Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 10/09/2001 PUBLIC HEARING OCTOBER 9,2001 Present: Tom Stone Michael Gallagher Arn Menconi Tom Moorhead Jack Ingstad Sara 1. Fisher Chairman Commissioner Commissioner County Attorney County Administrator Clerk to the Board This being a scheduled Public Hearing the following items were presented to the Board of County Commissioners for their consideration: Consent Agenda Chairman Stone stated the first item was the Consent Agenda as follows: A) Approval of bill paying for the week of October 8, 2001, subject to review by County Administrator B) Approval of the minutes of the Board of County Commissioners meeting for September 18, 2001 C) Intergovernmental Agreement between Eagle County and the Town of Avon for 800 MHz Wide Area Smartzone Trunking Radio Services D) Eagle County Airport Terminal Addition-Change Order #3 to B & B Excavating for electrical light installation E) Grant of Easement to the Town of Gypsum for a sanitary sewer and potable water line across Eagle County Regional Airport property to service the Colorado Air National Guard site F) Grant of Temporary Construction Easement to the Colorado Department of Military Affairs to construct with the Town of Gypsum, a sewer and potable water line across Eagle County Regional Airport property to service the Colorado Air National Guard G) Resolution 2001-127 Release of Plat Note No. 10, submittal of collateral and commencement of the warranty period for Lazie-R-Ranch H) ECO Strategic Plan, June 2001. Chairman Stone asked the Attorney's Office if there were any changes to the Consent Agenda. Tom Moorhead, County Attorney, stated there were no changes. Commissioner Gallagher asked about items E, grant of easement and F, grant of temporary construction easement, and if this will interfere with the runway. Jack Ingstad, County Administrator, stated it will not. Commissioner Menconi moved to approve the Consent Agenda as presented. Commissioner Gallagher seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Plat & Resolution Signing Matt Gennett, Planner, stated there are no plats and resolutions for today's meeting. Resolution 2001-126, Support of Deep Creek Wilderness Recognition Chairman Stone stated the next matter on the agenda was Resolution 2001-126, supporting the 1 10-09- 2001 Deep Creek Wilderness recognition. He read the resolution for the record as follows: "Whereas, Eagle County through its Board of County Commissioners supports developing land use decisions at the local level; and Whereas, the Board of County Commissioners supports multiple use of federal lands; and Whereas, decisions made concerning federal land management impact local communities the greatest, and any decisions made by Congress must be based on input from these local communities; and Whereas, proposed wilderness designations by federal agencies in the Deep Creek are in Garfield and Eagle Counties;, and Whereas, Garfield County through its Board of County Commissioners is also in full support of the proposed wilderness designation; and Whereas, such designation will have a dramatic impact on local citizens; and Whereas, Deep Creek has, therefore, met the definition of wilderness by its scenic and ruggedly remote limestone canyon, which is up to 3,000 feet deep. It contains more that 40 caves, including Colorado's largest known cave. Deep Creek provides a pristine stream, lined with high quality Blue Spruce, Douglas Fir and Red Osier Dogwood habitat, and is home for Deer, Elk, Bear, Mountain Lion, Bald Eagle, Peregrine Falcon, Norther Goshawk, Townsend's Big-Eared Bat, Round-Tail Chub, numerous Songbirds and Raptores, and Whereas, critical water and water rights can be adequately addressed legislatively to protect both private property interests and water related natural resources in the Deep Creek area; and Whereas, the proposed wilderness designation which is begin supported herein includes the area contained within rim to rim of Deep Creek totaling approximately 8,450 acres of which 2,000 acres are in Eagle County and 6,450 acres are in Garfield County. Now, therefore, be it resolved by the board of County Commissioners of the County of Eagle, State of Colorado: That, consistent with the Board of County Commissioners of Eagle County, Colorado, philosophy of supporting local review, Eagle County supports the designation of rim to rim of the Deep Creek area of Garfield and Eagle Counties as a wilderness area. That, this Resolution is necessary for the public health, safety and welfare of the citizens of the County of Eagle, State of Colorado. Moved, read and adopted by the Board of County Commissioners of the County of Eagle, State of Colorado, at its regular meeting held the 9th day of October, 2001." Commissioner Gallagher stated he supports the resolution to designate and supports the need to maintain the pristine areas within Eagle County and the State of Colorado. Commissioner Menconi stated he would hold his comment until the public has spoken. Richard Compton, a resident of unincorporated Eagle County in Basalt, stated he is the Director of the Whiteriver Conservation Project and a member of the Colorado Wilderness Network. He stated the Colorado