Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
agenda.council.regular.20211026
1 AGENDA CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING October 26, 2021 5:00 PM, City Council Chambers 130 S Galena Street, Aspen WEBEX www.webex.com Enter Meeting Number: 2559 121 0124 Password: 81611 Click “Join Meeting” OR Join by phone Call: 1-720-650-7664 Meeting number (access code): 2559 121 0124 I.CALL TO ORDER II.ROLL CALL III.SCHEDULED PUBLIC APPEARANCES IV.CITIZENS COMMENTS & PETITIONS (Time for any citizen to address Council on issues NOT scheduled for a public hearing. Please limit your comments to 3 minutes) V.SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY a) Councilmembers' and Mayor's Comments b) Agenda Amendments c) City Manager's Comments d) Board Reports VI.CONSENT CALENDAR (These matters may be adopted together by a single motion) VIA.Resolution #087, Series of 2021 - Purchase of Grant-Funded Bike Share Equipment Resolution #104, Series of 2021 - Opioid Litigation Settlement Draft Minutes of October 12th, 2021 1 2 VII.NOTICE OF CALL-UP VIIA.HPC Approval for 135 W. Francis - Conceptual Major Development, Relocation, Setback Variations, and Floor Area Bonus VIII.FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES IX.PUBLIC HEARINGS X.ACTION ITEMS XA.2021 State Ballot Questions Presentation XB.EOTC Preparation XI.EXECUTIVE SESSION Pursuant to C.R.S. Section 24-6-402 (4)(a) The purchase, acquisition, lease, transfer, or sale of any real, personal, or other property interest; (4)(b) Conferences with an attorney for the local public body for the purposes of receiving legal advice on specific legal questions. (4)(e) Determining positions relative to matters that may be subject to negotiations; developing strategy for negotiations; and instructing negotiators. The specific items of discussion involve the following: Parking Fees – 434 East Cooper and 300-312 E. Hyman. AspenFilm - Isis Lease Amendment XII.ADJOURNMENT 2 MEMORANDUM TO:Mayor and City Council FROM:Lynn Rumbaugh, Transportation Programs Manager THROUGH:John Krueger, Director of Transportation Trish Aragon, P.E., City Engineer MEMO DATE:October 1, 2021 MEETING DATE:October 26, 2021 RE:Approval of Resolution 2021-087 Purchase of grant-funded bike share equipment REQUEST OF COUNCIL: City staff is requesting approval of Resolution Number 087 of 2021, authorizing the City Manager to sign and execute the attached supply procurement agreement between the City of Aspen and PBSC Urban Solutions for the purchase of grant-funded bike share station equipment. SUMMARY AND BACKGROUND: In the 1980s, the City of Aspen was designated a non-attainment area for PM-10 (particulate pollution sized 10 microns or less) by the Environmental Protection Agency. Through the implementation of extensive trip reduction measures including transit service and paid parking, Aspen was redesignated as a Maintenance Area in 2003. As such, the City is eligible for CMAQ funding. Previous CMAQ awards have been used to purchase carshare vehicles, street sweepers, carpool matching software. In 2011, the City of Aspen and Pitkin County were jointly awarded CMAQ funds for the purchase of bike share station equipment that helped to launch the WE- cycle program. 3 In 2018, Aspen City Council approved a $180,000.00 Congestion Mitigation Air Quality (CMAQ) grant agreement with the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) for the purpose of expanding the WE-cycle bike share program by adding new bike share station equipment. The attached contract with PBSC Urban Solutions is for the purchase of this equipment in the amount of $179,985.00. The City of Aspen Transportation Fund will cover the full cost of this equipment and will be reimbursed for 80% of the project total as further detailed in the Financial Impacts section of this memo. Public Bike Share Urban Solutions was selected to supply the original WE-cycle bike share equipment via a rigorous RFP process that took place in 2012. CDOT has granted this sole source contract with the vendor due to the need for consistencyand interchangeability of equipment throughout the WE-cycle system. Station-related equipment will make up the entirety of this purchase as bike share bicycles do not currently qualify for CMAQ funding due to Buy America requirements. The Roaring Fork Transportation Authority is assisting this project by funding the purchase of some bicycles as discussed below. DISCUSSION: As a Founding Partner, the City of Aspen has worked with WE-cycle to launch and grow bike sharing since the system’s inception in 2012. The current Aspen system consists of 131bikes at 22 stations (see Attachment A) funded in part by an annual operating contract which, for 2021, totals $148,000.00. Throughout 2021, staff has been participating in RFTA’s First Last Mile Mobility (FLMM) study which explores options for expanding WE-cycle valley-wide with financial assistance from Destination 2040. This grant pre-exists the FLMM study and is a separate effort. The FLMM study is currently in the public outreach phase and should be complete by year’s end. As part of this effort, staff has requested and the RFTA Board has approved the use ofDestination 2040 funds to purchase electric bicycles to pair with this new equipment. Staff will keep Council apprised as the FLMM process moves forward. In 2020 and 2021, Aspen and Basalt worked with WE-cycle to pilot shared electric bicycles in each community. The bike share equipment to be purchased with this grant will add new stations with electric docking points in key Aspen locations. Although final locations are still being solidified, plans include important connections on Maroon and Castle Creek Roads as well as possible use in a 4 downtown location as part of the Downtown Safety Improvements under discussion with the Engineering Department. More details are included in Attachment A. Equipment ordered via this supply procurement agreement will arrive in the spring of 2022 and will be implemented for the 2022 bike share season, in time to assist with mitigating a busy summer season that includes construction in the roundabout. FINANCIAL IMPACTS: The CMAQ grant awarded for this project totals $180,000.00 and requires a 20% match from the City. The Transportation Department is funding this purchase and will receive reimbursement for the Federal portion of the project. Funding for the entirety of this project is available in the 2021 Transportation budget. Project Federal Local Total Bike Share Equipment Purchase $143,988.00 $35,997.00 $179,985.00 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: The provision of a robust menu of transportation options, including bike share, is a key component of meeting City GHG goals. Additionally, this project enables the installation of solar-powered electric stations, in line with the City’s renewable energy goals. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends that City Council approve Resolution 2021-087 authorizing the City Manager to execute the agreement between the City of Aspen and Public Bike Share Urban Solutions for purchase of CMAQ-funded bike share equipment. ALTERNATIVES: Council can reject the attached resolution and eliminate this project from the Transportation work plan. