The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMinutes 04/02/2002 PUBLIC HEARING APRIL 2, 2002 Present: Michael Gallagher Am Menconi T om Stone Torn Moorhead Jack Ingstad Sara J. 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: GENERAL FUND A.C.E.O. AAA COLLECTORS ABC LEGAL MESSENGERS ADAMS MARK HOTEL AFFORDABLE PORTABLE ALLIANT FOOD SERVICE ALPHA INTERACTIVE GROUP ALPINE BANK AMADEO GONZALES AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOC AMERICAN SOCIETY AMERICAN TOWER CORP AMERICAN TRAFFIC SAFETY AMERICINN LODGE & SUITES AMICH AND JENKS INCORPORA ANDERSON & KEIL ANDRIA L COLLINS ANIMAL HOSPITAL OF VAIL ANN MUNCASTER APA COLORADO APEX SECURITY ARN MENCONI ARTHUR AND PERLMUTTER ARTWORKS, THE ASPEN BASE OPERA TON ASPEN CTR FOR WOMENS HL TH ASSOCIA TION FOR QUALITY AT & T WIRELESS SERVICES A V TECH ELECTRONICS INC AVALANCHE PLUMBING AVCARD AVON COMMERCIAL OWNERS SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE 300.00 53.10 5.00 110.00 88.00 3,734.95 130.00 200.00 25.20 851.00 2,820.00 875.00 20.50 1,152.00 90.00 25.00 75.90 115.00 81.60 55.00 239.00 86.15 25.10 134.00 166.82 2,175.00 375.00 3,130.58 1,431.98 108.00 702.89 2,022.61 1 04-02-2002 B & H FIRE EQUIPMENT BAILEY FUNERAL HOME BARRY SMITH BARTON PINNEY BATTLE MOUNTAIN HS BEN GALLOWAY MD BENCHMARK ENGINEERING BERLITZ LANGUAGE CENTER BERTHOD MOTORS BEVERLY KUNKEL BOB BARKER COMPANY BROWNING FERRIS IND BRUCE CAMPBELL BRYAN TREU BUILDING PERMITS LAW CALOIA & HOUPT PC CAPITOL CITY PUBLISHERS CAROL B. HAAS CARTER & SANDS P.C. CASTLE PEAK VETERINARY CA THY RYSAVY CCO AND ERA CENTER FOR SUCCESSFUL CENTRAL DISTRIBUTING CENTRAL SERVICES/EC CENTRAL V ALLEY PROFESSION CENTURYTEL CHARLES B DARRAH CHARLOTTE TRIEBNIG CHEMA TOX INC. CHESS CHRIS GUNION CHRISTINE L MOTT CITY MARKET #34 CLEAN DESIGN CLERK EAGLE COUNTY COURT CO ASSESSORS ASSOCIATION CO AUTO THEFT INESTIGA TOR CO BUREAU INVESTIGATION CO DEPT OF HEALTH CO DEPT PUBLIC HEALTH & COGSWELL LAW OFFICES COLLEEN WIRTH COLORADO ACTIVITY CTR INC COLORADO ASSOCIATION OF COLORADO COUNTIES INC SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT PAYROLL EXPD SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE 246.00 350.00 360.00 55.72 100.00 2,760.00 873.75 100.00 1,058.28 72.00 633.84 873.46 248.30 82.80 84.78 1,458.53 238.00 50.00 721.23 32.82 55.71 62,687.29 136.50 1,114.55 20.95 433.59 13,819.66 5.00 25.00 375.00 467.00 290.71 2,130.00 1,804.57 10.99 329.70 100.00 12.00 132.48 20.00 520.12 25.00 45.43 1,380.00 75.00 102.81 2 04-02-2002 COLORADO JAIL ASSOCIATION COLORADO LAW ENFORCEMENT COLORADO MOUNTAIN NEWS COLORADO STATE FOREST COLORADO WEST COLORADO WEST MENTAL HL TH COLUMBIA PROPANE COMFORT INN DOWNTOWN COMMANDER CONSERVE A WATT LIGHTING CONSOLIDA TED PLASTIC CO COPY PLUS CORPORATE EXPRESS CORPORATE EXPRESS IMAGING CRABTREES PHOTO WORKS CRAIG COMMUNAL CRAIG D JOHNOSON & ASSOC D SHACKELFORD SHIPP DAHL DAMON MA TLON DAN STANEK DAVID A SOLOMON DA VID G TYLER DAVID GUINNEE, DVM DEBBRA BROWN DEENA EZZELL DEEP ROCK WEST DELL INC DENNIS WILLEY DENVER HEALTH DENVER NEWSPAPER AGENCY DEPT OF LABOR EMPLOYMENT DEWHIRST & WEEKS DIANA JOHNSON DISTRICT ATTORNEYS OFFICE DL T SOLUTIONS, INC. DOCTORS ON CALL DONALD OWNSBEY DONNA BARNES CORONER DUFFORD WALDECK & MILBURN EAGLE AMOCO EAGLE AUTO PARTS EAGLE CARE MEDICAL CLINIC EAGLE COMPUTER SYSTEMS EAGLE CONVENIENCE STORE EAGLE COUNTY MOTOR POOL SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SUPPLIES REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE PARTS SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE 10.00 1,360.00 4,687.02 200.00 163.00 1,985.00 4,124.95 184.00 2,400.00 1,182.22 74.06 41.29 2,875.82 140.00 125.00 30.08 25.00 22.28 75.08 162.07 132.91 5.00 18.68 1,911.69 155.71 11.96 116.13 9,019.71 43.65 137.00 277.73 200.00 18.72 39.00 216,165.00 34,904.25 480.00 48.33 35.77 33.72 234.50 98.75 2,500.00 5,926.04 400.00 984.86 3 04-02-2002 EAGLE COUNTY SHERIFFS OFF EAGLE EYE PHOTO EAGLE PHARMACY EAGLE RIVER WATER AND EAGLE RIVER YOUTH EAGLE V ALLEY ENTERPRISE EAGLE VALLEY HARDWARE EAGLE V ALLEY HIGH SCHOOL EAGLE V ALLEY MEDICAL EAGLE V ALLEY PRINTING EARL GLENWRIGHT EAST WEST RESORTS ELEMENT K JOURNALS EMC2 EMERGENCY FILM GROUP EMERGENCY MEDICAL PRODUCT EMILIA GONZALEZ EPS DESIGN AND PRINT ERNIE BROWN EXECUTIVE PROTECTION FALCON ASSOCIATES INC FAMILY SUPPORT REGISTRY FARMER BROTHERS FARNER ASSOCIATES FARRELL, GOLDSTEIN, FEDERAL EXPRESS FELSBURG HOLT & ULLEVIG FEMA, GUEST SERVICES FILE FINDERS L TD FIRE SPRINKLER SERVICES FIRKINS GARAGE DOORS FIRST BANKS FITZSIMMONS MOTOR COMPANY FRANK J BALL FREDERIC LEE MARTENS G & M INSURANCE AGENCY GALLS INCORPORATED GATES MARGE PHN GATEWAY SECURE STORAGE GE CAPITAL GLENN PADGETT GLENWOOD SHOE SERVICE GLOBAL TECHNOLOGY INC GOOD TURNS SOFTWARE GRAINGER INCORPORATED GRAND JUNCTION PIPE AND SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SUPPLIES SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE 43.02 33.94 319.72 3,085.22 32,000.00 20.00 109.46 1,100.00 90.00 4,673.00 90.00 1,832.66 208.50 1,621.49 403.00 17.09 105.75 2,273.15 268.73 3,190.00 90.00 1,149.22 286.20 27.00 132.12 263.11 6,029.10 72.50 30.00 1,659.00 121.00 15,654.05 60.00 25.00 142.12 113.00 108.98 2,975.00 170.00 159.99 43.46 760.00 8,209.06 3,870.00 747.01 73.86 4 04-02-2002 GREEN SPACE DESIGN GREENBERG & ASSOCIATES GREGG PIEPER GYPSUM CENTER HAMPTON INN DENVER WEST HASSLER LAW FIRM HEALTH INSURANCE FUND HEAL THONE CLINIC SERVICES HELEN MIGCHELBRINK HELEN R LYONS HERMAN MILLER INC. HIGH COUNTRY COPIERS HIGH COUNTRY NEWS HOLIDA Y INN HOLIDA Y INN EXPRESS HOLLEY ALBERTSON & POLK HOLY CROSS ELECTRIC ASSOC HOMEWOOD SUITES HOTEL HOTSY EQUIPMENT CORP HOUSING FUND IACP NATIONAL LAW IAPMO ICMA INCENTIVE MARKETING INC INDOFF INC INTEGRITY PLUMBING AND INTELLINET LLC INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE INTERNA TIONAL ASSOCIATION JACK CANNON JACQUELINE ALLEN JAMES PUBLISHING COMPANY JAMIE HUMPHREY JANICE SCOFIELD JC WHITNEY JEFFERSON COUNTY JEFFREY FEDRIZZI JOHN E REID & ASSOCIATES JOHN PLANO JOHNSON KUNKEL & ASSOC JOLIE B RAMO JOSE JUAN RAMIREZ JOSE LOZANO JOSEPH L FORINASH JOYCE HANSON JUNIPER V ALLEY PRODUCTS SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT EMPLOYEE BENEFIT SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE 395.00 32.66 34.34 34.34 336.00 8.68 7,754.37 77.00 61.41 25.00 50.43 148.50 28.00 317.00 118.00 4.96 13,045.39 186.00 92.55 100,000.00 50.00 190.00 250.00 593.32 382.25 2,106.26 1,410.00 270.00 349.95 45.00 319.04 69.94 1,305.90 149.00 254.92 125.00 48.84 1,485.00 60.98 1,096.85 160.00 1.24 50.00 90.00 227.70 25.50 5 04-02-2002 JUSTIN HIDRETH KLOG KELLY LIEKIS KEN WILSON KENDRA DOEPKEN KINDER MORGAN INC KING CAMPBELL DDS LA PLATA COUNTY LAB SAFETY SUPPLY LAURA FAWCETT LC CLARK PUBLISHING CO LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS LEGACY COMMUNICATIONS INC LESLEE SCOTT, INC LESLIE KEHMEIER LEXISNEXIS LIGHTNING SERVICES LK SURVEY INSTRUMENTS MACHOL & JOHANNES MAINTENANCE WAREHOUSE MARGERY STONE MARKS PLUMBING PARTS MARLISA MIZERAK MARSHALL SWIFT MARY JANE LAYNE MATT ROYER MBIA MCCAULLEY REBECCA T MCGRA W HILL COMPANY MCI TELECOMMUNICATIONS MCI WORLDCOM MEDICAL CENTER OF EAGLE MERCK A TL MESSNER & REEVES METEORLOGIX MICHAEL CIRKOVIC MICHELLE BALL MICRO WAREHOUSE MICROW AREHOUSE MILLER & COHEN MILLER VISUAL ARTS MONTAG KEITH P MOORE MEDICAL CORP MOTOR POOL FUND MOTOROLA MOUNTAIN COMMUNICATIONS REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SUPPLIES REIMBURSEMENT PARTS REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE 330.41 897.32 46.58 200.00 75.75 12,813.25 1,362.15 175.00 31.63 6.71 4.99 49.33 2,796.35 762.37 300.50 542.00 45.00 292.25 150.28 209.89 37.95 405.25 53.29 480.90 172.15 83.77 3,770.59 63.14 299.00 5,788.30 6,588.72 704.00 1,584.40 38.60 279.00 207.37 293.25 1,198.37 17,644.55 25.00 50.00 67.45 286.33 37,253.90 141.35 1,701.00 6 04-02-2002 MOUSE MITT INTERNATIONAL MiCTA NATIONAL FINALS RODEO NATIONAL GRAPHICS COMPANY NA TIONAL SEMINARS GROUP NA TIONAL SHERIFFS ASSOC NEW LIFE INDUSTRIES NINA ETTA WIL NOBEL SYSCO FOOD SERVICES NORDIC REFRIGERATION NOVELL, INC. NUTRITION CONSULTANTS OFFICE SERVICES UNLIMITED OMNIFAX ONE OF A KIND DESIGN ORKIN EXTERMINATING CO OSM DELIVERY LLC OVERLAND AND EXPRESS COMP PAINT BUCKET THE PAPER WISE PARK COUNTY SHERIFF OFF. PATHOLOGY GROUP PATRICIA BACA PAUL H STEINFORT PDR PEAK PERFORMANCE COPIER & PEGASUS SATELLITE PEGGY GRAYBEAL PETTY CASH PFM ELECTRONICS PHONE SUPPLEMENTS INC PITNEY BOWES PLANNING COMMISSIONERS PLASTOCON PONDEROSA ENTERPRISES PRIMEDIA WORKPLACE PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATES PSS, INC PUBLIC SPACE PLUS PURCHASE POWER QUEST DIAGNOSTICS QUILL CORPORATION QUINLAN PUBLISHING COMPAN QWEST QWEST INTERPRISE NETWRKNG RE-PRINT DRAPHlX CORP SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE 21.95 75.00 282.00 559.88 99.00 100.00 252.00 19.89 4,860.42 ]73.00 10,960.36 112.00 3,960.00 336.00 1,625.38 150.00 380.00 295.00 380.43 2,713.75 1,485.00 1,439.25 2.48 122.70 79.90 121.28 30.98 340.00 80.63 72.38 51.90 2,576.25 275.00 799.60 210.00 388.00 25.00 411.47 221.73 13,334.12 354.69 156.68 180.78 4,863.30 2,496.82 19.58 7 04-02-2002 RICHARD KESLER RIDER, EDWARDS, MCANALLEN ROBERT MACH ROBERT NARRACCI ROCKHURSTCOLLEGE ROCKY MOUNTAIN REPROGRAPH ROFINTUG ROSIE MORENO ROSS & WHITE COMPANY RRC ASSOCIATES RSC SACHS LAWLOR SALVADOR FIGUERUA SARA J FISHER SCHUTZMAN NBS INC SCULL YS ART OFFICE AND SECOND CHANCE BODY ARMOR SERVICEMASTER OF V AIL SETINA MANUFACTURING CO SIEGEL DISPLAY PRODUCTS SINTON DAIRY COMPANY SLEEPY CAT GUEST RANCH SNOWHITE LINEN SOFTMART INC SPIECKER HANLON & GORMLEY ST MARYS HOSPITAL ST MARYS PRESCHOOL STARBUCK SURVEYORS & ENGI STEPHANIE RZUALET-MATHES STEPHANIE SMITH STERICYCLE INC STOUTS ELECTRICAL MOTOR STRAWBERRY PATCH SULLIVAN GREEN LLC SUMMIT COUNTY SHERIFFS OF SUMMIT LUMBER SUPPL Y CACHE SUSPENSE FUND SUZANNE BERG MSW TEAM MANAGEMENT BRIEFINGS TERRI BIERSDORFER TOWN AND COUNTRY