Wilderness Network has proposed a larger area which he supports. He asked the Board amend the area to include a larger area which has been endorsed by the Town of Eagle and the Town of Basalt. He thinks it is inappropriate for this Board to define the boundaries. He hopes that they will endorse McInnis's bill and leave it open to include the larger area. He spoke to additional information to enter into the record in support of his position, three letters from outfitters and Dr. Jacobson, a land owner in the area, supporting the Colorado Wilderness Network, asking for the 22,000 acre boundary. He read a letter from Dick Piffer who operates out of Sweetwater an area that would be included in the larger bill as follows: "I am writing this letter to vocalize my support of the Deep Creek Wilderness boundaries that have been defined by the Colorado Wilderness Network. I am a hunting and fishing outfitter in the Roaring Fork Valley and I run my hunting trips and general management unit number 25, which is part of the area being considered as wilderness. I have been running trips in the Deep Creek area for many years and I know the area very well. I am supportive of your decision to promote Deep Creek for 2 10-09-2001 wilderness designation, but want to encourage you to include a larger acreage in your proposal. During the past few weeks, I have been contacted by representatives from the Citizens Wilderness Network to discuss the boundaries in the Citizens Wilderness Proposal. With their boundary along Route 618, there are no conflicts between their proposed area and the functioning of my business. I support the boundaries proposed by the Network, although I would propose extending the northern boundary all the way to Sweetwater to best protect the resource. There are several reasons why I feel that the area above the Deep Creek canyon rim deserves wilderness designation, including wildlife habitat values and watershed protection. Essentially, the canyon itself is well protected because of the difficulty of gaining access to this area. However, the land located above the canyon rim risks future degradation due to the ease of access from roads and user created routes. This is one important reason that protection should extend beyond the canyon rim. Also, the land adjacent to the rim provides an important wildlife corridor for big game herds, which wilderness designation would protect. If you are looking to provide protection for Deep Creek, you need to protect the entire watershed. I feel that designating the canyon itself as wilderness is not enough and I encourage you to consider the boundaries that are being presented by the Citizens Wilderness Network." Mr. Compton read a letter from Christopher Porter from Anderson Camps for the record as follows: "I am writing this letter in support of the boundaries for the Deep Creek Proposed Wilderness Area as outlined in the Citizens Wilderness Proposal (CWP). I am permitted to run my outfitting business, Andersen Camps, in the Deep Creek Management Area that is being proposed for Wilderness designation. After discussing the boundaries with a representative from the Citizens Wilderness Network, I have determined that there are no conflicts with the operation of my business and the Citizens Wilderness Proposal. I run a backpacking and camping program, and take students into the Deep Creek proposed wilderness area on a daily basis. Knowing this area extremely well, I believe that the area above the rim has wilderness qualities and should qualify for wilderness protection. There are several reasons why the CWN boundaries are more logical, including resource protection and access to the canyon. I believe that the best way to protect the pristine Deep Creek system is to provide protection for a greater portion of the watershed, which is what the Citizens Wilderness Proposal aims to do. In addition, because of the fact that I run hiking trips into this area, I am very familiar with the difficulty of foot access to the canyon itself. In order to maintain human access to wilderness areas, which has been claimed as a high priority of local and national officials, it is essential to provide protection to the area above the rim so that more people can gain access to the wilderness area. For these reason, among others, I support the boundaries as defined by the Citizens Wilderness Proposal. Because I maintain my business in the Deep Creek area, I believe that my input should be seriously considered by the local and national officials who are making the Deep Creek boundary decisions. Thank you for your attention to this matter." Ken Nubecker, an Eagle resident, commended the Commissioners for supporting the protection of Deep Creek for Eagle and Garfield Counties and the State as a whole. He does not feel the resolution should specifically outline an area for a boundary. He has reviewed the citizens proposal and suggested it might be too much. He suggested that further study should be done before making the designation. He stated the primary concern he has is protecting the canyon itself and believes it is inappropriate to define it at this time without all of the information. He questioned the statement in the resolution regarding the dramatic impact this will have on the local citizens. He asked what that means. Commissioner Gallagher stated the designation brings it to the attention of people across the country and that the designation will increase the impact to Deep Creek and increase the visitor numbers. He stated it may impact those who have businesses in the area. Mr. Nubecker stated he understands and thanked the Board. 