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: ATTACHMENTS Attachment A;WE-cycle station map including proposed locations for new equipment 5 Attachment B:Resolution 2021-087 Attachment C:Contract Documents 6 Highlands Base Village Aspen Recreation Center Aspen School District Galena | Hyman Roundabout E Existing Station New Station New Solar Powered E-Station Converting Existing Station to E-Station Koch Park / Ice Garden Vicinity Rio Grande Park/ New City Hall KEY: 7 RESOLUTION NO. 087 Series of 2021 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, APPROVING A SUPPLY PROCUREMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, AND PBSC URBAN SOLUTIONS, AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE SAID DOCUMENT ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO. WHEREAS, the City of Aspen seeks to reduce traffic congestion and improve air quality by encouraging increased travel by bicycle; and WHEREAS the professional services agreement between the City of Aspen, Colorado and PBSC Urban Solutions is annexed hereto and made a part thereof; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: That the City Council of the City of Aspen hereby approves the supply procurement agreement between the City of Aspen, Colorado, and PBSC Urban Solutions, a copy of which is annexed hereto and incorporated herein, and does herebyauthorize the City Manager of the City of Aspen to execute said contract on behalf of the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 12th day of October 2021. _________________________ Torre, Mayor I, Nicole Henning, duly appointed and acting City Clerk do certify that the foregoing is a true and accurate copy of that resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado, at a meeting held on the day hereinabove stated. ______________________ Nicole Henning, City Clerk 8 Company name: PBSC Urban Solutions Inc. Contact Name/Title: Adrian Popovici, Chief Legal Officer Address: 1120, Marie-Victorin Blvd., Longueuil, Quebec, J4G 2H9, Canada Telephone: +1 (450) 748-7272 ext. 2014 Email: apopovici@pbsc.com Bike share station equipment, funded in part with a Congestion Mitigation Air Quality grant. CITY OF ASPEN STANDARD FORM OF AGREEMENT SUPPLY PROCUREMENT City of Aspen Project No.: 2021-087 AGREEMENT made as of 12 day of October, in the year 2021. BETWEEN the City: Contract Amount: The City of Aspen c/o ___________________ 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Phone: (970) 920-5055 And the Vendor: _____________________ _____________________ _____________________ _____________________ Summary Description of Items to be Purchased: Exhibits appended and made a part of this Agreement: The City and Vendor agree as set forth below. If this Agreement requires the City to pay an amount of money in excess of $50,000.00 it shall not be deemed valid until it has been approved by the City Council of the City of Aspen. City Council Approval: Date: October 12, 2021 Resolution No.2021-087____________ Exhibit A: List of supplies, equipment, or materials to be purchased. Total: $179,985.00 9 1. Purchase. Vendor agrees to sell and City agrees to purchase the items on Exhibit A appended hereto and by this reference incorporated herein as if fully set forth here for the sum set forth hereinabove. Delivery. Vendor will deliver the Equipment “EX WORKS” from the relevant production facility 2. Contract Documents. This Agreement shall include all Contract Documents as the same are listed in the Invitation to Bid and said Contract Document are hereby made a part of this Agreement as if fully set out at length herein. 3. Warranties. ______________________________________ 4. Successors and Assigns. This Agreement and all of the covenants hereof shall inure to the benefit of and be binding upon the City and the Vendor respectively and their agents, representatives, employee, successors, assigns and legal representatives. Neither the City nor the Vendor shall have the right to assign, transfer or sublet its interest or obligations hereunder without the written consent of the other party. 5. Third Parties. This Agreement does not and shall not be deemed or construed to confer upon or grant to any third party or parties, except to parties to whom Vendor or City may assign this Agreement in accordance with the specific written permission, any right to claim damages or to bring any suit, action or other proceeding against either the City or Vendor because of any breach hereof or because of any of the terms, covenants, agreements or conditions herein contained. 6. Waivers. No waiver of default by either party of any of the terms, covenants or conditions hereof to be performed, kept and observed by the other party shall be construed, or operate as, a waiver of any subsequent default of any of the terms, covenants or conditions herein contained, to be performed, kept and observed by the other party. 7. Agreement Made in Colorado. The parties agree that this Agreement was made in accordance with the laws of the State of Colorado and shall be so construed. Venue is agreed to be exclusively in the courts of Pitkin County, Colorado. 8. Attorney’s Fees. In the event that legal action is necessary to enforce any of the provisions of this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to its costs and reasonable attorney’s fees. 9. Waiver of Presumption. This Agreement was negotiated and reviewed through the mutual efforts of the parties hereto and the parties agree that no construction shall be made or presumption shall arise for or against either party based on any alleged unequal status of the parties in the negotiation, review or drafting of the Agreement. 10. Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension, Ineligibility, and Voluntary Exclusion. Vendor certifies, by acceptance of this Agreement, that neither it nor its principals is presently debarred, suspended, proposed for debarment, declared ineligible or voluntarily excluded from participation in any transaction with a Federal or State department or agency. It further 10 certifies that prior to submitting its Bid that it did include this clause without modification in all lower tier transactions, solicitations, proposals, contracts and subcontracts. In the event that Vendor or any lower tier participant was unable to certify to the statement, an explanation was attached to the Bid and was determined by the City to be satisfactory to the City. 11. Warranties Against Contingent Fees, Gratuities, Kickbacks and Conflicts of Interest. (A) Vendor warrants that no person or selling agency has been employed or retained to solicit or secure this Contract upon an agreement or understanding for a commission, percentage, brokerage, or contingent fee, excepting bona fide employees or bona fide established commercial or selling agencies maintained by the Vendor for the purpose of securing business. (B) Vendor agrees not to give any employee of the City a gratuity or any offer of employment in connection with any decision, approval, disapproval, recommendation, preparation of any part of a program requirement or a purchase request, influencing the content of any specification or procurement standard, rendering advice, investigation, auditing, or in any other advisory capacity in any proceeding or application, request for ruling, determination, claim or controversy, or other particular matter, pertaining to this Agreement, or to any solicitation or proposal therefore. (C) Vendor represents that no official, officer, employee or representative of the City during the term of this Agreement has or one (1) year thereafter shall have any interest, direct or indirect, in this Agreement or the proceeds thereof, except those that may have been disclosed at the time City Council approved the execution of this Agreement. (D) In addition to other remedies it may have for breach of the prohibitions against contingent fees, gratuities, kickbacks and conflict of interest, the City shall have the right to: 1. Cancel this Purchase Agreement without any liability by the City; 2. Debar or suspend the offending parties from being a vendor, contractor or subcontractor under City contracts; 3. Deduct from the contract price or consideration, or otherwise recover, the value of anything transferred or received by the Vendor; and 4. Recover such value from the offending parties. 