RESORT TOWN OF V AIL TRANE COMPANY TRANSCOR AMERICA INC TRI COUNTY FIRE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT PARTS SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE 3,837.38 10.00 30.62 108.33 148.00 4,424.80 48.00 147.18 273.42 4,889.34 696.04 29.00 25.00 227.70 30.09 27.55 1,055.48 26,939.70 1,517.62 89.74 964.16 200.00 166.44 698.20 6.16 259.05 100.00 904.00 28.72 38.88 64.44 130.66 198.60 2,953.00 9,855.00 1,182.38 1,134.10 2,483.89 50.00 99.00 30.49 868.56 165,795.87 95.80 967.57 1,285.50 8 04-02-2002 TYCO WILDFIRE SERVICE 1,133.22 UNIFORM KINGDOM SERVICE 949.25 UNITED PARCEL SERVICE SERVICE 249.41 UNITED REPROGRAPHlC SERVICE 196.72 UNITED STATES POSTAL SERV SERVICE 3,000.00 UNIV COLORADO AT BOULDER SERVICE 125.00 UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO SERVICE 60.00 V AIL ELECTRONICS SERVICE 4,240.70 V AIL LOCK AND KEY SERVICE 16.20 V AIL NET SERVICE 79.90 V AIL TRAIL THE SERVICE 114.00 V AIL V ALLEY EMERGENCY SERVICE 900.00 V AIL V ALLEY MEDICAL CENTR SERVICE 2,346.96 V AILNET INC SERVICE 1,072.85 V ALLEY CREDIT AND REIMBURSEMENT 55.00 V ALLEY PINES HOMEOWNERS SERVICE 450.19 VERIZON SELECT SERVICES SERVICE 15,237.50 VERIZON WIRELESS, SERVICE 2,900.49 VIKING OFFICE PRODUCTS SUPPLIES 97.87 VILAR CENTER FOR THE ARTS REIMBURSEMENT 9,970.76 VIOLA ULLERICK SERVICE 90.00 VISIONICS CORP SERVICE 5,238.00 VOGELMAN WEST ASSOCIATES REIMBURSEMENT 3.72 WARWICK HOTEL SERVICE 336.00 WASTE MANAGEMENT SERVICE 95.00 WELLS FARGO PAYROLL EXPD 276,254.98 WENDY BOGNER REIMBURSEMENT 34.00 WEST GROUP SERVICE 1,250.00 WESTERN EAGLE COUNTY SERVICE 2,810.00 WESTERN PAGING SERVICE 8.00 WESTERN SLOPE SERVICE 1,921.75 WILLARD B HARDESTY REIMBURSEMENT 25.00 WILLIAM CARLSON SERVICE 18.47 WMD CONSULTANT SERVICE 8,000.00 WOLFGANG MUELLER REIMBURSEMENT 19.22 WYLACO SUPPLY COMPANY SUPPLIES 183.28 XCEL ENERGY SERVICE 612.26 XEROX CORPORATION SERVICE 5,339.98 Y & S PHARMACY SERVICE 2,814.46 Y AMPA V ALLEY ELECTRIC SERVICE 80.97 PAYROLL FOR MARCH PAYROLL 5 & 6 514,091.26 1,895,353.56 ROAD AND BRIDGE FUND 9 04-02-2002 ACTIVE COMMUNICATIONS SERVICE 81.00 ADAMS MARK HOTEL SERVICE 146.00 APW A WESTERN SLOPE BRANCH SERVICE 100.00 ASPEN MESA HOMEOWNERS REIMBURSEMENT 500.00 BROWNING FERRIS IND SERVICE 35.25 CCO AND ERA PAYROLL EXPD 4,363.37 CENTRAL SERVICES/EC SERVICE 23.10 COLORADO MOUNTAIN NEWS SERVICE 297.00 COMPLIANCE ALLIANCE INC SERVICE 270.45 DEEP ROCK WEST SERVICE 36.25 EAGLE COUNTY PURCHASING SUPPLIES 72.33 EAGLE COUNTY REGIONAL SERVICE 9,961.72 EAGLE EYE PHOTO SERVICE 72.00 EAGLE PHARMACY SUPPLIES 25.30 GEORGE SISNEROS REIMBURSEMENT 250.00 GRAND RIVER CONSTRUCTION SERVICE 1,730.25 HEAL TH INSURANCE FUND EMPLOYEE BENEFIT 598.22 HOLYCROSS ELECTRIC ASSOC SERVICE 440.35 INTERWEST SAFETY SUPPLY SUPPLIES 955.22 JAKE J STULL REIMBURSEMENT 75.00 KENWOOD DEVELOPMENT INC REIMBURSEMENT 100.00 LEGACY COMMUNICATIONS INC SERVICE 192.50 LOGAN CRAIG, INC REIMBURSEMENT 500.00 METEORLOGIX SERVICE 1,068.00 MICROW AREHOUSE SERVICE 58.93 MOTOR POOL FUND SERVICE 5,400.00 RHONDAPARKER REIMBURSEMENT 14.84 RICK ETTLES REIMBURSEMENT 75.00 ROARING FORK V ALLEY COOP SERVICE 27.47 SERVICEMASTER OF V AIL SERVICE 896.85 SUMMIT LUMBER SUPPLIES 11.20 TOWN OF GYPSUM SERVICE 235.22 V ALLEY LUMBER SUPPLIES 93.46 WELLS FARGO PAYROLL EXPD 23,304.80 WYLACO SUPPLY COMPANY SUPPLIES 186.45 PAYROLL FOR MARCH PAYROLL 5 & 6 54,504.62 106,702.15 SOCIAL SERVICES FUND AMANDA BALES REIMBURSEMENT 65.21 ARAPAHOE COUNTY SHERIFF SERVICE 6.00 ARLISS SIMS REIMBURSEMENT 41.92 BEAVER RUN RESORT SERVICE 237.00 10 04-02-2002 CAEYC CA THERINE CRAIG CCO AND ERA CENTRAL SERVICES/EC CHIP CITY MARKET #34 CO DEPT HUMAN SERVICES COLORADO MOUNTAIN COLLEGE COLORADO MOUNTAIN NEWS COMFORT SUITES LAKEWOOD CORPORATE EXPRESS CRAIG SMITH CSED EAGLE COUNTY PURCHASING EAGLE COUNTY SHERIFFS OFF EAGLE PHARMACY EL PASO COUNTY SHERIFF EXECUTIVE TOWERS INN GLEN WOOD ORAL SURGERY HEALTH INSURANCE FUND HIGH COUNTRY COPIERS HUG-BUNCH INDOFF INC INTEGRITY PLUMBING AND JEFFERSON CNTY CHIDRENS JENNIFER WORCESTER JOSE BANUELOS KAPLAN COMPANIES, INC KAREN LAJOY SMITH MA LPC KA THY REED KAY SCHNEIDER LABORATORY CORPORATION OF LEARNING TREE LISA GRIGGS MARIAN MCDONOUGH MESA COUNTY SHERIFF MOTOR POOL FUND PATRICIA SENA PEAK PERFORMANCE COPIER & PEPPERDINE'S MARKET PITKIN COUNTY SHERIFF QUILL CORPORATION QWEST RENEE FIELDS RENEE RICHARDS RITA WOODS SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT PAYROLL EXPD SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT SUPPLIES REIMBURSEMENT SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE EMPLOYEE BENEFIT SUPPLIES SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT REIMBURSEMENT 55.00 127.08 5,071.83 342.16 120.00 216.79 120.00 40.00 120.00 158.00 56.89 21.48 123.63 419.01 345.90 24.95 11.60 89.00 10.00 583.78 121.50 3,060.00 312.75 1,723.30 125.00 223.57 3,080.00 87.08 200.00 221.89 25.00 55.00 60.00 97.62 21.54 30.00 471.75 75.40 99.22 24.25 22.84 303.96 179.02 690.34 127.54 86.42 11 04-02-2002 ROCHELLE A BOWER REIMBURSEMENT 384.10 SCULL YS ART OFFICE AND SUPPLIES 18.13 ST MARYS HOSPITAL SERVICE 286.05 SUSPENSE FUND SERVICE 500.00 SYLVIA SALAZAR REIMBURSEMENT 43.47 VERIZON WIRELESS, SERVICE 257.78 WALMART GLENWOOD SERVICE 200.00 WELLS FARGO PA YROLL EXPD 15,605.13 XEROX CORPORATION SERVICE 91.80 PAYROLL FOR MARCH PAYROLL 5 & 6 33,918.37 71,237.05 WRAP FUND CAMP CHlP-A- TOOTH SERVICE 850.00 CHlLDRENS HOSPITAL SERVICE 149.45 COLORADO MOUNTAIN MEDICAL SERVICE 517.00 MISTY GOMEZ REIMBURSEMENT 26.29 TERRI ALLENDER SERVICE 20.00 1,562.74 RETIREMENT FUND CCO AND ERA PAYROLL EXPD 54,564.22 54,564.22 INSURANCE RESERVE FUND AMERICAN GLASS SERVICE 2,229.00 EAGLE RIVER AUTO BODY SERVICE 927.70 GAY JOHNSONS INC SERVICE 392.05 GYPSUM AUTO BODY SERVICE 623.47 4,172.22 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS FUND CALOIA & HOUPT PC SERVICE 425.00 COLORADO MOUNTAIN NEWS SERVICE 296.00 CYBERLINK SERVICE 3,075.20 DA VID ADAMS & ASSOCIATES SERVICE 880.00 DENVER NEWSPAPER AGENCY SERVICE 136.36 12 04-02-2002 DESIGN WORKSHOP SERVICE 4,778.25 FOX & COMPANY SERVICE 8,251.94 HOLYCROSS ELECTRIC ASSOC SERVICE 18.33 JOHNSON KUNKEL & ASSOC SERVICE 1,200.00 MICROW AREHOUSE SERVICE 5,144.00 MOTOROLA SERVICE 300,872.00 PEAK LAND CONSULTANTS INC SERVICE 34,270.97 RUDD CONSTRUCTION SERVICE 243,759.96 SHAW SIGNS SERVICE 897.00 TOWN OF EAGLE SERVICE 985.00 US TREASURY SERVICE 500.00 WESTERN SLOPE SERVICE 21,596.90 627,086.91 SALES TAX E.V. TRANSP. ANDREA VESQUE REIMBURSEMENT 44.50 ANITA PERCIFIELD REIMBURSEMENT 227.50 ARKANSAS VALLEY PUBLISHIN SERVICE 252.00 AT & T WIRELESS SERVICES SERVICE 322.00 BARBARA SWOPE REIMBURSEMENT 380.00 BRODY CHEMICAL SERVICE 217.31 BROWNING FERRIS IND SERVICE 123.38 BRUCE JOBBINS REIMBURSEMENT 516.00 CASTLE PEAK AUTOMOTIVE SERVICE 6,138.18 CCO AND ERA PAYROLL EXPD 3,391.14 CHILI WILL YS SERVICE 120.00 CITY MARKET #34 SUPPLIES 76.16 COAST FULFILLMENT CORP SUPPLIES 419.90 COLLETTS SUPPLIES 1,343.89 COLORADO KENWORTH INC SERVICE 12,828.43 COLORADO MOUNTAIN NEWS SERVICE 452.40 COMPLIANCE ALLIANCE INC SERVICE 96.00 COpy PLUS SERVICE 106.40 CUMMINS ROCKY MOUNTAIN PARTS 16,007.35 DAILY SENTINEL THE SERVICE 188.79 DCS AMERICA INC SERVICE 532.33 DEEP ROCK WEST SERVICE 35.00 DELL INC SERVICE 1,159.00 DESIGN GLASS INCORPORATED SERVICE 455.00 DODD DIESEL INCORPORATED PARTS 22,032.14 DRIVE TRAIN INDUSTRIES PARTS 7,972.67 EAGLE AUTO PARTS PARTS 119.55 EAGLE COUNTY MOTOR POOL SERVICE 24,566.51 EAGLE COUNTY REGIONAL SERVICE 25,025.25 13 04-02-2002 EAGLE PHARMACY EAGLE RIVER AUTO BODY EAGLE VALLEY HARDWARE EAGLE VALLEY PRINTING FAMILY SUPPORT REGISTRY G & K SERVICES GA Y JOHNSONS INC GENERAL ELECTRIC GILLIG CORPORATION HEALTH INSURANCE FUND HOLY CROSS ELECTRIC ASSOC INTERSTATE BATTERY SYSTMS J J KELLER JIM LAIR KRIS JORGENSEN LAKE CREEK VILLAGE LA WSON PRODUCTS LIL JOHNS WATER TREATMENT M & M AUTO PARTS MAE PITTMAN MOTOR POOL FUND MOUNTAIN GAZETTE LLC NEOPART NORTHWEST COLORADO QUILL CORPORATION QWEST REY MOTORS INCORPORATED SAN DIEGO COUNTY OF THE SCULL YS ART OFFICE AND SERVICEMASTER OF VAIL SILVER WHEELS INC. STEVE HODGE SUMMIT LUMBER SUSPENSE FUND TIM MINAROVICH TOWN OF GYPSUM UNITED STATES POSTAL SERV VAIL VALLEY COMMUNITY VERIZON WIRELESS, VUL TRON WELLS FARGO WESTERN RETARDER CO WYLACO SUPPLY COMPANY XCEL ENERGY XEROX CORPORATION ZEP MANUFACTURING COMPANY SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE PARTS EMPLOYEE BENEFIT SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE PARTS SERVICE PARTS REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE PARTS SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE PARTS REIMBURSEMENT SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SUPPLIES SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE PA YROLL EXPD PARTS SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE 8.97 1,884.00 150.76 180.00 230.76 231.20 83.20 269.16 5,052.26 1,008.35 1,542.02 828.65 131.88 27.80 175.00 5,120.00 543.87 52.50 34.74 8.98 2,818.80 475.00 136.90 4,900.00 1,603.48 385.89 156.00 55.38 22.00 3,140.49 1,396.00 400.00 1.99 408.50 380.00 823.67 500.00 150.00 311.09 856.31 67,232.56 513.48 6.80 329.19 648.00 79.28 14 04-02-2002 PAYROLL FOR MARCH PAYROLL 5 & 6 154,583.18 385,026.87 SALES TAX E.V. TRAILS CCO AND ERA PAYROLL EXPD 132.10 COLORADO MOUNTAIN NEWS SERVICE 111.30 COLUMBINE MARKET SUPPLIES 32.21 COPY PLUS SERVICE 6.98 EAGLE COUNTY REGIONAL SERVICE 330.15 EAGLE PHARMACY SERVICE 3.97 HEALTH INSURANCE FUND EMPLOYEE BENEFIT 5.36 HIGH COUNTRY SHIRTWORKS SERVICE 570.75 PROMO UNLIMITED SERVICE 510.88 SCULL YS ART OFFICE AND SUPPLIES 293.92 WELLS FARGO PAYROLL EXPD 836.28 2,833.90 AIRPORT FUND APEX SECURITY SERVICE 2,486.50 AT & T WIRELESS SERVICES SERVICE 115.74 BAND B EXCA V A TING SERVICE 248,152.75 BENCHMARK ENGINEERING SERVICE 1,737.50 BERTHOD MOTORS SUPPLIES 269.48 BRENT SERVICES SERVICE 1,019.24 BRIAN SCHOFIELD REIMBURSEMENT 300.00 BROWNING FERRIS IND SERVICE 353.49 CALOIA & HOUPT PC SERVICE 50.00 CCO AND ERA PAYROLL EXPD 