3 10-09-2001 Annie Eagan, area resident, stated she agrees with what was stated by Mr. Compton and the Citizens Proposal. She stated she would like to thank Scott McInnis and the Garfield County Commissioners for supporting this wilderness but believes they have fallen short. The canyon is most impressive and must be saved but the prairie above with the critical wildlife habitat with many species, large and small, is a vital and essential part of the eco system as a whole. To fragment the canyon from the prairie would be a huge mistake. Since there are few, if any, use conflicts with the large designation of 22,000 acres, versus the 8,000, it makes more sense to manage the 22,000 acres as one. It still allows for public access to the rim same as before, the Coffee Pot Road would remain outside the designation and would be motorized. The U.S.F.S. have stated that more than double the land as proposed by McInnis, has high ranking in each of the nine categories for wilderness designation. She urged the Board to encourage Scott McInnis and the Garfield County Commissioners to support wilderness designation for the entire Deep Creek area. Susie Kinkaid, an Eagle County resident, stated she is in support of designating the entire 22,000 acres as wilderness in the Deep Creek area. This would be a way to leave a lasting legacy to future generations. It is important to preserve all of the lands in the proposal and not reduce the acreage as proposed by some. Not only is the Deep Creek Canyon a precious asset, but in order to protect it in the future the areas at the top of the drainage and the forests also need to be preserved as well. These forests and meadows that border the canyon are the natural buffer for the area below. The entire area creates its own eco system. If compared to the Grand Canyon, what would it be like if there was oil drilling on the rim. Please support this bill in its current form, which protects both the canyon and the rim area. As a mother and hopefully a grandmother and great grandmother, she hopes to share this area with many generations in the future. Chairman Stone closed public comment. Commissioner Menconi stated he supports the Deep Creek Area for wilderness as he has hiked the area and sees it as a benefit to the County. He sees the area between Tea Pot Road and the rim as important to preserve for the use of recreation and snowmobiles. He was encouraged this morning when they expanded the language to include the input from the U.S.F.S. and the BLM in getting their voices heard. He would like to see the Resolution state that it is not limited to the areas listed in the resolution and include the upper rim. He supports the resolution and the areas of Deep Creek, Bull Gulch, Castle Peak, Hack Lake and Red Table Mesa. He stated if the wording stays the same he will commit to it. He stated he also received a call from John Wild of Edwards who is interested in seeing the wilderness area expanded. He received a letter from Dr. Warren Jacobson and read the letter for the record as follows: "I am in favor of the proposed wilderness area on Deep Creek and expanding the acreage beyond the Representative McInnis proposal to be more in accordance with that being proposed on the Citizens Wilderness Proposal, providing that nothing in this legislation alters my grazing outfitting business and water rights from the present status." Commissioner Menconi stated he received language which from the City of Glenwood Springs resolution which reads as follows: "The City Council also encourages Congress to consider any appropriate area adjacent to the specified Deep Creek Drainage for wilderness designation as well." Commissioner Gallagher stated he values the public input on this and has received letters encouraging him to support the Citizens Wilderness Proposal. He referred to the Wilderness Act which defines wilderness. The area around Deep Creek to a large extent is not wilderness. The purpose is not to restore an area to wilderness but to have wilderness and protect it. If the area around Deep Creek is to be managed in such a way to make it wilderness or return it to wilderness, he would be supportive at that time to preserving it. This act does not apply to taking a roaded area, a snowmobile area, an area that is used for motorized recreation and then all of a sudden it is wilderness. He stated that is why he supports the canyon to be defined as wilderness. He referred to the comments from the Forest Service. He stated in his discussion with the White River National Forest Supervisor, they did not support this. 4 10-09-2001 Commissioner Menconi stated it is his understanding that wilderness areas have been designated that do have roads within them. He stated there is confusion on the messages received. Chairman Stone called for a