12. Termination for Default or for Convenience of City. The sale contemplated by this Agreement may be canceled by the City prior to acceptance by the City whenever for any reason and in its sole discretion the City shall determine that such cancellation is in its best interests and convenience. 13. Fund Availability. Financial obligations of the City payable after the current fiscal year are contingent upon funds for that purpose being appropriated, budgeted and otherwise made available. If this Agreement contemplates the City using state or federal funds to meet its obligations herein, this Agreement shall be contingent upon the availability of those funds for payment pursuant to the terms of this Agreement. 11 14. City Council Approval. If this Agreement requires the City to pay an amount of money in excess of $50,000.00 it shall not be deemed valid until it has been approved by the City Council of the City of Aspen. 15. Non-Discrimination. No discrimination because of race, color, creed, sex, marital status, affectional or sexual orientation, family responsibility, national origin, ancestry, handicap, or religion shall be made in the employment of persons to perform under this Agreement. Vendor agrees to meet all of the requirements of City’s municipal code, section 13 -98, pertaining to nondiscrimination in employment. Vendor further agrees to comply with the letter and the spirit of the Colorado Antidiscrimination Act of 1957, as amended and other applicable state and federal laws respecting discrimination and unfair employment practices. 16. Integration and Modification. This written Agreement along with all Contract Documents shall constitute the contract between the parties and supersedes or incorporates any prior written and oral agreements of the parties. In addition, vendor understands that no City official or employee, other than the Mayor and City Council acting as a body at a council meeting, has authority to enter into an Agreement or to modify the terms of the Agreement on behalf of the City. Any such Agreement or modification to this Agreement must be in writing and be executed by the parties hereto. 17. Authorized Representative. The undersigned representative of Vendor, as an inducement to the City to execute this Agreement, represents that he/she is an authorized representative of Vendor for the purposes of executing this Agreement and that he/she has full and complete authority to enter into this Agreement for the terms and conditions specified herein. 18. Electronic Signatures and Electronic Records This Agreement and any amendments hereto may be executed in several counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, and all of which together shall constitute one agreement binding on the Parties, notwithstanding the possible event that all Parties may not have signed the same counterpart. Furthermore, each Party consents to the use of electronic signatures by either Party. The Scope of Work, and any other documents requiring a signature hereunder, may be signed electronically in the manner agreed to by the Parties. The Parties agree not to deny the legal effect or enforceability of the Agreement solely because it is in electronic form or because an electronic record was used in its formation. The Parties agree not to object to the admissibility of the Agreement in the form of an electronic record, or a paper copy of an electronic documents, or a paper copy of a document bearing an electronic signature, on the ground that it is an electronic record or electronic signature or that it is not in its original form or is not an original. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, The City and the Vendor, respectively have caused this Agreement to be duly executed the day and year first herein, of which, to all intents and purposes, shall be considered as the original. 12 FOR THE CITY OF ASPEN: By: __ _________________________ Aspen City Manager _______________________________ Date SUPPLIER: PBSC Urban Solutions By:________________________________ ___________________________________ Title ___________________________________ Date Adrian Popovici, Chief Legal Officer Spetember 29, 2021 13 EXHIBIT A 14 MEMORANDUM To:Mayor and City Council From: James R. True, City Attorney Date:October 21, 2021 RE: Resolution #104, Series of 2021 (Opioid Litigation Settlement) Request of Council:To consider the adoption of Resolution #104, Series of 2021, which approves the participation of the City of Aspen in the opioid litigation settlement. Background: On October 1, 2021, Phil Weiser, Attorney General for the State of Colorado, notified communities across the State of Colorado of the settlement of ongoing litigation against various companies who produce and distribute opioids. His statement to communities included the following: The attached Memorandum of Understanding (“MOU”) is the product of a lengthy and complex negotiation between the Attorney General’s Office, Colorado Counties, Inc. (“CCI”), Colorado Municipal League (“CML”), and many negotiating local governments detailing that distribution process. As you may know, the State, as well as several Colorado local governments, have pursued litigation against various pharmaceutical companies for their role in causing the opioid epidemic in Colorado. That litigation recently resulted in settlements with Purdue Pharma, McKinsey & Co., Johnson & Johnson, AmerisourceBergen, Cardinal Health, and McKesson, resulting in up to approximately $400 million in settlement funds for both the State and Colorado local governments to abate the opioid crisis. To maximize the settlement funds within Colorado, it is important that all Colorado counties and municipalities participate in these settlements and the distribution process by signing the following four documents: 1. The MOU that lays out the allocation of Opioid recoveries in the State of Colorado; 2. The Subdivision Settlement Participation Form that releases subdivisions’ legal claims against Johnson & Johnson; 3. The Subdivision Settlement Participation Form that releases subdivisions’ legal claims against AmerisourceBergen, Cardinal Health, and McKesson; and 15 4. The Colorado Subdivision Escrow Agreement that ensures subdivisions’ legal claims are released only when 95% participation by certain local governments has been reached. That 95% participation threshold is important because it triggers certain amounts of incentive payments under the settlements and signals to the settling pharmaceutical companies that the settlements have wide acceptance. Discussion:Resolution #104, attached, approves the Colorado Opioids Settlement Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) and the related documents. The documents submitted herewith, outline the basis for local community participation, including that of the City of Aspen. Alternatives: Council could elect not to participate in the Settlement. However, the only real purpose for not participating in the settlement would be if the City wished to prosecute its own cases against these manufacturers. Such action would be extremely expensive, time consuming and difficult. Consequently, the City Attorney’s Office does not support this alternative. Recommendation:The City Attorney’s Office recommends adoption of Resolution #104, Series of 2021. 