3,486.72 CENTRAL SERVICES/EC SERVICE 94.55 CENTURYTEL SERVICE 2,486.83 CITY MARKET #34 SUPPLIES 59.20 COLLETTS SERVICE 1,396.06 COLORADO MOUNTAIN NEWS SERVICE 3,648.00 COLUMBINE MARKET SUPPLIES 49.90 DCS AMERICA INC SERVICE 2,500.00 DEEP ROCK WEST SERVICE 48.75 DELLINC SERVICE 1,145.00 DRIVE TRAIN INDUSTRIES SUPPLIES 502.12 EAGLE AUTO PARTS SUPPLIES 45.73 EAGLE COUNTY PURCHASING SUPPLIES 570.43 GALLS INCORPORATED SERVICE 381.95 15 04-02-2002 GLENWOOD SHIRT COMPANY GMCO CORPORATION GYPSUM TOWN OF HEALTH INSURANCE FUND HOLY CROSS ELECTRIC ASSOC HONEY BUN BAKERY KINDER MORGAN INC LA WSON PRODUCTS LEGACY COMMUNICATIONS INC LEIBOWITZ AIRPORT MGT CON M & M AUTO PARTS M & M TIRE COMPANY MCI TELECOMMUNICATIONS MIDWEST AIR TRAFFIC MOTOR POOL FUND MOTOROLA MR ROOTER MYSLIK INC NOBLE WELDING PRECISION WEST SIGNS RICHARD L GUSTAFSON SAFETY KLEEN SCULL YS ART OFFICE AND SERVICEMASTER OF VAIL SEVERSON SUPPLY CO., INC. SIEMSNS AIRFIELD SOLUTION SPIEGEL MCDIARMID STANDARD SIGNS INC STEELOCK FENCE COMPANY SUMMIT LUMBER TRANSCORE, INC VAIL ELECTRONICS V AIL V ALLEY JET CENTER VERIZON WIRELESS, VISIONICS CORP WAGNER RENTS WASHINGTON INFRASTRUCTURE WELLS FARGO WRIGHT WATER ENGINEERS WYLACO SUPPLY COMPANY XEROX CORPORATION ZEP MANUFACTURING COMPANY SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE EMPLOYEE BENEFIT SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE PAYROLL EXPD SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE 206.95 182.00 334.25 462.98 2,827.89 28.00 2,490.08 56.00 552.40 1,423.07 412.45 30.50 195.33 29,153.00 1,906.92 9,699.20 464.44 193.32 302.90 40,300.00 1,604.19 278.06 155.53 1,161.49 2,159.50 1,206.41 165.18 1,251.56 700.00 254.29 135,538.00 56.25 11.36 147.57 22,100.00 5.53 20,973.72 26,383.96 256.00 618.87 111.38 312.50 PAYROLL FOR MARCH PAYROLL 5 & 6 62,215.54 639,788.51 16 04-02-2002 MICROWAVE MAINTENANCE FUND HOLYCROSS ELECTRIC ASSOC SERVICE 5,460.76 5,460.76 CAPITAL EXPENDITURE FUND GLOBAL TECHNOLOGY INC SERVICE 3,225.94 3,225.94 LANDFILL FUND 21ST CENTURY SEEDERS INC SERVICE 13,276.00 BROWNING FERRIS IND SERVICE 40,149.00 CALIFORNIA CONTRACTORS SERVICE 125.64 CCO AND ERA PA YROLL EXPD 1,294.89 CENTRAL SERVICES/EC SERVICE 65.72 DEEP ROCK WEST SERVICE 153.92 DENVER NEWSPAPER AGENCY SERVICE 261.44 DOWN V ALLEY SEPTIC SERVICE 330.00 EAGLE COUNTY PURCHASING SUPPLIES 44.60 HANSON EQUIPMENT SERVICE 14,655.00 HEALTH INSURANCE FUND EMPLOYEE BENEFIT 346.92 KRW CONSULTING INC SERVICE 5,132.25 MOTOR POOL FUND SERVICE 814.16 PEEP SERVICE 10,000.00 ROAD AND BRIDGE DEPARTMEN SERVICE 50,733.31 SCULL YS ART OFFICE AND SUPPLIES 79.41 SERVICEMASTER OF VAIL SERVICE 1,599.28 SUSPENSE FUND SERVICE 20.00 V AIL PRINTING AND SERVICE 685.18 WELLS FARGO PAYROLL EXPD 6,510.34 YARGER SERVICES LLC SERVICE 475.00 PAYROLL FOR MARCH PAYROLL 5 & 6 16,163.39 162,915.45 MOTOR POOL FUND Al AUTO ELECTRIC COMPANY SERVICE 187.50 ACTIVE COMMUNICATIONS SERVICE 27.00 ADAMS MARK HOTEL SERVICE 73.00 17 04-02-2002 AL-JON INC APW A WESTERN SLOPE BRANCH BERTHOD MOTORS BRODY CHEMICAL BROWNING FERRIS IND CCO AND ERA COLLETTS COLORADO MOTOR PARTS DRIVE TRAIN INDUSTRIES EAGLE AMOCO EAGLE AUTO PARTS EAGLE COUNTY PURCHASING EAGLE COUNTY REGIONAL EAGLE PHARMACY EATON SALES & SERVICE EMED COMPANY INC G & K SERVICES GA Y JOHNSONS INC GLENWOOD RADIATOR REPAIR GLENWOODSPRINGSFORD GOODYEAR WHOLESALE TIRE HANSON EQUIPMENT HEAL TH INSURANCE FUND HOLIDAY INN EXPRESS HOL Y CROSS ELECTRIC ASSOC HONNEN EQUIPMENT INDEPENDENT TOOL SUPPLY INTERSTATE BATTERY SYSTMS JACK CANNON KEMP AND COMPANY INC KOIS BROTHERS LAWSON PRODUCTS M & M AUTO PARTS MOTOR POOL FUND NAPA AUTO PARTS-CARBONDLE PETTY CASH MOTOR POOL POWER EQUIPMENT COMPANY POWER MOTIVE REY MOTORS INCORPORATED ROCKY MOUNTAIN FLEET SAFETY KLEEN (WHICITA) SAN DIEGO COUNTY OF THE SERVICEMASTER OF VAIL SUMMIT LUMBER SUSPENSE FUND TOWN OF GYPSUM SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE PAYROLL EXPD SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SERVICE PARTS SUPPLIES SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SUPPLIES EMPLOYEE BENEFIT SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SUPPLIES PARTS SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE REIMBURSEMENT SERVICE SUPPLIES SERVICE SERVICE 18.50 50.00 34,188.00 346.18 91.09 1,538.53 43,401.14 1,329.26 1,045.29 21.00 33.52 57.49 25,500.00 6.78 446.00 245.64 378.44 68.05 176.00 98.1 0 837.72 878.53 248.03 80.10 1,138.48 38.25 621.36 128.90 45.00 38.51 335.85 1,168.79 285.49 886.64 6.21 191. 64 313.77 5,976.47 464.52 225.00 147.62 55.38 2,318.66 35.95 76.92 608.15 18 04-02-2002 TRANSWEST TRUCKS INC UNITED LABORATORIES UNITED STATES WELDINy WAGNER EQUIPMENT COMPANY WEAR PARTS EQUIPMENT WELLS FARGO WESTERN SLOPE CHRYSLER WYLACO SUPPLY COMPANY SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SUPPLIES PARTS PAYROLL EXPD SERVICE SUPPLIES 45.38 187.14 232.84 482.07 232.83 8,725.25 234,485.00 794.30 PAYROLL FOR MARCH PAYROLL 5 & 6 22,165.94 393,829.20 HEALTH INSURANCE FUND DENMAN GREY AND COMPANY MOUNTAIN STATES ADMIN. PROVIDENT LIFE/ACCIDENT UNITED STATES LIFE INS EMPLOYEE BENEFIT EMPLOYEE BENEFIT EMPLOYEE BENEFIT EMPLOYEE BENEFIT 975.00 50,874.52 3,392.86 4,043.20 59,285.58 ENHANCED E911 FUND CENTURYTEL LANGUAGE LINE SERVICES QWEST SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE 360.18 49.75 12,774.37 13,184.30 REPORT TOTAL 4,426,229.36 Consent Agenda Chairman Gallagher stated the first matter before the Board was the Consent Agenda as follows: A) Approval of bill paying for the week of April 1, 2002, subject to review by County Administrator B) Approval of payroll for April 4, 2002, subject to review by County Administrator C) Approval of the minutes of the Board of County Commissioners meeting for March 12,2002 D) Resolution 2002-052, Final Release of Collateral and termination of the correction period for Blue Lake Subdivision, Filing V E) Agreement with J.S. Lengel & Associates, Inc. for the Cemetery Road Bridge property appraisal F) (2) 2002 Dodge Intrepid four door sedans, trade-in #6563 - 1995 Dodge Intrepid, #6098, 1992 Ford Taurus G) (3) 2002 1/4 ton quad cab pick up, trade in #6566, 1996 Ford Ranger, #7291, 1998 19 04-02-2002 Ford Ranger, $6580, 1996 Ford Ranger H) (2) 2002 4x4 utility vehicle I) Agreement between the County of Eagle and Roaring Fork School District. Chairman Gallagher asked the Attorney's Office if there were any changes to the Consent Agenda. Torn Moorhead, County Attorney, stated item I, Agreement with the Roaring Fork School District, can be pulled. He stated he has not yet received the Agreement from the School District. Commissioner Stone moved to approve the Consent Agenda as presented, pulling item I. Commissioner Menconi seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Final Settlement, Shaw Construction Torn Moorhead presented final settlement for Shaw Construction Company for expansion to the Eagle County Regional Airport Terminal. He stated this matter was published and no complaints have been received. Commissioner Menconi moved to approve final settlement for Shaw Construction Company for expansion to the Eagle County Regional Airport Terminal. Commissioner Stone seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. 1041 Permit, Cordillera's Chaveno Parcel Ross Easterling, Planner, presented the completeness hearing for a major extension of a domestic water and sewage system to Cordillera's Chaveno Parcel. He stated the action that is being requested from the Board is to determine completeness of a 1041 Permit application and to estimate associated processing fees. A 1041 application has been submitted for the major extension of domestic water and sewer systems to serve the proposed fire station, maintenance facility and future residential development and to allow the efficient utilization of a municipal water project. Staff has reviewed the above referenced permit application and has found it to be complete. We have tentatively scheduled the permit hearings for the Planning Commission and the Permit Authority on May 15,2002 and May 28,2002 respectively. Estimated fees for the above referenced 1041 Permit application are as follows: Environmental Health and Community Development Staff 10 Hrs @ $42.50 = $ 425.00 Engineering Staff 6 Hrs @ $42.50 = $ 255.00 Attorney Staff 6 Hrs @ $75.00 = $ 450.00 TOTAL = $1,130.00 Commissioner Stone moved the Board accept the permit application, submitted for the construction of a major extension of domestic water and sewage treatment systems to serve the 'Chaveno Parcel', as complete. The estimated fee to process this application is $1,130.00 and may be altered to cover the actual cost of review and public hearings. Commissioner Menconi seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Commissioner Stone moved the Board approve the applicants waiver request for the requirement of a special use permit, as applied from Section 3-310 I of the Eagle County Land Use Regulations. Commissioner Menconi seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Commissioner Stone spoke to the amendment of the 1041 regulations and asked when they will 20 04-02-2002 be adopting those changes. Ray Merry, Director of Environmental Health, stated he believes the meeting will be set for late April. Commissioner Stone asked if there is a date they are shooting for. Torn Moorhead stated they can have a date by the end of the day. Settlement Stipulations Torn Moorhead presented the settlement stipulations stating there are three properties but are all owned by First Bank Colorado Corporation, Avon, West Vail and Edwards. Schedule number P007051, the Board of Equalization assessed value is $558,260.00 and the stipulated value is $435,600.00. Schedule number P008973, the Board of Equalization assessed value is $168,510.00 and the stipulated value is $115,730.00. Schedule number P026202, the Board of Equalization assessed value is $293,790.00 and the stipulated value is $124,770.00. He