motion. Commissioner Gallagher moved to approve Resolution 2001-126 concerning support of the designation of certain lands in Eagle and Garfield County as wilderness areas. Commissioner Menconi seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Commissioner Gallagher urged the public to speak to Senator McInnis and share their desires for additional information. Commissioner Menconi thanked the public for their attendance and for keeping the conversation alive. Chairman Stone stated the conversation has been alive since 1995. He stated it is good that there are people in Congress that pushed this matter towards resolution. Fy2002 County Budget, Transmittal Jack Ingstad, County Administrator & Budget Officer, stated the next item on the agenda was transmittal of the FY2002 Eagle County Budget and budget message. He stated they have made some adjustments to this budget in the last couple of weeks as a result of the activities in the last few weeks. He stated they have made some adjustments and there is a week set up for the Board to review the budget with the individual departments. He stated the recommended budget is $71,054,626.00 which is up a little from two years ago, but not by much. $65,244,000 is the projected expenditure for this year which is close to what was spent in 2000. He spoke to the review of the sales tax collections during the Gulf War. We are reducing the sales tax revenue by 15%. It is too early to tell what will happen with sales tax. He stated July numbers were down a little compared to last year and they've been running in the negative for the year. He stated the desire is to continue the core business at a high level, adjusting revenue forecast conservatively. Property tax payments may be delayed. The desire is to maintain a positive cash flow and the desire to maintain a quality work force. They are recommending no new staffing positions for 2002. Adding ECO to the County staffing has added to that. Weare keeping the merit pool and recommending the increase of 17% health insurance premium not be passed on to employees. 35% of what is spent is on the people who work here and that is very appropriate. He stated they funded the Board's major priorities for next year, the Tree Farm, construction of the Berry Creek Road, the Cemetery Bridge Road and additional road improvements. They did reduce the mill levy to 6.999. Eagle County is currently the lowest mill levy in the State of Colorado. Other revenue reductions are in interest income and an adjustment made in permits and license fees of 18%. They are taking a conservative approach to the revenue picture. He stated he was unable to match the operating expenses to operating revenues. They feel in view of the fact they have reserves and that the total budget is balanced, they believe it is an appropriate budget. He stated the County has very little debt. The departments are present if there are any questions. Chairman Stone asked for public input. There was none. Chairman Stone asked if this year's budget was at $1,000,000 less than the previous year or was that last year. Mr. Ingstad stated they are actually down $5,000,000 from last year. The spending is down. Chairman Stone asked how that compares to next year. Mr. Ingstad stated they carry forward a considerable amount of money. They are not spending down the reserves. He stated as they look at Edwards and some of the traffic projects, they may want to dip into the reserves. Chairman Stone asked if those are capital expenditures not operating. Mr. Ingstad stated they do not dip into the reserves for operating expenses. Chairman Stone spoke to the County paying cash for many projects rather than issuing bonds. 5 10-09-2001 He stated in a year with reduced revenues they are still looking at reducing the mill levy . He asked Mr. Ingstad what comes next. Mr. Ingstad stated they began with the Capital Improvement Committee which includes the public. The critical staffing committee reviews the staffing needs. There were meetings with each department and then review of the individual line items. Some departments have not seen the proposed budgets as the changes were made over the last couple of weeks. He stated the Board will review the budget and the departments will have the opportunity to make their case. The information will also be available to the public on the web and through printed copies. The public is invited to all of the meetings with the departments and they will be advertised. Once the Board makes a recommendation they will run the figures again and then the adoption will take place in December. Chairman Stone complimented Mr. Ingstad and the staff for their hard work. His feedback is that the County gets better and better and increases its level of service without increasing spending. Commissioner Menconi thanked the department heads and how well they worked on fiscal responsibility. He stated everyone did a great job. Commissioner Gallagher stated he read a memo this morning about CCI and Summit County leaving CCI and the Rural Resort Region due to cutbacks as they are anticipating a low revenue year. He stated they will be laying off employees and cutting back on purchasing equipment. He is very proud of the