16 RESOLUTION #104 (Series of 2021) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, APPROVING THE COLORADO OPIOIDS SETTLEMENT MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING (“MOU”) AND RELATED DOCUMENTS AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE SAID MOU AND RELATED DOCUMENTS ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO. WHEREAS, there has been submitted to the City Council the Colorado Opioids Settlement Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) and related documents to complete the City’s participation in such settlement, true and accurate copies of which are attached hereto; and WHEREAS, the City Council believes that the City’s participation in such settlement is in the best interest of the City of Aspen and its citizens. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, That the City Council of the City of Aspen hereby approves the Colorado Opioids Settlement Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) and related documents, copies of which are attached hereto, and does hereby authorize the City Manager to execute said MOU and related documents on behalf of the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 26 th day of October 2021. _______________________ Torre, Mayor I, Nicole Henning, duly appointed City Clerk do certify that the foregoing is a true and accurate copy of that resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado, at a meeting held October 26, 2021. ________________________ Nicole Henning, City Clerk 17 COLORADOOPIOIDSSETTLEMENTMEMORANDUMOFUNDERSTANDING(“MOU”)Thursday,August26,2021August25,2021AttorneyGeneralversionA.DefinitionsAsusedinthisMOU:1.“ApprovedPurpose(s)”shallmeanforward-lookingstrategies,programming,andservicestoabatetheopioidepidemicasidentifiedbythetermsofanySettlement.IfaSettlementissilentonApprovedPurpose(s),thenApprovedPurpose(s)shallmeanthoseforward-lookingstrategiestoabatetheopioidepidemicidentifiedinExhibitAoranysupplementalforward-lookingabatementstrategiesaddedtoExhibitAbytheAbatementCouncil.ConsistentwiththetermsofanySettlement,“ApprovedPurposes”shallalsoincludethereasonableadministrativecostsassociatedwithoverseeingandadministeringOpioidFundsfromeachofthefour(4)SharesdescribedinSection(B)(2).ReimbursementbytheStateorLocalGovernmentsforpastexpensesarenotApprovedPurpose(s).“ApprovedPurposes”shallincludeattorneys’feesandexpensesincurredinthecourseoftheopioidlitigationthatarepaidthroughtheprocessdiscussedbelow.2.“CountyArea”shallmeanacountyintheStateofColoradoplustheLocalGovernments,orportionofanyLocalGovernment,withinthatcounty.3.“EffectiveDate”shallmeanthedateonwhichacourtofcompetentjurisdiction,includinganybankruptcycourt,entersthefirstSettlementbyorderorconsentdecree.ThePartiesanticipatethatmorethanoneSettlementwillbeadministeredaccordingtothetermsofthisMOU,butthatthefirstenteredSettlementwilltriggerthefonnationoftheAbatementCouncilinSection(C)andtheRegionalCouncilsinSection(F)(5))4.“GeneralAbatementFundCouncil,”or“AbatementCouncil,”shallhavethemeaningdescribedinSection(C),below.Fortheavoidanceofdoubt,theMcKinseySettlementandanyotherSettlementthatprecedesthefinalizationofdraftingthisMOUarenotconsideredatriggerforpurposesofthecalculationof“EffectiveDate.”118 5.“LocalGovernment(s)”shallmeanallcountiesintheStateofColoradoandthemunicipalities,towns,andcountyandcitymunicipalcorporationsthatarclistedinExhibitB.6.“NationalOpioidSettlementAdministrativeFund”shallmeananyfundidentifiedbyaSettlementforthenationaldistributionofOpioidFunds.7.“OpioidFunds”shallmeandamageawardsobtainedthroughaSettlement.8.“OpioidSettlingDefendant”shallmeananypersonorentity,oritsaffiliates,thatengagesinorhasengagedinthemanufacture,marketing,promotion,distribution,ordispensingoflicitopioids.9.“ParticipatingLocalGovernment(s)”shallmeanallLocalGovernmentsthatsignthisMOU,andifrequiredundertermsofaparticularSettlement,whohaveexecutedareleaseofclaimswiththeOpioidSettlementDefendant(s).Fortheavoidanceofdoubt,aLocalGovernmentmustsignthisMOUtobecomea“ParticipatingLocalGovernment.”LocalGovernmentsmaydesignatetheappropriateindividualfromtheirentitytosigntheMOU.10.“Party”or“Parties”shallmeantheStateand/orParticipatingLocalGovernment(s).II.“QualifiedSettlementFundAccount,”or“QSFAccount,”shallmeananaccountsetupasaqualifiedsettlementfund,468bfund,asauthorizedbyTreasuryRegulationsl.468B-1(c)(26CFR§l.468B-l).12.“RegionalCouncil”shallhavethemeaningdescribedinSection(F)(5),below.13.“Settlement”shallmeanthenegotiatedresolutionoflegalorequitableclaimsagainstanOpioidSettlingDefendantwhenthatresolutionhasbeenjointlyenteredintobytheStateandtheParticipatingLocalGovernments,orbyanyindividualPartyorcollectionofPartiesthatopttosubjecttheirSettlementtothisMOU.UnlessotherwisedirectedbyanorderfromaUnitedStatesBankruptcyCourt,“Settlement”shallalsoincludedistributionsfromanyliquidationunderChapter7oftheUnitedStatesBankruptcyCodeorconfirmedplanunderChapter11oftheUnitedStatesBankruptcyCodethattreatstheclaimsoftheStateandLocalGovernmentsagainstanOpioidSettlingDefendant.14.“TheState”shallmeantheStateofColoradoactingthroughitsAttorneyGeneralandtheColoradoDepartmentofLaw.B.AllocationofSettlementProceeds1.AllOpioidFundsshallbeheldinaccordancewiththetermsofanySettlement.IfaSettlementallowsOpioidFundstobeheldinaNationalOpioidSettlementAdministrativeFund,thenOpioidFundsshallbeheldinsuchNationalOpioidSettlementAdministrativeFund.IfaSettlementdoesnotallowforOpioidFunds219 tobeheldinaNationalOpioidSettlementAdministrativeFund,OpioidFundsshallbeheldinaColorado-specificQSFAccountor,underthefollowinglimitedcircumstances,intheState’sCustodialAccount:1)ifatthetimeofaSettlement,aColorado-specificQSFAccountisnotyetestablished,althoughinsuchcase,theOpioidFundsshallbetransferredtotheColorado-specificQSFAccountonceitisestablishedor2)wheretheAbatementFundCouncildetenTlinesOpioidsFundscannotbelegallyheldinaColorado-specificQSFAccount.RegardlessofwhetherOpioidFundsareheldinaNationalAdministrativeFund,aColorado-specificQSFAccount,orintheState’sCustodialAccount,theAbatementCouncilshallappointoneofitsmemberstoserveasthepointofcontactinaccordanceSection(C)(4)(b)(i),below.2.AllOpioidFunds,atthetimeofaSettlementoratthetimedesignatedintheSettlementdocuments,shallbedividedanddistributedasfollows:2a.10%directlytotheState(“StateShare”)forApprovedPurposesinaccordancewithSection(D),below;b.20%directlytoParticipatingLocalGovernments(“LGShare”)forApprovedPurposesinaccordancewithSection(E),below;c.60%directlytoRegions(“RegionalShare”)forApprovedPurposesinaccordancewithSection(F),below;andd.10%tospecificabatementinfrastructureprojects(“StatewideInfrastructureShare”)forApprovedPurposesinaccordancewithSection(G),below.3.DistributionoftheSharesinSectionB(2)(a)—(d)shallbedirect,meaningthatfundsheldinaccordancewithSectionB(l)shallbedisburseddirectlytotheState,ParticipatingLocalGovernments,Regions,andtheStatewideInfrastructureShareaccordingtothetermsofthisMOU.4.AllOpioidFunds,regardlessofallocation,shallbeusedforApprovedPurposes.5.ParticipatingLocalGovernmentsmayelecttoshare,pool,orcollaboratewiththeirrespectiveallocationoftheLGorRegionalSharesinanymannertheychoose,solongassuchsharing,pooling,orcollaborationisusedforApprovedPurposesandcomplieswiththetenTisofthisMOUandanySettlement.C.GeneralAbatementFundCouncilAGeneralAbatementFundCouncil(the“AbatementCouncil”),consistingofrepresentativesappointedbytheStateandParticipatingLocalGovernments,shall2ThisMOUtreatsmulti-countyhealthdepartmentsascountyhealthdepartmentsforpurposesofallocationanddistributionofabatementproceedsandthereforemulti-countyhealthdepartmentsshallnotreceiveanyOpioidFundsdirectly.Third-PartyPayors(“TPPs”)arenotPartiestothisMOU.320 