stated these three properties are owned by First Bank and are actually their banking locations. He stated the subject personal property included items of tenant finish that were considered real property and other items that should have been deleted in 2001 since the petitioner, First Bank, owns and occupies the improvements. This stipulated value corrects the double assessment. Commissioner Menconi moved to approve the settlement stipulations as presented and as shown on Exhibit A. Commissioner Stone seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Plat & Resolution Signing Matt Gennett, Planner, presented the following plats and resolutions for the Board's consideration: 5MB-00293, Berry Creek Ranch Filin2 2. A Re-subdivision of Lot 25. Block 1. He stated this was a Type B Minor Subdivision, the intent of which is to re-subdivide Lot 25 into two, If2 duplex lots, Lot 25A and Lot 25B. Staff findings are as follows: Pursuant to Section 5-290 (G) (1) of the Eagle County Land Use Regulations: 5-290 (G) (1) Standards for Type A and Type B Subdivision (G) Standards. The Board of County Commissioners and the Community Development Director shall consider the following in the review of a Type A Subdivision, a Type B Subdivision, and an Amended Final Plat. Standards for Type A and Type B Subdivision. a) Access, potable water, and sewage disposal on the land to be subdivided are adequate; b. The plat does conform to Final Plat requirements and other applicable regulations, policies, standards, and guidelines; and c. No Improvement Agreement is applicable. Commissioner Stone moved to approve final plat file number 5MB-00293, Berry Creek Ranch, Filing 2, are-subdivision of Lot 25, Block 1, incorporating staff findings. Commissioner Menconi seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. AFP-00129, Lot 10, Brett Ranch pun Jena Skinner, Planner, presented file number AFP-00129, Lot 10, Brett Ranch PUD. She stated the intent of this plat is to both create a new building envelope, and vacate the existing building envelope on Lot 10. 21 04-02-2002 Pursuant to Section 5-90.G.2. Standards for Amended Final Plat: a. Adjacent property. Staff has determined that the proposed amendment DOES NOT have an adverse effect on adjacent property owners. No letters of opposition have been received by the Community Development department. b. Final Plat Consistency. Review of the Amended Final Plat has determined that the proposed amendment IS NOT inconsistent with the intent of the Final Plat. c. Conformance with Final Plat Requirements. Review of the Amended Final Plat has determined that the proposed amendment DOES conform to the Final Plat requirements and other applicable regulations, policies and guidelines. d. Improvement Agreement. Proposed improvements and/or off-site road improvements agreement ARE adequate. e. Restrictive Plat Note Alteration. DOES NOT Apply Chairman Gallagher referred to a photo of the location. He asked on the sketch were it indicates it is not part of the Berry Creek PUD. He asked if that is the lot in question. Ms. Skinner stated that is the adjacent property. Chairman Gallagher asked for public comment. There was none. Commissioner Menconi moved the Board approve File No. AFP-00129, Lot 10, Brett Ranch PUD, incorporating the findings and authorize the Chairman to sign the plat. Commissioner Stone seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. Minimum Standards, Commercial Aeronautical Service Torn Moorhead stated the next matter was a public hearing on the Minimum Standards and requirement for the conduct of commercial aeronautical service and activities at the Eagle County Regional Airport. He stated the hearing today follows two work sessions, one on October 2001 and the other on March 4, 2002. He stated at those hearings he outlined the present status of the proposed Minimum Standards and how they compare to those of 1986. At that hearing they received written comments from the Vail Valley Jet Center. He listed the additional written comments received on March 15, 2002. He stated written comments were also received from High Tech Aircraft, dated March 19,2002. He stated he and Eddie Storer, Airport Manager, have reviewed all of the written comments. He stated they have received written comments today and from Mike Leaderhouse and from Jim Pollitt. In addition to those general written comments they received written comments from the FAA on March 29,2002, Chris Shaeffer, Project Manager. He stated they had a telephone conference with Mr. Schaeffer. He provided the Board a memorandum with three changes to the Minimum Standards and one change to the Rules and Regulations. That copy is available for the members of the public to review. In addition to the written comments he has had an opportunity to meet with Paul Meyers, High Tech Aircraft and Brian Burns ofthe Vail Valley Jet Center. Subsequently they have met with Michael Gallagher, Chairman, and gone through some additional changes. Since the March 5th work session, Flying Clubs, which appeared in the Minimum Standards, have been moved to the Rules and Regulations section of the documents, and the general lease provisions now appear as attachment #2. There are two attachments, # 1 is a schedule of minimum insurance requirements and #2 is the lease provisions. Both can be amended by their terms without having to amend the minimal standards. Mr. Moorhead stated there are a number of issues raised by Vail Valley Jet Center and High Tech Aircraft. Vail Valley Jet Center have stated they believe the Minimum Standards are not sufficiently burdensome. It would leave one to make a claim of unjust discrimination. There have been 22 04-02-2002 comments from High Tech who claim they are too burdensome. He stated they have had a comment from both of them that the Minimum Standards should apply to the County. He stated he and Mr. Storer reviewed this with the FAA and they believe that they should not apply to the County as they have the opportunity to engage in a number of activities and the Minimum Standards are not necessary to be applied to the County. Mr. Moorhead stated there is also a question regarding the retro-activity. These are retro-active and any operator must corne into compliance within 90 days. He worked with Reesa Peters, who has been working on the Minimum Standards longer than he, who stated they can require compliance with the updated standards unless unreasonable to do so. He spoke to the requirement for new construction compared to existing construction. He stated he reviewed the present lease agreement with Vail Valley Jet Center and they are bound by the Minimum Standards. He believes that this lease would be retro- active. He stated he does not believe that any of the standards being discussed have increased requirements from a facilities standpoint that would make it unreasonable. Based on the changes made after conversations with the FAA the standards for the construction of the hangar are now the same as they were in the 1986 provisions. He stated the provision of six acres being the minium lease area also does not present a conflict or unreasonable requirement. He stated if there is something in these that would be unreasonable they will be pointed out in discussion today. Mr. Moorhead spoke to questions being raised on exhibit #1 regarding insurance coverage. He spoke to the discussion with Aon Aviation, who is the insurance carrier that carries Eagle County's twenty million dollar coverage through. They were reviewed and it was determined they were appropriate for today's market and were appropriate coverages. Chairman Gallagher spoke to the sign up sheet for public comment. He stated everyone will have time to address their comments but asked that they minimize repeat comments. He asked them to be specific to the statements in the document. He stated they would appreciate it if they have a recommended change. Brian Bums, president of Vail Valley Jet Center, asked to read a letter written by Mike Hodges, President of Airport Business Solutions. He ready the letter as follows: "Dear Mr. Gallagher, Based on my involvement in the Minimum Standards revision process at the Eagle County Airport over the past few month, I would like to express the following concerns on behalf of the Vail Valley Jet Center. Please understand that although the Jet Center is my client, the following comments are based solely upon my independent review of the various documents as they relate to prevalent Minimum Standards at other airports throughout the region and nation. 1) Due Process Precludes Voting on April 2, 2002. a. The County failed to follow its own rules with respect to those notified of the meeting. Specifically, only a small portion of Airport tenants were notified of this meeting. In fact, of the estimated 50 airport tenants, only 4 were listed on the County's mailing list of which none are in this room today. Any vote taken at this meeting will therefore be invalid and subject to being stricken later. b. Those entities in fact provided notice were given less than 10 days notice as set forth in the County's rules. The extremely short time that has been provided to Vail Valley Jet Center and other interested parties to offer their concerns and issues regarding various drafts of proposed Minimum Standards is highly irregular. Minimum Standards typically follows an extension "information gathering" process which includes numerous opportunities for all interested parties to offer suggestions and air their concerns about the impact of Standards which may be too high or too low in certain areas. It is also the general rule that any incumbent FBO's are provided the opportunity to offer input and insight into the trends and characteristics of the general aviation users at the Airport. This is not only done as a courtesy to the existing operators who will likely incur the greatest level of impact on their business as the result of new, modified Standards, but also because they are typically the most 23 04-02-2002 knowledgeable resource to the Airport relative to user demands from existing and prospective operators who will be impacted. However, in my view of this process over the past couple of months, there has been a total disregard for due process in the development of the proposed new Minimum Standards. c. The newly proposed Minimum Standards remain flawed and are a work in progress that is not yet ready for a vote. As set forth throughout these comments, as well as those received by the County from the FAA's Denver Airport District Office (ADO), the proposed Minimum Standards continue to contain problems and discrepancies that indicate the document is not yet ready for a vote. Specifically, the ADO has suggested that the utilization of words that are "open to interpretation" (sufficient, adequate, typical, suitable) be removed and replaced with more concise and specific requirements. Should a vote occur and these Standards be implemented as written, the Airport risks them being invalidated, in addition to possible losing future Federal funding and being required to pay back grants received in past years. 