budget officer, each one of the directors and down to the lowest paid person that pushes a pencil. It is by their efforts that the County is extremely healthy financially. He stated the County has the lowest mill levy in Colorado and appear to be in a better financial condition that other Counties. Commissioner Menconi moved to accept the proposed 2002 County Budget. Commissioner Gallagher seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Settlement Stipulation Tom Moorhead stated the next matter was approval of a settlement stipulation. He stated the two proposals involve residential property where the two individuals filed a protest and an appeal. The matter was heard by an appointed referee and a determination was made by the Board of County Commissioners. Since that time they have filed a request to have these matters arbitrated. The first stipulation to be discussed is Stewart and Rebecca Green. The total valuation is $2,163,320.00. Subsequent to that stipulation there were errors that were concerning the square footage and inventory. The new negotiated value supported by sales in the Cordillera area is $1,397,250.00. Commissioner Gallagher asked how they come to these negotiated numbers. Max Schafley, Appraisal Coordinator for the Assessor's Office, stated the petitioner called him after all the other hearings had taken place to request an arbitration. On his review of the information he felt that their home was not of the same quality as the others in the area. This was one of the original homes built in Cordillera. Some of the homes that have been built in the last several years are of better quality. There were also some discrepencies in the square footage. Commissioner Gallagher asked if there was to be a reappraisal and a rediscovery of square footage is there a way to do so before going through all the hearing processes. Mark Chapin, Chief Appraiser, stated the appeals process requires tremendous time and staff. A previous appraisers opinion might differ from another staff member. He stated as they proceed through the appeals process they then deal with those questions on a case by case basis. Commissioner Gallagher asked if they attempt to reconcile the issue before going through all the processes. He asked if it is staff, the quantity, etc. Mr. Chapin stated they did have over 5,000 appeals this year and some of those slip through the cracks. Mr. Moorhead stated reasonable minds can differ to the value. There are so many factors to be considered and one or two can make a considerable difference. They look at many applications and 6 10-09-2001 some they might have to arbitrate in court. As they are making the review, any they can settle that will provide integrity of the system that is when they come to the Board with a recommendation. Commissioner Gallagher thanked him and suggested he was trying to understand how a discrepancy like square footage may take time to resolve. Mr. Schlafley explained they are in the process of re-evaluating properties from requests that came in after the abatement process. Commissioner Menconi moved to approve the stipulation of value for the Stewart and Rebecca Green property, schedule number R031559, located at 1445 Cordillera Way in Edwards. Commissioner Gallagher seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Mr. Moorhead stated the second involves property owned by Steven Jacobson at 197 Saddle Ridge, Cordillera. He stated the parcel next to the subject is similar. He stated they are talking about a negotiated value of$1,297,820.00 and a Board of Equalization value of$1,486,600.00. The negotiated parcel is similar to the adjacent parcel. Commissioner Gallagher moved to approve the stipulation of value for the Steven Jacobson parcel located at 197 Saddle Ridge, Cordillera, schedule number R04l185. Commissioner Menconi seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Colorado Mountain College, Ground Lease Tom Moorhead presented approval of Colorado Mountain College Ground Lease and the Intergovernmental Agreement creating the Partnership for Education. He stated previous to the consideration of the ground lease and the Intergovernmental Agreement creating the Partnership for Education, the County and the School District have amended the Intergovernmental Agreement to provide for a 16 acre parcel on Berry Creek 5th, to be available to Colorado Mountain College to create a 21 st century facility and program. He spoke to the continuing negotiations and what has been arrived at is an opportunity for Colorado Mountain College to enter into a 50 year lease agreement for a 16 acre parcel. The Landlord to the lease will be the Partnership for Education. The terms of the lease are 16 acres in the southwest comer of the property known as Berry Creek 5th and immediately upon the execution of the lease, Colorado Mountain College will proceed with the approval process and construction of a 35,000 to 38,000 square foot all purpose educational facility. The buildings will be situated on a two to three acre parcel. Upon completion of that building, evidenced by a certificate of occupancy, the Partnership for Education will convey that two or three acre parcel to Colorado Mountain College and