplex split of Lot 35 to create Lots 35A and
35B. ThlS plat does contain a duplex split caveat. Staff recommended
approval.
Commissioner Johnson moved to approve final plat file number SM-I046-96,
Arrowhead at Vail, Filing 15, Lot 35.
Commissioner Phillips seconded the motion. The vote was declared
unanimous.
Resolution 96-69, file numbers PD-342-95-S/P and ZC-269-95, Confluence
PUD. She stated this Resolution is for approval with conditions, of a Minor
PUD and Zone Change located adjacent to the Town of Avon on the North side of
the Eagle River, South of the Southern Pacific Railroad. A PUD Guide is
attached to the Resolution. These files were presented to the Board on May
28, 1996.
Commissioner Phillips moved to approve Resolution 96-69, file numbers
PD-342-95-S/P and ZC-269-95, Confluence PUD.
Commissioner Johnson seconded the motion. The vote was declared
unanimous.
Commissioner Johnson stated he will abstain from voting on the next item
as he was not present on April 30, 1996.
Resolution 96-70, file numbers PD-296-96-Al, PD-296-96-A2 and PD-293-95-
P, Cordillera Planned Unit Development. She stated this Resolution was for
the conditional approval of two PUD Amendments and a Preliminary Plan for the
Bearden Parcel. A revised PUD Guide is attached to this Resolution. These
applications were presented to the Board on April 30, 1996.
commissioner Gates asked for clarification if this increases the number
of units or moves them to the Bearden parcel.
Ms. Eastley stated it moves them to the Bearden parcel.
Commissioner Phillips moved to approve Resolution 96-70, file numbers
PD-296-96-Al, PD-296-96-A2 and PD-293-95-P, Cordillera PUD and the
preliminary plan for the Bearden parcel.
Chairman Gates seconded the motion. Commissioners Gates and Phillips
voting aye and Commissioner Johnson abstained.
Adam I S Rib Appeal
Jim Fritze, County Attorney, stated the next item on the agenda was the
Adams Rib appeal. He explained the appeal to the Board stating this issue
2
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
EAGLE, COLORADO
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
FORM 50 HOECKEL'S 387869
was appealed by District Court. The Board has had the benefit of receiving
the Court's written decision. The Board is to decide whether or not to file
an appeal to the decision by the District Court to the Board of Appeals.
Chairman Gates asked for public comment.
Gene Lorig, plaintiff in this suit, stated he may be considered an
antagonistic party. He hopes the Board does not appeal. He stated he does
not make bets on law suits in District or Appellant Court. What has bothered
him are the statements from Kummer and one of the Commissioners to the effect
that if the Court is ~"Oing to decide this what is the use of having County
Commissioners. He thlnkS they all know better than that. He referred to the
Courts decision and stated he agrees with it.
Commissioner Phillips stated she does not feel what they did was
unlawful or illegal. She does not believe they acted in error. She
explained her position and believes the extended plans that have been done in
the past set the foundation for this extension. There are many reasons for
extension whether a sketch plan or other extension. That does not mean they
will approve them when brought back. She believes their decision for
extension was warranted. If this must be in a written regulation, they can
still extend the plan. She believes it was implied at the time. She stated
she will vote to appeal the court case.
Commissioner Johnson stated he voted against ~roviding the extension
because it was not written in the land use regulatlons at that time. He
believes the County can fix the regulations and they have proceeded in that
direction. By appealing they would be saying there is no need to put it in
the regulations. For the County to appeal, would be throwing good money
after bad. The County can remedy this by changing the land use regulatlons.
He urges the Board not to a~peal this decision.
Commissioner Gates revlewed his impression of the law and finds that
though it doesn't state they can, it doesn't state they can't. He believes
he should uphold the decision previously made but is sure they will come up
with the regulations as needed.
Commissioner Phillips moved to appeal to the District Court of Appeals
for the decision made regarding the extension of the Adam's Rib.
Commissioner Johnson stated while they will not have a resolution, the
record should be clear to show the polling of the Board.
commissioner Johnson seconded the motion.