2) Lowering the Standards for a new entrant harms competition. a. The County's currently proposed Minimum Standards are substantially less onerous than the 1986 standards that it required VVJC to meet. This fact alone harms competition by unfairly subsidizing a new entrant. Several items within the most recent draft Minimum Standards are lower than the existing 1986 Standards, (e.g., hangar requirements), while others have been kept the same as the 1986 Standards, which has the "effective" impact oflowering Standards. b. Growth at the Airport has been extraordinary over the last 16 years, which should warrant more stringent Standards. At the time that the 1986 Standards were adopted, the Eagle County Airport only offered a 5,000 foot runway, with other facilities and amenities being extremely limited. In addition, enplanements at the Airport were minimal. However, in 2002, the Airport offers a new 8,000 foot runway, new commercial terminal facility, extensive facilities to service general aviation (which has allowed a whole new generation of private, business, and corporate aircraft access to the Airport), and over 200,000 annual enplanements. In other words, the Airport has grown exponentially, both in quantity and quality, over the last 16 years. The FAA states in its Advisory Circular on Minimum Standards (AC 15-/5190-5, Section 2, Item 8d) that various attributes and operational characteristics should be considered when developing an airport's Minimum Standards. As such, the facilities, equipment and amenities necessary to service and support general aviation and commercial airline users at EGE should be expanded beyond those provided in the 1986 Standards. It is reasonable to expect that any new Minimum Standards at EGE would reflect the significant growth which has occurred by setting forth increased requirements in hangar size, fuel storage and transfer, insurance, etc. c. In my opinion, the proposed new Minimum Standards are without regard to the current market conditions at the Eagle County Airport, and provide an economic advantage to new operators who will compete with the Vail Valley Jet Center, who developed in accordance with the 1986 Standards. By lowering or maintaining similar Standards to 1986 levels in such areas as fueling equipment, aircraft towing and servicing equipment, principal building and terminal area sizes, and certain minimum insurance requirements, the cost of developing and maintaining an FBO will be less than those Standards imposed on Vail Valley Jet Center, providing them with an unfair and unjust economic advantage. Furthermore, by maintaining similar Standards to 1986 levels in certain areas has the "net" effect of lowering Standards for new operators. 3. Un-necessary Airport Funding. a. The Vail Valley Jet Center is not attempting to prohibit competition at the Airport, but only to insure that any prospective competitors are held to a reasonable level of development and operational standards to create a "level playing field" for all commercial service providers. In my opinion, the proposed Standards do not accomplish this objective. Moreover, the FAA's Minimum Standards Advisory Circular states: "Changes to the standards can be most easily facilitated by 24 04-02-2002 demonstrating to the business operators that the sole purpose for the change is to improve the quality of service to the public." It is my opinion Eagle County can better demonstrate this by funding the installation of radar, a new air traffic control tower and security enhancements, not more un-necessary GA infrastructure costs. 4. Economic Impact of Eagle County. Two FBO's at the Eagle County Airport cannot be economically viable. During the course of my research, I have performed numerous financial analyses to determine the economic viability of a second fixed base operator at the Eagle County Airport. Assuming a highly optimistic (and probably unrealistic) scenario, which would be a SO/50 split of the existing business revenues generated by VVJC with no reduction in margins, based upon either the existing or proposed Standards at the Airport, neither operator will be able to generate a positive return on investment. In our research of airports that have gone from 1 to 2 FBO's (Memphis, Las Vegas, Rochester, Bradley, Dulles) or 2 to 1 FBO (Minneapolis, Boston, Detroit), there has not been a measurable change in overall fuel volumes generated at the Airport, only a reallocation of existing business levels. However, in the scenarios where competition was created, revenues and margins declined for both FBO's driven by overly competitive pricing and less focus on service quality. The fallout has been a reduction in the level of amenities and services available to the customer, which were the result of the operators being forced to cut costs and servIces. 5. Capacity Versus Demand. Vail Valley Jet Center is currently meeting customer demands. The Vail Valley Jet Center offers substantial hangar space to meet the needs of both based and transient customers (with an obligation to construct another facility in the near future), and provides a level of service that is recognized as a benchmark within the FBO industry. An airport's desire for a second FBO is typically driven by a scenario where the incumbent is providing inadequate facilities or service. Neither is the case with VVJC. 6. Through the Fence Violations. Through the fence access has been totally disregarded in the recent draft. On behalf of VV JC, I am concerned about the recent removal of a Section 4 of the March 7th draft Minimum Standards that addressed through the fence operations at the Airport. At the March 11 meeting, both myself and a consultant for High Tech Aircraft agreed that the County should make a stronger statement about their position on through the fence operations. Commissioner Gallagher stated that the County was wholly against through the fence activities at EGE, which was confirmed by Commissioner Stone. However, in the March 21 version ofthe Standards, all references to through the fence were deleted, not strengthened to clearly reflect the County's position. (Note: FAA Denver ADO letter written to Torn Moorhead April 1, 2002). By removing all references to through the fence commercial service activities, the County has created the opportunity for a through the fence operator to legally challenge the County's position on such operators. Furthermore, the County should include a requirement that all property necessary for potential commercial service providers to meet Minimum Standards must be leased directly from the Airport Sponsor. By including this statement, the County will eliminate the potential for an adjacent property owner to lease only minimal land area to access the Airport. This requirement would not only limit the competitive advantage to a prospective operator, but also maximize revenues collected by the County from property leases. Finally, I would like to express my concern about the overall picture that has been painted by the Commission during this process. VVJC has provided extensive commentary and analysis about the various versions of Standards presented to them, most of which is solely related to the best interests of the Eagle County Airport and VaillEagle County community. However, none of the recommendations we have presented have been included or even explained in any revised drafts, to include those that were 25 04-02-2002 for the express purpose of protecting the financial stability of Eagle County. Coupled with a failure to provide adequate notice of meetings and reasonable opportunities to present our concerns in a public forum, leads to the conclusion that the Commission has not adequately or thoroughly analyzed the overall ramifications of the proposed Minimum Standards. Thank you for your time." The letter is signed by Michael A. Hodges, MAl, President/CEO, Airport Business Solutions. Chairman Gallagher stated this is an opportunity for the three Commissioners to gather all the information they need to make an appropriate decision. He asked Mr. Moorhead about the timeliness of notification. Torn Moorhead stated he read that all operators will be notified and a hearing will be held not less than ten or more than thirty days after the notice. He stated operators at the airport are defined as a commercial general aviation operator, a person engaging in an activity which involves, makes possible, or which is required for the operation of aircraft, or which contributes to or required for the safe conduct and utility of such aircraft operations. He stated there is one operator on the airport at this time and