the leasehold estate will continue over the twelve to fourteen remaining acres. He stated there will be a five year program between Colorado Mountain College and Partnership for Education in which there will be identified additional improvements for the remaining site. The consideration for the ground lease will be a cash contribution of $800,000, by Colorado Mountain College, which will be utilized to provide the necessary infrastructure. There will be services provided to the School District and to Eagle County for education opportunities. Commissioner Menconi thanked Mr. Moorhead for the time and the years he has been involved with this property. Chairman Stone asked for public input. Michael Cacioppo, area resident, asked if the $800,000 is an annual lease payment. Mr. Moorhead stated that is a one time payment that will be available in 2002 for improvements to the Miller Ranch Road and the Cemetery Bridge project. Mr. Cacioppo asked if there is an annual lease payment. Mr. Moorhead explained there will be an agreement that will be entered into for services to be provided to the School District and Eagle County. Mr. Cacioppo asked how many students they are planning on. He suggested he has heard there 7 10-09-2001 will be 14,000 students and wondered about parking. Chairman Stone stated they will be considering a number of questions as they go through the PUD process. He stated they then consider roads and traffic impacts as part of the process. The County can exempt itself from that process, but will not. Mr. Cacioppo asked if by this vote today if it is a done deal with the lease agreement. Chairman Stone stated there are three parties to the agreement being Eagle County, the School District and Colorado Mountain College. Mr. Cacioppo suggested if they vote today it is a done deal. Commissioner Gallagher stated if the question is the County committed to making the land available to Colorado Mountain College, the answer is yes. Mr. Cacioppo suggested that the discussions have all taken place in Executive Session. Commissioner Gallagher stated the refinement of the lease document was done in Executive Session but it is now open for public discussion. Mr. Cacioppo stated he was not aware until today that there is a 35,000 square foot building with a 50 year land lease. Commissioner Gallagher stated it their goal to have this post secondary education facility on this location and available to the citizens of Eagle County. Mr. Cacioppo stated this is the only opportunity to discuss it. He asked they consider at least having a hearing after the public is aware of the details. Commissioner Gallagher suggested that this item has been on the agenda and posted for a period of time. Mr. Ingstad suggested this was an added item. Commissioner Gallagher suggested he believes that the public is aware what kind of facility will be going on this property. Mr. Cacioppo stated this is the first day that the public is aware of the details of this agreement and he believes it would only be fair for the public to absorb the details so that they can get input from the public as to whether or not they are in support. He stated it is difficult to ask good questions without having an opportunity to read this. Commissioner Gallagher stated it has been at this forum and at the School District forum. Mr. Cacioppo asked again that they give the public the opportunity to understand this. He suggested they table this for a couple of weeks so that people can read the document. He asked how this agreement affects the original agreement conveyed by the Eagle County Recreational Authority and the caveats to that authority. Mr. Moorhead explained the Eagle County Recreation Authority and the School District had entered into an Intergovernmental Agreement which provided for the joint planning for the 200 acres known as the Miller Ranch and the Berry Creek 5th. Eagle County purchased the 100 acre Berry Creek 5th, subject to the tenants of that Intergovernmental Agreement. He stated this agreement meets the original tenants of the Intergovernmental Agreement and further the County and the School District, have within the last two months, amended that Intergovernmental Agreement. The provisions of that amended Intergovernmental Agreement specifically identified this 16 acre site and identified a 35,000 square foot all purpose educational facility. Mr. Cacioppo stated two Commissioners have left and is this still a public meeting. He stated this does not pass the smell test. He stated the Board is coming out here and relating this is the deal and then two Commissioners leave at the same time. He suggested the reasonable thing to do is table this matter for two weeks to allow for public input. He asked for a copy of the agreement. Chairman Stone asked Mr. Cacioppo to ask his questions and move on. Mr. Cacioppo asked if he can read the agreement and formulate his questions before the Board votes on this matter. Chairman Stone answered no. 8 10-09-2001 Mr. Cacioppo asked what is it about allowing the public an opportunity to review the documents before a vote is taken that the Board does not like. Commissioner Gallagher asked Mr. Moorhead when this is going to be considered by the