bccreatedtoensurethedistributionofOpioidFundscomplieswiththetermsofanySettlementandtoprovideoversightoftheOpioidFundsinaccordancewiththetermsofthisMOU.2.Membership:TheAbatementCouncilshallconsistofthefollowingthirteen(13)members,whoshallserveintheirofficialcapacityonly.a.StateMembers:Seven(7)membersshallbeappointedbytheState,asauthorizedvolunteersoftheState,asfollows:(i)AChairtoserveasanon-votingmember,exceptintheeventofatie;(ii)Two(2)memberswhoarelicensedprofessionalswithsignificantexperienceinsubstanceusedisorders;(iii)Three(3)memberswhoareprofessionalswithsignificantexperienceinprevention,education,recovery,treatment,criminaljustice,ruralpublichealthissues,orgovernmentadministrationrelatedtosubstanceusedisorders;and(iv)One(1)memberorfamilymemberaffecteddirectlybytheopioidcrisis.b.LocalGovernmentMembers:Six(6)membersshallbeappointedbytheParticipatingLocalGovernments.LocalGovernmentMembersshallbeaCountyCommissioner,Mayor,CityorTownCouncilMember,oraprofessionalwithsignificantexperienceinprevention,education,recovery,treatment,criminaljustice,ruralpublichealthissues,orgovernmentaladministrationrelatedtosubstanceusedisorders.AParticipatingLocalGovernmentmaydeterminewhichLocalGovernmentMembersareeligible(orineligible)toserveontheGeneralAbatementFundCouncil.CountyCommissioners,CityorTownCouncilMembers,and/orMayorsfromtheRegionsidentifiedinExhibitCshallcollaboratetoappointLocalGovernmentMembersasfollows:(i)Two(2)MembersfromRegions1,5,13,14,15,17,18;(ii)Two(2)MembersfromRegions2,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,16;and(iii)Two(2)MembersfromRegions3,4,19.c.Terms:TheAbatementCouncilshallbeestablishedwithinninety(90)daysoftheEffectiveDate.Inordertodoso,withinsixty(60)daysoftheEffectiveDate,theStateshallappointtheStateMembersinaccordancewithSection(C)(2)(a),andafterconferralwiththeLocalGovernments,CCIandCMLshalljointlyappointsix(6)LocalGovernmentMembersforaninitialtermnottoexceedoneyear.Thereafter,Membersshallbe421 appointcdinaccordancewiththisSectionandSections(C)(2)(a)and(b)andmayservenomorethantwo(2)consecutivetwo-yearterms,foratotaloffour(4)consecutiveyears.Exceptthat,beginninginthesecondyearonly,two(2)StateMembersandtwo(2)LocalGovernmentmembersshallbeappointedforathree-yeartermandmayserveoneconsecutivetwo-yeartermthereafter.TheChairshallhavenotermbutmaybereplacedattheState’sdiscretion.(i)IfaStateorLocalGovernmentMemberresignsorisotherwiseremovedfromtheAbatementCouncilpriortotheexpirationoftheirterm,areplacementMembershallbeappointedwithinsixty(60)daysinaccordancewithSections(C)(2)(a)and(b).(ii)IfaLocalGovernmentMembervacancyexistsformorethansixty(60)days,theStateshallappointareplacementLocalGovernmentMembertoserveuntilthevacancyisfilledinaccordancewithSection(C)(2)(b).3.Duties:TheAbatementCouncilisprimarilyresponsibleforensuringthatthedistributionofOpioidFundscomplieswiththetermsofthisMOU.TheAbatementCouncilisalsoresponsibleforoversightofOpioidFundsfromtheRegionalShareinaccordancewithSection(F),below,andfordevelopingprocessesandproceduresforthedistributionandoversightofOpioidFundsfromtheStatewideInfrastructureShareinaccordancewithSection(G)below.4.Governance:TheAbatementCouncilshalldraftitsownbylawsorothergoverningdocuments,whichmustincludeappropriateconflictofinterestanddisputeresolutionprovisions,inaccordancewiththetermsofthisMOUandthefollowingprinciples:a.Authority:TheAbatementCouncildoesnothaverulemakingauthority.ThetermsofthisMOUandanySettlement,asenteredbyanycourtofcompetentjurisdiction,includinganybankruptcycourt,controltheauthorityoftheAbatementCouncilandtheAbatementCouncilshallnotstrayoutsidetheboundsoftheauthorityandpowervestedbythisMOUandanySettlement.b.Administration:TheAbatementCouncilshallberesponsibleforanaccountingofallOpioidFunds.TheAbatementCouncilshallberesponsibleforreleasingOpioidFundsinaccordancewithSection(B)(l)fortheRegionalandStatewideInfrastructureSharesinSections(B)(2)(c)and(d)andshalldeveloppoliciesandproceduresforthereleaseandoversightofsuchfundsinaccordancewithSections(F)and(G).ShouldtheAbatementCouncilrequireassistancewithprovidinganaccountingofOpioidFunds,itmayseekassistancefromtheState.522 (i)TheAbatementCouncilshallappointoneofitsmemberstoserveasapointofcontactforthepurposeofcommunicatingwiththeentityholdingOpioidFundsinaccordancewithSection(B)(l)andinthatroleshallonlyactasdirectedbytheAbatementCouncil.c.Transparency:TheAbatementCouncilshalloperatewithallreasonabletransparencyandoperateinamannerconsistentwithallColoradolawsrelatingtoopenrecordsandmeetingsregardlessofwhethertheAbatementCouncilisotherwiseobligatedtocomplywiththem.(i)TheAbatementCouncilshalldevelopacentralizedpublicdashboardorotherrepositoryforthepublicationofexpendituredatafromanyPartyorRegionalCouncilthatreceivesOpioidFundsinaccordancewithSections(D)-(G).(ii)TheAbatementCouncilmayalsorequireoutcomerelateddatafromanyPartyorRegionalCouncilthatreceivesOpioidFundsinaccordancewithSections(D)-(G)andmaypublishsuchoutcomerelateddatainthecentralizedpublicdashboardorotherrepositorydescribedabove.Indetenniningwhichoutcomerelateddatamayberequired,theAbatementCouncilshallworkwithallPartiesandRegionalCouncilstoidentifyappropriatedatasetsanddevelopreasonableproceduresforcollectingsuchdatasetssothattheadministrativeburdendoesnotoutweighthebenefitofproducingsuchoutcomerelateddata.(iii)Forpurposesoffundingthecentralizedpublicdashboardorotherrepositorydescribedabove,theAbatementCouncilshallmakegoodfaitheffortstoseekfundingfromoutsidesourcesfirst,otherwisetheStateshallprovidesuchfunding.d.Collaboration:TheAbatementCouncilshallfacilitatecollaborationbetweentheState,ParticipatingLocalGovernments,RegionalCouncils,andotherstakeholdersforthepurposesofsharingdata,outcomes,strategies,andotherrelevantinformationrelatedtoabatingtheopioidcrisisinColorado.e.DecisionMaking:TheAbatementCouncilshallseektomakealldecisionsbyconsensus.Intheeventconsensuscannotbeachieved,unlessotherwiserequiredinthisMOU,theAbatementCouncilshallmakedecisionsbyamajorityvoteofitsMembers.TheChairshallonlyvoteintheeventofatie.f.DueProcess:TheAbatementCouncilshalldevelopthedueprocessproceduresrequiredbySection(G)(3)(d)forPartiestodisputeorchallengeremedialactionstakenbytheAbatementCouncilforOpioidFundsfromtheStatewideInfrastructureShare.TheAbatementCouncil623 shallalsoabidebythedueprocessprinciplesrequiredbySection(F)(12)-(13)forRegionstodisputeorchallengeremedialactionstakenbytheAbatementCouncilforOpioidFundsfromtheRegionalShare.g.LegalStatus:TheAbatementCouncilshallnotconstituteaseparatelegalentity.h.LegalRepresentation:Totheextentpermittedbylaw,theStateshallprovidelegalcounseltoStateMembersforalllegalissuesarisingfromthoseStateMembers’workontheAbatementCouncil.Atalltimes,LocalGovernmentMembersoftheAbatementCouncilareentitledtoreceivelegalrepresentationfromtheirrespectivegovernmentalentities.Intheeventofaconflict,theAbatementCouncilanditsmembersmayretaintheservicesofotherlegalcounsel.i.Compensation:NomemberoftheAbatementCouncilshallbecompensatedfortheirworkrelatedtotheAbatementCouncil.D.StateShareInaccordancewithSections(B)(l)and(B)(2)(a),andthetermsofanySettlement,theStateShareshallbepaiddirectlytotheStateinaccordancewiththetermsofthisSection(D).2.TheStatemaintainsfulldiscretionoverdistributionoftheStateShareanywherewithintheStateofColorado,however,theStateShareshallbeusedforApprovedPurposesonly.TheStatewillworktoreduceadministrativecostsasmuchaspracticable.3.Onanannualbasis,asdeterniinedbytheAbatementCouncil,theStateshallprovideallexpendituredata,includingadministrativecosts,fromtheStateSharetotheAbatementCouncilforpurposesofmaintainingtransparencyinaccordancewithSection(C)(4)(c)(i).TheAbatementCouncilmayrequiretheStatetoprovideadditionaloutcome-relateddatainaccordancewithSection(C)(4)(c)(ii)andtheStateshallcomplywithsuchrequirements.4.IftheStatedisputestheamountofOpioidFundsitreceivesfromtheStateShare,theStateshallalerttheAbatementCouncilwithinsixty(60)daysofdiscoveringtheinformationunderlyingthedispute.FailuretoalerttheAbatementCouncilwithinthistimeframeshallnotconstituteawaiveroftheState’srighttoseekrecoupmentofanydeficiencyinitsStateShare.E.LGShareInaccordancewithSections(B)(1)and(B)(2)(b),andthetermsofanySettlement,theLGShareshallbepaiddirectlytoParticipatingLocalGovernmentsinaccordancewiththetermsofthisSection(E).724 