that is Vail Valley Jet Center. He stated it does not refer to lease holders. He stated he hand delivered the notice of this hearing as well as it was sent by mail. He spoke to the lists he has of everyone to whom the proposed amendments were mailed to. Mr. Moorhead spoke to the letter written by Mike Hodges and his reference to the remarks made by the FAA, and related in a discussion with Chris Schaeffer those comments were clarified. He stated they commented that several of the comments have been worded in such a way as to be open to future interpretation. Such case by case interpretation of standards can inadvertently lead to claims of unjust discrimination. He stated as a result of the clarifications, they did make the amendments as noted on his memorandum to the Commissioners. The parking references the Eagle County Land Use Regulations and the hangar size has been amended to include the requirements of the 1986 standards, which are presently in place. He stated that was contrary to what was stated by Mike Hodges. He stated they have included on page 1 of the document under introduction, the following paragraph: "These Minimum Standards expressly forbid "through the fence" commercial operations. The County's obligation to make the airport available for the use and benefit of the public does not extend to providing access from adjacent property. Such "through the fence" operations can adversely affect the ability of the airport to sustain itself financially, resulting in unfair competitive situations, and contribute to loss of control with respect to airport access". He stated other comments read from Mr. Hodges letter were previously received on letters dated January 20th and March 15th. Brian Burns stated in response to the comment about the notification issue, he stated at 5 :00 p.m. yesterday they received a fax copy of the additional proposals. Mr. Moorhead asked if that is what they are claiming to be lack of notice. Mr. Bums stated no that is in addition to the previous notice received. Mr. Moorhead asked if they did in fact receive a hand delivered notice. Mr. Bums stated yes they did receive that in advance of the 10 day notice. Mr. Bums stated the foundation of FAA's Minimum Standards are driven on four factors. 1) The original standards that were in place when the incumbent FBO commenced their lease. He stated the Jet Center is obviously bound by the original Minimum Standards. 2) General aviation facilities and services that exist today. 3) Industry standards to airports comparable to Eagle County. 4) The current market demand for facilities and services. He stated contrary to popular belief, setting low standards does not promote competition. Prematurely developing general aviation real estate at the Airport will economically suffer before it ever has a chance to grow. It only serves to dilute the existing market and create a "win at all costs" environment, which in turn leads to business failure. The only benefit the County will see if these low standards are not raised, is the ground rent collected from a second FBO. No new fuel sales and services will be generated, only a splitting of the existing market. Fuel sales 26 04-02-2002 currently provide four times the revenue to the County than what ramp rent provides. Vail is a world class resort destination. FBO's are one ofthe key gateways to the valley, not only for local businesses but for second homeowners, high end recreational visitors and such. The Minimum Standards for Eagle County should reflect the same quality image as the five star hotels in this area. What these standards reflect is a model for a Motel 6 to be built next to a Ritz Carlton. The general aviation users are not Motel 6 clientele!. When the Jet Center sold the commercial Terminal B to the County they were considered the low cost provider. The new commercial terminal is a good example of what quality and service should be at a price. All they are asking is that the same philosophy be applied to the second FBO provider. What may be perceived as a growing fractional aircraft market is often offset by the ability ofthe new generation aircraft, the Global Express, the G5, the business Boeing Jet, having the long range fuel capabilities to potentially tanker through without any consideration of service, quality and price, which translates into lost fuel sales. With a second FBO provider on the field, not only will the Vail Valley Jet Center be competing on price, but against the common practice oftankering fuel at the origin of flight and at their next stop. When considering a second FBO provider, the Board needs to treat it as a businessman would, not as a necessity to fill FAA requirements. The risk associated with low Minimum Standards, dissolution ofthe market. By adding a second FBO provider, it will not double the general aviation businesses at the Airport. The shift of the labor market, is not going to grow employment but rather transfer the work force. Predatory pricing less concession fees, mean less concession fees for Eagle County. The economic unfeasibility of maintaining two quality operations will result in having two marginal operations versus one viable stable service provider. They have related that Sun Valley and Jackson Valley are both fields with one FBO. He urged the Board to look at those reasons why. Demand versus capacity issues, the Vail Valley Jet Center has an additional six and one half acres, which is 270,000 square feet of land east of hangar 4, which must be developed in the next few years. It will most likely be another hangar, adding more capacity when they are already at 85% capacity today. The former Terminal B space which is another 35,000 square feet is available for development or re-development, adding more capacity to the Airport. Chairman Gallagher asked Mr. Burns to speak to the Minimum Standards. He stated we are not here today to argue if there should be another FBO or not. Mr. Bums replied the Minimum Standards are tied to second FBO's. The reason for this is they set the criteria for that level of entry. Chairman Gallagher asked that they get into the meat and potatoes of the standards. Mr. Bums stated he would like to provide an economic analysis of what two FBO's would mean to the airport. He continued and spoke to the seasonality of four months of revenues are 75%/25% revenue split. He stated the VVJC has provided space for a pilots lounge. Chairman Gallagher thanked him for his input and stated they will at sometime ask for the analysis. Commissioner Menconi asked if it is Mr. Burns' understanding that accepting of Minimum Standards sets the stage for a second FBO. Mr. Bums stated it is the foundation. Commissioner Menconi stated from his understanding that after the Minimum Standards are in place it is up to the Airport or the Commissioners to approve a second FBO. He asked if it is possible for them to sue the official for not allowing a second FBO. Mr. Burns stated you can have an airport with a sole provider. That depends on the criteria, the economics and what drives it. He stated they must substantiate it by what they have available and must be taken into consideration. Commissioner Menconi stated he understands the link, but the process allows them to adopt Minimum Standards, after that there are additional processes to either bring in or decline a second FBO. He stated it doesn't necessarily relate back to the Minimum Standards. 27 04-02-2002 Commissioner Stone asked if anyone else is going to speak on behalf of the Jet Center. Mr. Bums stated he doesn't believe so. Commissioner Stone continued by saying their resistance, their reluctance and the lack of response to exact specific recommendations concerning the Minimum Standards, has been disappointing. They have purposefully chosen to speak in generalities and they have not chosen to make specific comments to support the generalities. He stated if they think a specific standard is too low, they should say so, but they have not given specific recommendations. He stated he appreciates the comments from the consultant on behalf of the Jet Center. It would have been more helpful had the Jet Center given specific comments. Mr. Bums stated during the October worksession there was a proposal on the table that laid out specifically what standards were acceptable to the Jet Center. He stated those were completely ignored. He referred to the review by Reesa Peters. He stated some issues were never addressed such as fuel and equipment. He stated they had that in writing to the Board saying this was acceptable and reasonable to the VVJC. He stated the next draft they received never took into consideration any of their suggestions. He stated they tried and failed and are now starting at 1986 and working up. He stated they started fresh in the March meetings and that is why they are approaching this from an economic standpoint. Commissioner Menconi stated he did have a chance to get the Minimum Standards from Sun Valley. He stated he had a difficult time finding a discrepancy between those for Eagle County and Sun Valley. He asked if there are examples they might look at enhancing. Mr. Bums stated there is no boiler plate. He stated it is all driven on what the incumbent portion has in place today when Minimum Standards are being addressed. He stated the compromise comes into play when you take a look at what is happening in a specific location. You can't pick and choose. Commissioner Menconi asked if there is anything they can point to specifically that they would prefer to see changed. Mr. Bums stated absolutely and those are referenced in his October letter. Commissioner Menconi asked if he could take them through one of the concerns. Mr. Bums referred to a facility capability statement. He spoke to the square footage ofthe facility and 16,000 square feet oflobby space, 110,000 square feet of hangar space, 135,000 