School District and by Colorado Mountain College. Mr. Moorhead stated within the next few days. Mr. Cacioppo asked again about allowing the public to review the documents. Commissioner Gallagher stated the fact that they are approving at this time is not a final action of transferring land. There will be several more public hearings. Commissioner Gallagher moved to approve the Colorado Mountain College Ground Lease and the Intergovernmental Agreement creating the Partnership for Education. Commissioner Menconi seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Adjustment of 2001 Property Valuations Tom Moorhead presented the adjustments of certain year 2001 property valuations. This involves 16 separate properties upon which decisions were rendered by the referee. In each of these 16 properties the Assessor's office recommended a suggested value and in each of the cases the referee rendered a decision. It is obvious from the notes of the referee that they had believed that the suggested value had already been adopted. They are requesting that the Commissioners, acting as the Board of Equalization, approve of the Assessor's proposed value. Chairman Stone suggested that this was really a communication error. Commissioner Menconi moved to adjourn as the Board of County Commissioners and reconvene as the Board of Equalization. Commissioner Gallagher seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Commissioner Gallagher moved to approve the adjustments of certain year 2001 property valuations, Resolution E-200 1-6. Commissioner Menconi seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Commissioner Menconi moved to adjourn as the Board of Equalization and reconvene as the Local Liquor Licensing Authority. Commissioner Gallagher seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Consent Agenda Earlene Roach, Eagle County Liquor Inspector, presented the Liquor License Consent Agenda for October 9,2001 as follows: A) 4 Eagle Ranch, Inc. 4 Eagle Ranch This is a renewal of an optional premise license. This establishment is located along Hwy 131 close to Wolcott. There have been no complaints or disturbances during the past year. B) Marquez Restaurants, Inc. Fiesta's New Mexican Deli & Restaurant This is a renewal of a hotel and restaurant license. This establishment is located along Edwards Access Road in Edwards. There have been no complaints or disturbances during the past year. Commissioner Menconi moved to approve the Liquor License Consent Agenda for October 9, 2001, as presented. Commissioner Gallagher seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. 9 10-09-2001 Mid-Vail Restaurant Earlene Roach presented a modification of premises for Vail Food Services, Inc., dba/Mid-Vail Restaurant. The applicant is requesting to add an optional premise known as the Wok and Roll, located at the base of Chair 11 on Vail Mountain. This application is in order and all fees have been paid. Julie Papengelis, Vail Resorts, was present for the hearing. Chairman Stone asked if this is virtually the same as before. Ms. Papengelis stated the Wok and Roll was attached to Wildwood Restaurant in the past. She stated the Wok and Roll is being placed where the Dog Haus was located, which has been moved off the mountain. Commissioner Gallagher moved to approve the modification of premises for Vail Food Services, Inc., dba/Mid-Vail Restaurant. Commissioner Menconi seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Commissioner Menconi moved to adjourn as the Local Liquor Licensing Authority and reconvene as the Board of County Commissioners. Commissioner Gallagher seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Colorado Mountain College Ground Lease Commissioner Gallagher returned to the discussion regarding Colorado Mountain College Ground Lease. He stated it appears that having both other entities reviewing the same document in the next two days that any sense of urgency is allayed and the Board has time next week to receive public input. Chairman Stone stated the Board has approved the document. Commissioner Gallagher stated he is not suggesting the Board rescind that approval but rather that they take public input. As the process is refined they can take that public input into consideration. Chairman Stone stated he was not able to communicate with Mr. Cacioppo that the items of concern will be addressed in the PUD process. Commissioner Gallagher asked staff to publicize the meeting next week. Eagle County Fairboard Appointments Jack Ingstad stated he has received correspondence from the Fair Board asking that Bennett Pollick and Brent Smith be moved from alternates to full Board members. He suggested they are looking for direction before the meeting this evening. Chairman Stone stated he would be in favor of recommending those two members be moved to full Board members. Commissioner Gallagher stated he would be in favor of this recommendation but that the replacement of those two as alternates be a public process. Commissioner Menconi stated he is also in favor of the proposal. There being no further business to be before the Board the meeting was adjourned until October 16,2001. Attest: Clerk to the Board \{bt?~ Chairman 10 10-09-2001 \