2.AllocationstoParticipatingLocalGovernmentsfromtheLGShareshallfirstbedeterminedusingthepercentagesshowninExhibitD.3.TheLGShareforeachCountyAreashallthenbeallocatedamongthecountyandtheotherParticipatingLocalGovernmentswithinit.ExhibitEreflectsthedefaultallocationthatwillapplyunlesstheParticipatingLocalGovernmentswithinaCountyAreaenterintoawrittenagreementprovidingforadifferentallocation.TheParticipatingLocalGovernmentsmayelecttomodifytheallocationforaCountyAreainExhibitE,butsuchmodificationtotheallocationinExhibitEshallnotchangeaCountyArea’stotalallocationunderSection(E)(2).4.ALocalGovernmentthatchoosesnottobecomeaParticipatingLocalGovernmentwillnotreceiveadirectallocationfromtheLGShare.TheportionoftheLGSharethatwouldhavebeenallocatedtoaLocalGovernmentthatisnotaParticipatingLocalGovernmentwillinsteadbere-allocatedtotheRegionalSharefortheRegionwheretheLocalGovernmentislocated,inaccordancewithSection(F),below.5.IntheeventaParticipatingLocalGovernmentdissolvesorceasestoexistduringthetermofanySettlement,theallocationforthatParticipatingLocalGovernmentfromtheLGShareshallbere-allocatedasdirectedbyanySettlement,andifnotspecified,bere-allocatedtotheRegionalSharefortheRegioninwhichtheParticipatingLocalGovernmentwaslocated,inaccordancewithSection(F).IfaParticipatingLocalGovernmentmergeswithanotherParticipatingLocalGovernment,theallocationforthatParticipatingLocalGovernmentfromtheLGShareshallbere-allocatedasdirectedbyanySettlement,andifnotspecified,shallbere-allocatedtothesuccessorParticipatingLocalGovernment’sallocationoftheLGShare.IfaParticipatingLocalGovernmentmergeswithaLocalGovernmentthatisnotaParticipatingLocalGovernment,theallocationforthatParticipatingLocalGovernmentfromtheLGShareshallbere-allocatedasdirectedbyanySettlement,andifnotspecified,bere-allocatedtotheRegioninwhichthemergingParticipatingLocalGovernmentwaslocated,inaccordancewithSection(F),below.6.AParticipatingLocalGovernmentmayforegoitsallocationoftheLGShareanddirectitsallocationtotheRegionalSharefortheRegionwheretheParticipatingLocalGovernmentislocated,inaccordancewithSection(F)below,byaffirmativelynotifyingtheAbatementCouncilonanannualbasisofitsdecisiontoforegoitsallocationoftheLGShare.AParticipatingLocalGovernment’selectiontoforegoitsallocationoftheLGShareshallcarryovertothefollowingyearunlesstheParticipatingLocalGovernmentnotifiestheAbatementCouncilotherwise.IfaParticipatingLocalGovernmentelectstoforegoitsallocationoftheLGShare,theParticipatingLocalGovernmentshallbeexcusedfromthereportingrequirementsrequiredbySection(E)(8).7.ParticipatingLocalGovernmentsmaintainfulldiscretionoverthedistributionoftheirallocationoftheLGShareanywherewithintheStateofColorado,however,825 allParticipatingLocalGovernmentsshallusetheirallocationfromtheLGShareforApprovedPurposesonly.ReasonableadministrativecostsforaParticipatingLocalGovernmenttoadministeritsallocationoftheLGShareshallnotexceedactualcostsor10%oftheParticipatingLocalGovernment’sallocationoftheLGShare,whicheverisless.8.Onanannualbasis,asdeterminedbytheAbatementCouncil,allParticipatingLocalGovernmentsshallprovideallexpendituredata,includingadministrativecosts,fromtheirallocationoftheLGSharetotheAbatementCouncilforpurposesofmaintainingtransparencyinaccordancewithSection(C)(4)(c)(i).TheAbatementCouncilmayrequireParticipatingLocalGovernmentstoprovideadditionaloutcomerelateddatainaccordancewithSection(C)(4)(c)(ii)andallParticipatingLocalGovernmentsshallcomplywithsuchrequirements.9.IfanyParticipatingLocalGovernmentdisputestheamountofOpioidFundsitreceivesfromitsallocationoftheLGShare,theParticipatingLocalGovernmentshallalerttheAbatementCouncilwithinsixty(60)daysofdiscoveringtheinformationunderlyingthedispute.FailuretoalerttheAbatementCouncilwithinthistimeframeshallnotconstituteawaiveroftheParticipatingLocalGovernment’srighttoseekrecoupmentofanydeficiencyinitsLGShare.F.RegionalShareInaccordancewithSections(B)(l)and(B)(2)(c),andthetermsofanySettlement,theRegionalShareshallbepaidtotheRegionsinaccordancewiththetermsofthisSection(F).2.ParticipatingLocalGovernmentsshallorganizethemselvesintotheRegionsdepictedinExhibitC.MunicipalitieslocatedinmultipleRegionsmayjoinallorsomeoftheRegionsinwhichtheyarelocatedaccordingtoExhibitC.3.AllocationstoRegionswillbedistributedaccordingtoExhibitF.Formulti-countyRegions,eachRegion’ssharelistedinExhibitFiscalculatedbysummingtheindividualpercentageshareslistedinExhibitUforthecountieswithinthatRegion.ThepercentagesinExhibitFarebasedontheassumptionthateveryLocalGovernmentineachRegionbecomesaParticipatingLocalGovernment.4.Intheeventacity,town,orothermunicipalitythatisaParticipatingLocalGovernmentmerges,dissolves,orceasestoexistduringthetermofanySettlement,theallocationoftheRegionalShareowedtotheRegioninwhichthatParticipatingLocalGovernmentexistedshallbere-allocatedasdirectedbyanySettlement,andifnotspecified,shallnotbemodifiedfromExhibitF.IfacountythatisaParticipatingLocalGovernmentmergeswithanothercountywithinitsRegion,theallocationoftheRegionalShareowedtotheRegioninwhichthatcountyexistedshallbere-allocatedasdirectedbyanySettlement,andifnotspecified,shallnotbemodifiedfromExhibitF.IfacountythatisaParticipatingLocalGovernmentmergeswithacountyinadifferentRegionduringthetermof926 anySettlement,theallocationoftheRegionalShareowedtotheRegioninwhichthatcountyexistedshallbere-allocatedasdirectedbyanySettlement,andifnotspecified,shallbere-allocatedtotheRegioninwhichthatParticipatingLocalGovernmentmergedinaccordancewithExhibitF.5.EachRegionmustcreateitsownRegionalCouncilwhilegivingconsiderationtotheregionalgovernancemodelsillustratedinExhibitG.TheRegionalCouncilmustbeformedbytheParticipatingLocalGovernmentswithintheRegionandeachRegionalCouncilshalldesignateafiscalagentfortheRegion.Regionalfiscalagentsshallbecountyormunicipalgovernmentsonly.AllfundsfromtheRegionalShareshallbedistributedtotheRegionalCouncil’sidentifiedfiscalagentforthebenefitoftheentireRegion.a.SubjecttothisSectionF(5),eachRegionmaydraftitsownintra-regionalagreements,bylaws,orothergoverningdocumentstodeteriTlinehowtheRegionalCouncilwilloperate.However,eachvotingmemberofaRegionalCouncilshallbeanemployeeorelectedofficialofaParticipatingLocalGovernmentwithintheapplicableRegion.InthecaseofDenver,thevotingmembersofitsRegionalCouncilshallbeappointedbytheMayor.InthecaseofBroomfield,thevotingmembersofitsRegionalCouncilshallbeappointedbytheBroomfieldCityandCountyManager.b.TheRegionshallnotreceiveanyOpioidFundsfromtheRegionalShareuntiltheRegioncertifiestotheAbatementCouncilthatitsRegionalCouncilhasbeenformedandafiscalagenthasbeendesignated.SuchcertificationshallbeinasimpleformadoptedbytheRegionandmaybemadeviaemail,solongasitincludesthenamesandaffiliationsoftheRegionalCouncil’smembersandthedesignatedfiscalagent.c.IfaRegiondoesnotformandcertifyitsRegionalCouncilanddesignateitsfiscalagentwithinone-hundredandeighty(180)daysoftheEffectiveDate,theAbatementCouncilshallappointmemberstotheRegion’sRegionalCouncil.RegionalCouncilmembersappointedbytheAbatementCouncilshallserveuntiltheRegioncertifiestheformationofitsRegionalCounciltotheAbatementCouncil.d.ARegionshallsubmitarenewedcertificationrequiredbySection(F)(5)(b),above,whenitsmembershipchanges.e.IfamembershipvacancyexistsonaRegionalCouncilformorethanninety(90)daysandtheRegionalCouncilisunabletofillthevacancybyitsregularproceduresduringthattime,theAbatementCouncilshallappointareplacementmembertoserveuntiltheRegionfillsthevacancy.1027 