gallons of underground fuel storage, 50,000 gallons of rolling fuel storage. The criteria was set. In the last proposal, it is one 1,200 gallons for jet fuel and 1,200 gallons of rolling. That is a significant difference. He stated that is the variation he is referring to and that was addressed in their letter to the County. He stated that was the purpose of showing the physical capabilities they are able to support. Commissioner Menconi asked if the number set in the minimal standards is today compared to those of 1986. Mr. Burns stated they are nearly identical. Commissioner Menconi asked what problem that creates for the County to accept. Mr. Burns stated that is unfair. Commissioner Menconi questioned ifthe Jet Center had a choice to put in a lesser size. He is hearing that the Jet Center carne in and made choices. Mr. Bums spoke to the seasonal demand which is key. When that all goes away, all the inventory and investment in capital sit idle. That is the nature of resort destination. He stated they have to realize they must corne up to a level to support the market properly. Chairman Gallagher asked if it would be accurate to summarize the position of the Jet Center that any future newcomer should meet the minimum reality rather than the Minimum Standards. Mr. Burns stated they are not asking they corne up to 100% of their compliance. Chairman Gallagher asked if the position VVJC made last fall continues to be their position on the Minimum Standards. Bill Moran, controller at Walker Field in Grand Junction, stated most ofthe FBO's he is familiar 28 04-02-2002 with have higher standards than what the County is proposing. Mr. Moran spoke to item S, "aircraft maintenance in hangar shall be limited to that specifically permitted by building type rating". He stated the building type rating is not spelled out. Item Y, "the BOCC establish maximum take off weight". He assumes the County has qualified personnel to help establish that. Item 4D, "vehicles are not permitted on the runway unless escorted by the Airport Manager or FBO". He assumes they mean someone certified in the FBO. Item I, "all domestic pets must be retained by lease and confined in an area designated by the Airport Manager". Everyone knows that people corne in with pets and he assumes that the FBO would be a sufficient area to confine the pet. Item 6a, he questioned the BOCC construction guidelines. He stated they have no copy. Item 9, "fueling shall comply with all procedures by the BOCC". He assumes all the fueling procedures are dictated by the N.A.T.A. He stated the next item is they are speaking to non-ambulatory people and they are saying personnel must be standing by the scene to assure there are no problems when fueling. He stated in Walker Field they require a fire truck. He stated biggest question he has is the overlapping between the FBO Maintenance and the Aviation Service Operators as found in Section III, page 2. He stated there is a lot of over lapping of the functions of those two. He asked about a propeller mechanic being on site and ifthere is a need to have one on site. On page 11, they are speaking to selling maps that cover 300 square miles from the Airport, flashlights and batteries. He stated he believes it is un-necessary. He stated in making a general comment, the 2,500 square feet repeats quite often. He stated with the new larger planes the County will have to be flexible on the type of facility they will require. Brad Ghent, Cooley Mesa Leasing, stated his comments are more about due process and the planning that went into this. He asked if there were parties invited to submit comment. He stated here we are in the adoption process without having had the input of other interested parties. He stated to him that seems like the unfair part of the process. Chairman Gallagher asked who else might have been invited. Mr. Ghent stated his partner, Kent Meyers, has previously shown interest but was not part ofthe initial discussion. Chairman Gallagher stated in fact Kent Meyers was notified. Mr. Ghent stated he was part ofthis hearing but was not a part of original planning process. Commissioner Stone asked who was the County Manager when they started reviewing the Minimum Standards. Jack Ingstad, County Administrator, replied Jack Lewis. Commissioner Stone asked how long Mr. Lewis has been gone. Mr. Ingstad answered eight years. John Logan, Due West Aviation, stated he had nothing to add. Paul Meyers, Aviation Management Consultant Group, stated the Minimum Standards are exactly that, they are the Minimum Standards such as a minimum ante. He stated can those be exceeded. He stated yes they can. He stated he appreciates this Board having Minimum Standards and updating them. He stated this process is long overdue. He stated there was a statement made earlier about through the fence policy. He stated he did not agree with through the fence but rather asked for clarification. He then referred to the document and the FAA letter to Mr. Moorhead He stated in the first paragraph, it states "in general, we have determined that the proposed Minimum Standards fulfill the County's obligation to provide opportunity for interested parties to engage in commercial aeronautical activities at the Airport". He stated it was very clear that the FAA had no objections to this outside of the ones that were stated. Those were clarified and the language modified based on those specific comments from the FAA. The first point is on page 8, section 6, item b2, "the FBO or ASO must obtain written approval from the County to sub-lease the space and function". He stated with regard to the FBO, sub-leasing hangar, tie down, office and shop space is something that is normal and customary function that the FBO engages in. He questioned if the Board wants to have to review every 29 04-02-2002 sub-lease agreement for a tie down and hangar space to give their approval. He suggested the Board review a lease agreement in form and maybe have a boiler plate agreement. He stated on page 10, item 2a 4, "mobile dispensing trucks shall have the capacity of 1,200 gallon minimum for each grade of fuel". He stated 750 gallons is probably more appropriate, normal and customary for av-gas to be less. He stated they did run some quick numbers on the av-gas. He stated that would be 143 days of storage. The next comment is on page 12, item 3b, the requirement states that "the building improvements shall be permanent in nature and shall contain at least 17,500 square feet in the principal building for FBO operations". It states that 5,000 has to be executive space and 12,500 hangar. Eddie Storer stated the answer is yes, 17,500 square feet of which 5,000 should be the terminal area. The goal is that there will be another building. Mr. Meyers asked if you need a 17,500 square foot building and a 12,000 square foot hangar. Mr. Storer stated that is a combination building. Chairman Gallagher stated as he reads it the building should be permanent and shall consist of 12,500 in the principal building. Mr. Storer stated they are saying 17,500 and 5,000 of that is the terminal. There should then be a 12,500 square foot hangar. Commissioner Stone asked if somebody could meet the requirements with having one building with 12,500 of it being a hangar and then 5,000 is a passenger terminal. Mr. Storer state he doesn't believe so. Commissioner Stone asked if this is requiring two buildings, one being hangar and one being terminal. Mr. Storer stated that is his understanding. Commissioner Stone stated there will have to be 2 buildings. Mr. Meyers asked if there would be a total of 30,000 square feet of which 17,500 would be the principal building, 5,000 the terminal building and a hangar of 12,500. Mr. Storer stated that was correct. Chairman Gallagher asked if this item had been modified. Mr. Storer stated it was an adaption of the original language. Mr. Meyers stated they would submit that 5,000 square feet for the terminal building is appropriate for market and the 12,500 hangar is appropriate. That would be a total building of 17,500. He stated a 17,500 square foot terminal building is outrageous. He stated he doesn't know what a principal building area is. If they want 30,000 square feet that should be stated. Chairman Gallagher stated he has no problem with the terminal and hangar is appropriate but two 12,500 foot hangars is inappropriate. Mr. Meyers stated that was correct. Mr. Moorhead stated the language from the present Minimum Standards is identical to what is here. He stated it then goes on to identify 5,000 feet of floor area of total building area being allocated for general aviation terminal, and goes on to state each FBO shall occupy at least one clear span hangar containing 12,500 square feet. This hangar shall have a door opening of 100 feet in width and 30 feet in height. Chairman Gallagher stated the difference is one hangar. Mr. Meyers continued on page 13, paragraph 3, "each FBO shall be required to occupy one hangar of 12,500 square feet, shall have a door opening of 100 feet wide and 30 feet high". He suggested it relates to an aircraft having a wing span of "X" rather than height and width of the door. He stated the 30 feet in height is more than needed. Mr. Moorhead stated they discussed the matter with the FAA who asked why was it specified as height and width in 1986 and they did not have the answer. The FAA suggested if that dimension was based on a certain craft at the Airport. They were concerned with specifying a certain aircraft and 30 04-02-2002 reducing the Minimum Standards from 1986. Mr. Meyers spoke to insurance stating the limits are high. He stated piston operators could be prohibited from operating. He stated they are currently requiring a five million dollar policy. Chairman Gallagher asked if it was a good number for jet aircraft. Mr. Meyers answered yes but for piston aircraft it should be in