In discussion, commissioner Johnson asked that if Adam's Rib ~lans to
discuss issues with the County, he would like them to discuss the lssues with
all of the Board members.
Chairman Gates stated when the press is getting quotes they get them
from all parties.
Chairman Gates called for the question on the Motion. commissioners
Phillips and Gates voting aye and Commissioner Johnson voting no.
Airport Tenninal Revenue Bonds (continued)
Chairman Gates again stated for the record this is an issue of revenue
bonds.
Kevin Pratt stated they appreciate the Board making available the
documents for review. He asked about the assignment of lease among the
documents.
Mr. Loeffler stated that lease itself contemplates the terms of the
lease relationship, there will be a follow up lease and in fact there is now
that document.
Mr. Pratt asked for a copy of that lease.
Commissioner Johnson stated that was on the Board's agenda yesterday.
Mr. Pratt stated they have a number of comments and questions about the
issuance of Bonds. They see it being the County applying for the PFC's or
passenger facility charges.
Mr. Loeffler again stated the pu~ose of the hearing.
Mr. Pratt took that as a declinatlon to answer the questions. They do
not feel the Corporation can do so. He asked if the County has made the
request for PFC's at this time.
Mr. Pratt stated if there has been no application for PFC's this is
3
premature.
Mr. Loeffler responded regarding the lease agreement.
Mr. Pratt asked whether a budget has been prepared
Mr. Loeffler answered yes and a feasibility study has been done.
Discussion followed on passenger departure estimates and an estimate on
PFC's.
Mr. Pratt asked if the revenue from the PFC's is a major part of the
revenue.
commissioner Johnson stated no.
Further discussion was heard on PFC's and payment of the bonds.
Mr. Gardner stated the County will not be assigning PFC revenue to the
corporation. He suggested Mr. Pratt ask these questions to his fellow
counsel.
Commissioner Johnson stated the PFC's were not referred to in the
proposed resolution.
Mr. Gardner stated the PFC application has not been prepared or
submitted to the FAA.
Mr. Pratt stated the County cannot co~ly with FAA regulations regarding
collection of PFC's. He stated the Commisslon is making a grant of bonds
without voter approval.
commissioner Johnson stated the PFC collections are not being collected
to pay for the bonds.
Further and lengthy discussion was held on PFC's.
Chairman Gates directed Mr. Pratt to direct questioning to the airport
revenue bonds.
Mr. Pratt brought to the Board's attention inderrmification clauses in
the lease agreement which are fiscal obligations that require compliance with
Amendment One. He asked how the bonds will be rated.
Mr. Gardner replied the bonds are offered to a limited number of
investors.
Mr. Pratt requested a copy of the offering.
Mr. Loeffler replied a request for copies of the offering has been
received by the Jet Center.
Commissioner Johnson questioned Mr. Pratt regarding his understanding of
Amendment One and multi-year fiscal obligations and use of PFC's regarding an
Amendment One question. He asked the Board to consider Mr. Pratt's concern
regardin~ the enterprise zone to the bonds will be legal for the Corporation.
Chalrman Gates thanked Mr. Pratt for his concern regarding the details
of the lease and revenue bonds.
Mr. Loeffler stated this subject has been discussed in many conceivable
forms by many entities, and the matter with Amendment One compllance has been
addressed, inderrmification issues have been addressed.
Steve Larson, counsel to the Jet Center, asked where the money for
current construction of the terminal is coming from.
Mr. Loeffler replied there is no doubt the corporation will issue the
bonds.
Jeff Ross, Vail Beaver Creek Jet Center, stated he has not received
projections on the second terminal and re-requested a copy of them.
Commissioner Johnson moved to continue this matter to June 12, 1996 at
9:30 a.m.
Commissioner Phillips seconded the motion. The vote was declared
unanimous.
Mr. Pratt will provide the Board with a copy of his questions.
Mr. Gardner stated all the questions Mr. Pratt posed has been researched
and answered.
There being no further business to be brought before the Board the
meeting was adjourned until June 24, 1996.
Attest:
d~+-4~
4