6.ALocalGovernmentthatchoosesnottobecomeaParticipatingLocalGovernmentshallnotreceiveanyOpioidFundsfromtheRegionalShareorparticipateintheRegionalCouncilsdescribedinSection(F)(5)above.7.EachRegionalCouncilshallmakerequeststotheAbatementCouncilforOpioidFundsfromtheirallocationoftheRegionalShare.EachRegionalCouncil’srequestforOpioidFundsfromtheRegionalShareshallbeaccompaniedbya2-yearplanidentifyingtheApprovedPurposesforwhichtherequestedfundswillbeusedbytheRegionanywherewithintheStateofColorado.ARegionalCouncil’s2-yearplanmaybeamendedsolongassuchamendmentscomplywiththetermsofthisMOUandanySettlement.AnyRegionalCouncilmayseekassistancefromtheAbatementCouncilforpurposesofdevelopingits2-yearplan.8.ReasonableadministrativecostsforaRegionalCounciltoadministeritsRegion’sallocationoftheRegionalShareshallnotexceedactualcostsor10%oftheRegion’sallocationoftheRegionalShare,whicheverisless.9.TheAbatementCouncilshallreleasefundsrequestedbyaRegionalCouncilinaccordancewithSection(B)(l)iftheRegionalCouncil’s2-yearplancomplieswiththeApprovedPurposes,thetermsofthisMOU,andthetermsofanySettlement.TheAbatementCouncilshallnotdenyanyfundingrequestfromaRegionalCouncilonthebasisthattheAbatementCouncildoesnotapproveoragreewiththeApprovedPurposesforwhichaRegionalCouncilrequestsOpioidFundsfromtheRegionalShare.NormaytheAbatementCouncilholdup,delay,ormakeunreasonablerequestsforadditionalorsupportinginformationoftheRegionalCouncilpriortoreleasingtherequestedOpioidFunds.ThepurposeofthisMOUistofacilitateOpioidFundstotheirintendedrecipientsquicklyandefficientlywithminimaladministrativeprocedure.10.Onanannualbasis,asdeterminedbytheAbatementCouncil,eachRegionalCouncil’sfiscalagentshallprovidetotheAbatementCounciltheRegionalCouncil’sexpendituredata,includingadministrativecosts,fromtheirallocationoftheRegionalShareandcertifytotheAbatementCouncilthattheRegionalCouncil’sexpenditureswereforApprovedPurposesandcompliedwithits2-yearplan.TheRegionalCouncilshallsubjectitselftoanaccountingattheAbatementCouncil’sdiscretion.a.TheAbatementCouncilshallreviewaRegionalCouncil’sexpendituredataandcertificationtoensurecompliancewiththeRegionalCouncil’s2-yearplan,theApprovedPurposes,andthetermsofthisMOUandanySettlement.b.TheAbatementCouncilshallpublishtheRegionalCouncil’sexpendituredata,includingadministrativecosts,fromtheRegionalShareinaccordancewithSection(C)(4)(c)(i).TheAbatementCouncilmayrequireRegionalCouncilstoprovideadditionaloutcomerelateddatain1128 accordancewithSection(C)(4)(c)(ii)andallRegionalCouncilsshallcomplywithsuchrequirements.11.IfanyRegionalCouncildisputestheamountofOpioidFundsitreceivesfromitsallocationoftheRegionalShare,theRegionalCouncilshallalerttheAbatementCouncilwithinsixty(60)daysofdiscoveringtheinformationunderlyingthedispute.FailuretoalerttheAbatementCouncilwithinthistimeframeshallnotconstituteawaiveroftheRegionalCouncil’srighttoseekrecoupmentofanydeficiencyinitsRegionalShare.12.IftheAbatementCouncilhasreasontobelieveaRegion’sexpenditureofitsallocationoftheRegionalSharedidnotcomplywiththeRegion’s2-yearPlan,theApprovedPurposes,thetermsofthisMOUoranySettlement,asdescribedinthisSection(F),orthattheRegionotherwisemisuseditsallocationoftheRegionalShare,theAbatementCouncilmaytakeremedialactionagainsttheallegedoffendingRegion.SuchremedialactionislefttothediscretionoftheAbatementCouncilandmayincludebutnotbelimitedto,withholdingfutureOpioidsFundsowedtotheoffendingRegionorrequiringtheoffendingRegiontoreimburseimproperlyexpendedOpioidFundstotheRegionalShare.13.Withinonehundredandtwenty(120)daysoftheAbatementCouncilbeingformed,inaccordancewithSection(C)(2)(c)above,theAbatementCouncilshalldevelopandpublishdueprocessproceduresforallowingaRegiontochallengeordisputeanyremedialactiontakenbytheAbatementCouncil,includingtimelinesduringwhichtheRegionmayengageinsuchachallengeordispute.Suchdueprocessproceduresshallreflect,ataminimum,thefollowingprinciples:a.UponlearningofanyconductthatmaywarrantremedialactionagainstaRegion,theAbatementCouncilshallfirstprovidenoticetotheRegionoftheconductatissue,providetheRegionanopportunitytorespond,and,ifappropriate,curetheallegedoffendingconduct.IfafterprovidingtheRegionsuchnoticeandopportunitiestorespondandcure,theAbatementCouncilcontinuestobelieveremedialactioniswarranted,theAbatementCouncilmaytakesuchremedialaction.b.IftheAbatementCouncildecidestotakeremedialactionagainstanallegedoffendingRegion,suchactionmayonlyoccurbyatwo-thirdssupermajorityvoteoftheAbatementCouncil.Thus,anAbatementCouncilmadeupoftwelve(12)votingmembersrequiresavoteofeight(8)MemberspriortotakingremedialactionagainstanallegedoffendingRegion.c.PriortotakinganyremedialactionagainstanallegedoffendingRegion,theAbatementCouncilshallfirstprovidenoticetotheallegedoffendingRegionoftheremedialactiontobetakenandthefactsunderlyingsuchremedialaction.TheAbatementCouncilshallthenprovidethealleged1229 offendingRegionanopportunitytochallengeordisputetheremedialactioninaccordancewith,ataminimum,theprinciplesbelow:i.TheallegedoffendingRegionmayrequestrevisionsormodificationstotheproposedremedialaction;ii.TheallegedoffendingRegionmaysubmitawrittenresponsetoand/orrequestahearingbeforetheAbatementCouncil,orathird—partyhearingofficer,3regardingtheallegedoffendingconductandproposedremedialaction;andiii.Aftersuchwrittenresponsesaresubmittedandreviewedand/orahearingisconducted,theallegedoffendingRegionmaysubmitanappealtotheAbatementCouncilofthedecisiontotakeremedialaction.d.RemedialactionstakenbytheAbatementCouncil,inaccordancewiththedueprocessprinciplesdetailedabove,shallbeconsideredfinalnon-appealableordersandoffendingRegionsmaynotseekjudicialrelieffromremedialactiontakenbytheAbatementCouncil,exceptasprovidedinSection(H),below.e.SubjecttoSection(H)(2),below,ifanyParty(ies)believestheAbatementCouncilviolatedthetermsofthisMOU,suchParty(ies)mayseektoenforcethetermsofthisMOU.14.IftheAbatementCouncilhasreasontobelieveaRegion’sconduct,ortheconductofanyParticipatingLocalGovernmentorindividualinthatRegion,amountstoaviolationofanycriminallaw,theAbatementCouncilshallrefersuchmatterstotheappropriateauthoritiesandmayconsidersuchconductinitsdeterminationofanyremedialactiontobetaken.15.IftheAbatementCouncilhasreasontobelievethatanindividualinvolvedinthereceiptoradministrationofOpioidFundsfromtheRegionalSharehasviolatedanyapplicableethicsrulesorcodes,theAbatementCouncilshallnotattempttoadjudicatesuchaviolation.Insuchinstances,theAbatementCouncilshalllodgeacomplaintwiththeappropriateforumforhandlingsuchethicalmatters,suchasalocalhomerulemunicipality’sethicsboard.16.CostsassociatedwiththeAbatementCouncil’sdistributionandoversightoftheRegionalShare,asdescribedaboveinthisSection(F),includingcostsassociatedwithanyremedialactionbytheAbatementCouncil,shallbepaidfromtheStatewideOnlyanallegedoffendingRegionmayrequesttheappointmentofathird-partyhearingofficertoreviewanywrittenresponsesandconductanyrequestedhearings.IfanallegedoffendingRegionmakessucharequest,theAbatementCouncilhassolediscretiontoappointthethird-partyhearingofficerandtheallegedoffendingRegionshallbearthecostofsuchreviewand/orhearingbythethird-partyhearingofficer.1330 