the range of one million. He stated the other question is the student and renters liability. It is also to high in his opinion. More of $100,000 is more in line for the piston operator. Mr. Moorhead stated the only one that requires a five million dollar policy is a FBO, regardless of what he is operating. They will be dealing in the general aviation traffic. It is not required of anyone else. Mr. Meyers asked if the FBO wants to do flight instruction in a piston aircraft it would require five million in coverage. Chairman Gallagher stated under aircraft charter, it speaks of amounts of one million dollars. An FBO would be required five million. Mr. Meyers asked the difference between an FBO and a Charter Service. Chairman Gallagher stated the FBO will be doing more than taxi service. Bill Moran stated if you are fueling you normally have a $50,000,000 insurance policy from the fueling service. He spoke to chartering and training. He thinks the minimum insurance qualification should be raised to at least two or three million. Mr. Meyers stated he raised a good point between charter and flight instruction or rental. Insurance may need to be raised for the charter or flight instruction but for piston planes it should be kept at a million. He is just talking about a single individual or two people for flight instruction. For a charter the million is not enough. Maybe the Board should distinguish by type of service and type of airplane. Mr. Meyers stated in closing, he spoke to indemnification policies. If the County is negligent that should be included. He spoke to several changes in language, changing "shall" to "may" in a few instances. He asked if all transportation services must have Board approval before servicing travelers and if that included general aviation. Commissioner Stone answered yes. Greg Mohanna, High Tech Aircraft, thanked the Board for addressing the revision of the Minimum Standards. He stated the only point he has is over the hangar size and that they might want to revisit those specifications. He suggested a compromise by stating "Global Aircraft, G5's and large business aircraft currently in production" could be submitted. He stated there are no plans for new aircraft for the next 10 years. He stated the point he makes is those airplanes can comfortably fit under a door that is 28 feet. Commissioner Stone asked what the difference is between the two feet. Mr. Mohanna referred to the fire systems. With a thirty foot door it requires a foam deluge system. The local fire authority has the ability to defer to "409" or to use his own regulations. He stated the current FBO does not have a "409". He stated the foam system is financially restrictive and requires an airport infrastructure issue. He stated it requires a 16" water main or a storage tank. He stated you also have to contain the affluent which has to be disposed of. He stated you are opening Pandora's box. He stated he would like to address the comments about the market. He stated they are an interested party for a second FBO. He stated their studies show a 12% annual growth in fuel consumption. He stated it is not about dividing the pie, it is about a bigger pie. He stated there is currently a deficiency in airport services and there is a waiting list every day, every week for hangar services. He stated you are missing revenue. He stated it would be their contention the deficiency can be addressed by growing and improving the market. Chairman Gallagher asked if a 757 will fit in a 28 foot door. 31 04-02-2002 Mr. Mohanna stated that requires a 45 foot door. Commissioner Menconi asked what size hangar the VVJC has. Paul Gordon, Vail Valley Jet Center, stated their systems are all water and are self contained. He stated they checked with the fire martial and that was acceptable at the time. Chairman Gallagher asked for any additional public comment. There was none. He closed public comment. Chairman Gallagher stated the next item on the agenda is the Resolution approving the Minimum Standards. Commissioner Stone asked that the Board table the Resolution presented today and allow sufficient time to review the suggestions or changes introduced and produce a document that will show what was submitted in writing as well as the comments. Also he would like to give the Jet Center or anyone else the opportunity to make specific comments in writing regarding suggested changes. That would allow the Commissioners an opportunity to review all changes. Commissioner Menconi stated he would like to honor that request but he would like to continue asking some additional questions beforehand. Chairman Gallagher suggested he ask the questions now. He agrees with Commissioner Stone's recommendation and would like to spend time with staff to review the suggestions. He stated he understands the impact these changes might have and agrees with the deliberation process suggested. Commissioner Menconi asked Ed Storer and Torn Moorhead if they could give their opinion of the main difference between the 1986 standards and today's standards. He asked what created the need for the revision? And, what is the purpose of adopting new Minimum Standards. Mr. Storer stated the Minimum Standard project has been ongoing for a number of years. As far as the differences, there have been a number of versions of the document in the past several months. He cannot recall any place they have reduced the Minimum Standards. He stated they have expanded the requirements of 1986 and in some cases they have left those the same. As far as the need, he agrees with what Mr. Gordon said earlier in that they should be reviewed routinely. They should look at the needs of the facility and the users of the facility. Mr. Moorhead stated these should be reviewed and updated on a regular basis. He stated he can cover the new areas and reviewed some of the changes. Commissioner Menconi asked Bill Moran about his comment that this set of Minimum Standards are fairly low in relation to the industry standards. He asked if he might be willing to write a letter that would identify the low points. Mr. Moran stated one comment he made is about insurance based on being an FBO and having a charter operation. He stated they carry $25,000,000 in insurance coverage. He stated the fuel suppliers give an automatic $50,000,000 in insurance covering fuel. Commissioner Menconi asked if Timberline Aviation is interested in seeking a possible second FBO position. Mr. Moran answered yes. Commissioner Menconi suggested Mr. Moran indicated the Minimum Standards are low. Mr. Moran stated that was correct. They are a full scale FBO located at Walker Field in Grand Junction. Commissioner Menconi stated he believes the Minimum Standards, concerning pre-qualification requirement, section 4 on page 3, the way it speaks to him is that it is generally asking about the financial strength of the FBO. He stated it would appear to him that he would like to set forth a standard that brings in more information on the business and its solidness. Commissioner Stone stated he wants to comment that he has tried to research the history of these amendments to the best of his ability and there were reasons why the County could be considered as being delinquent in not revising the standards. He stated they have had a number of people for a number 32 04-02-2002 of years say they would like to expand the operations. They have put them off. He recognizes that has been a sore point and it is high time that they do this. He wants the Jet Center to recognize their request to have a level playing field but at the same time they are under the FAA guidelines to have Minimum Standards that are not onerous. He thinks in a competitive biding process they will have to present a pretty compelling case that far exceeds the Minimum Standards. He thinks there is enough interest that people will be revising and revising their services. He stated he appreciates the level of service that the Jet Center gives. He apologizes for his comments if they are considered smart aleck. They must move forward and ifthey don't they will be deemed as being irresponsible. He doesn't want the Jet Center to go away today not feeling as though they have had due process. Chairman Gallagher asked if they should have more work sessions and bring this matter back to a public hearing for approval of the resolution. Commissioner Stone asked if they are looking for a meeting with just the Commissioners and staff. Chairman Gallagher stated he would like to have the interested parties, Commissioners, staff and the written comments they receive in the next ten days. Commissioner Stone suggested one could be sufficient. Commissioner Menconi suggested they allow for one or two work sessions, but allow for public comment and written comment at one of the meetings. Jack Ingstad, Torn Moorhead and Ed Storer stated two months would work for them. Chairman Gallagher asked if there is any urgency to adopt the Minimum Standards. Mr. Storer stated he would suggest they work as quickly as possible to pull this together and if they complete the rewrite task earlier they would move forward. He stated he was looking for the work sessions to move forward between now and then. Mr. Moorhead stated two work sessions in eight weeks is appropriate to be ready for adoption of a resolution. He suggested the adoption hearing be the 28th of May, 2002. Resolution, Enacting Minimum Standards, Commercial Aeronautical Service Commissioner Stone moved to table the Resolution, enacting Minimum Standards and requirements for the conduct of commercial aeronautical service and activities at the Eagle County Regional Airport to May 28, 2002. Commissioner Gallagher seconded the motion. The vote was declared unanimous. There being no further business to be brought before the Board the meeting was adjourned until April 9, 2002. Attest: Clerk to the Bo 33 04-02-2002