InfrastructureShare.TheAbatementCouncilshallmakeallgoodfaitheffortstolimitsuchcoststothegreatestextentpossible.G.StatewideInfrastructureShareInaccordancewithSectionsB(1)and(B)(2)(d),andthetermsofanySettlement,theStatewideInfrastructureShareshallbepaidtoanyPartyorRegionalCouncilinaccordancewiththisSection(G).2.ThepurposeoftheStatewideInfrastructureShareistopromotecapitalimprovementsandprovideoperationalassistancefordevelopingorimprovingtheinfrastructurenecessarytoabatetheopioidcrisisanywherewithintheStateofColorado.TheStatewideInfrastructureShareisintendedtosupplementOpioidFundsreceivedbyanyPartyorRegion.3.PriortodistributinganyOpioidFundsfromtheStatewideInfrastructureShare,theAbatementCouncilshallestablishandpublishpoliciesandproceduresforthedistributionandoversightoftheStatewideInfrastructureShare,includingprocessesforPartiesorRegionstoapplyforOpioidFundsfromtheStatewideInfrastructureShare.TheAbatementCouncil’spoliciesandproceduresshall,ataminimum,reflectthefollowingprinciples:a.OpioidFundsfromtheStatewideInfrastructureShareshallbeusedforApprovedPurposesonly;b.OpioidFundsfromtheStatewideInfrastructureShareshallbepaiddirectlytotheappropriatestateagencies(includingbutnotlimitedtotheColoradoDepartmentofLaw),Regionalfiscalagents,orParticipatingLocalGovernmentsonly;c.DistributionandoversightoftheStatewideInfrastructureShareshallcomplywiththetermsofthisMOUandanySettlement;d.AppropriateprocessesforremedialactionwillbetakenagainstPartiesorRegionsthatmisuseOpioidFundsfromtheStatewideInfrastructureShare.SuchprocessesshallincludeproceduresforallegedoffendingPartiesorRegionstochallengeordisputesuchremedialaction;ande.LimitationsonadministrativecoststobeexpendedbyrecipientsforadministeringOpioidFundsreceivedfromtheStatewideInfrastructureFund,nottoexceedactualcostsexpendedbytherecipientor10%oftheamountreceived,whicheverisless.4.ThedistributionandoversightpoliciesandproceduresdevelopedbytheAbatementCouncil,inaccordancewithSection(G)(3),shallbenon-appealableordersandnoPartyorRegionmayseekjudicialreliefrelatedtothedistributionandoversightoftheStatewideInfrastructureShare.1431 5.Onanannualbasis,asdeterminedbytheAbatementCouncil,anyPartyorRegionalCouncilthatreceivesfundsfromtheStatewideInfrastructureShareshallprovideallexpendituredata,includingadministrativecosts,relatedtoanyOpioidFundsitreceivedfromtheStatewideInfrastructureShareandsubjectitselftoanaccountingasrequiredbytheAbatementCouncil.TheAbatementCouncilshallpublishallexpendituredatafromtheStatewideInfrastructureShareinaccordancewithSection(C)(4)(c)(i).TheAbatementCouncilmayrequirethePartiesorRegionalCouncilsthatreceivefundsfromtheStatewideInfrastructureSharetoprovideadditionaloutcomerelateddatainaccordancewithSection(C)(4)(c)(ii)andthePartiesorRegionalCouncilsshallcomplywithsuchrequirements.6.CostsassociatedwiththeAbatementCouncil’sdistributionandoversightoftheStatewideInfrastructureShare,asdescribedinthisSection(G),shallbepaidforfromtheStatewideInfrastructureShare.TheAbatementCouncilshallmakeallgoodfaitheffortstolimitsuchcoststothegreatestextentpossible.H.GeneralTermsAllPartiesandRegionalCouncilsshallmaintainallrecordsrelatedtothereceiptandexpenditureofOpioidFundsfornolessthanfive(5)yearsandshallmakesuchrecordsavailableforreviewbytheAbatementCouncil,anyotherPartyorRegionalCouncil,orthepublic.RecordsrequestedbythepublicshallbeproducedinaccordancewithColorado’sopenrecordslaws.RecordsrequestedbytheAbatementCounciloranotherPartyoraRegionalCouncilshallbeproducedwithintwenty-one(21)daysofthedatetherecordrequestwasreceived.ThisrequirementdoesnotsupplantanyPartyorRegionalCouncil’sobligationsunderColorado’sopenrecordslaws.2.IfanyParty(ies)believestheAbatementCouncilhasviolatedthetermsofthisMOU,theallegingParty(ies)mayseektoenforcethetermsofthisMOU,providedtheallegingParty(ies)firstprovidesnoticetotheAbatementCounciloftheallegedviolationandareasonableopportunitytocuretheallegedviolation.Insuchanenforcementaction,theallegingParty(ies)mayonlyseektoenforcethetermsoftheMOUagainsttheStateandtheParticipatingLocalGovernmentsfromwhichtheLocalGovernmentMembersoftheAbatementCouncilwereappointedandmayonlyseekdeclaratoryand/orinjunctivereliefIndefenseofsuchanenforcementaction,theState’sMembersoftheAbatementCouncilshallberepresentedbytheStateandtheLocalGovernmentMembersshallberepresentedbytheParticipatingLocalGovernmentsfromwhichtheLocalGovernmentMemberswereappointed.Intheeventofaconflict,theAbatementCouncilanditsMembersmayseekoutsiderepresentationtodefenditselfagainstsuchanenforcementaction.3.IfanyParty(ies)believesanotherParty(ies),notincludingtheAbatementCouncil,violatedthetermsofthisMOU,theallegingParty(ies)mayseektoenforcethetermsofthisMOUinthecourtinwhichanyapplicableSettlement(s)wasentered,providedtheallegingParty(ies)firstprovidetheallegedoffendingParty(ies)1532 noticeoftheallegedviolation(s)andareasonableopportunitytocuretheallegedviolation(s).Insuchanenforcementaction,anyallegingPartyorallegedoffendingParty(ies)mayberepresentedbytheirrespectivepublicentityinaccordancewithColoradolaw.4.NothinginthisMOUshallbeinterpretedtowaivetherightofanyPartytoseekjudicialreliefforconductoccurringoutsidethescopeofthisMOUthatviolatesanyColoradolaw.Insuchanaction,theallegedoffendingParty(ies),includingtheAbatementCouncil,mayberepresentedbytheirrespectivepublicentitiesinaccordancewithColoradolaw.Intheeventofaconflict,anyParty,includingtheAbatementCouncilanditsMembers,mayseekoutsiderepresentationtodefenditselfagainstsuchanaction.5.IfanyParty(ies)believesanotherParty(ies),Region(s),orindividual(s)involvedinthereceipt,distribution,oradministrationofOpioidsFundshasviolatedanyapplicableethicscodesorrules,acomplaintshallbelodgedwiththeappropriateforumforhandlingsuchmatters,suchasalocalhomerulemunicipality’sethicsboard.6.IfanyParty(ies)believesanotherParty(ies),Region(s),orindividual(s)involvedinthereceipt,distribution,oradministrationofOpioidFundsviolatedanyColoradocriminallaw,suchconductshallbereportedtotheappropriatecriminalauthorities.7.VenueforanylegalactionrelatedtothisMOUshallbeinacourtofcompetentjurisdictionwhereanyapplicableSettlement(s)isentered.8.BecauserecoveryunderthetermsofdifferentSettlement(s)mayvarydependingonthenumberofPartiesrequiredtoeffectuateaSettlement,thePartiesmayconditionallyagreetosignontotheMOUthroughaletterofintent,resolutionorsimilarwrittenstatement,declarationorpronouncementdeclaringtheirintenttosignontotheMOUifthethresholdforPartyparticipationinaspecificSettlementisachieved.49.ThisMOUmaybeexecutedintwoormorecounterparts,eachofwhichshallbedeemedanoriginal,butallofwhichshallconstituteoneandthesameinstrument.ThePartiesapprovetheuseofelectronicsignaturesforexecutionofthisMOU.AlluseofelectronicsignaturesshallbegovernedbytheUnifonnElectronicTransactionsAct,C.R.S.§24-71.3-101,etseq.ThePartiesagreenottodenythelegaleffectorenforceabilityoftheMOUsolelybecauseitisinelectronicformorForinstance,theJuly21,2021“DistributorSettlementAgreement”includesa“SubdivisionSettlementAgreementForm”that,oncefilledoutandexecuted,ismeanttoindicatethatLocalGovernment’s(orSubdivision’s)electiontoparticipateinthatDistributorSettlementandalso,torequirethatLocalGovernmenttotakestepstoformallyreleaseanyclaimitmayhaveagainsttheSettlingDistributors.WithregardtotheDistributorSettlementAgreementoranyotherSettlementsthatincludeaformsimilartotheSubdivisionSettlementAgreementForm,thePartiesmaystillconditionallyagreetosignontotheMOUif,forinstance,thethresholdforPartyparticipationinaspecificSettlementisachieved.1633 becauseanelectronicrecordwasusedinitsformation.ThePartiesagreenottoobjecttotheadmissibilityoftheMOUintheformofanelectronicrecord,orapapercopyofanelectronicdocument,orapapercopyofadocumentbearinganelectronicsignature,onthegroundthatitisanelectronicrecordorelectronicsignatureorthatitisnotinitsoriginalformorisnotanoriginal.10.EachpartyrepresentsthatallproceduresnecessarytoauthorizesuchParty’sexecutionofthisMOUhavebeenperformedandthatthepersonsigningforsuchPartyhasbeenauthorizedtoexecutetheMOU.PaymentofCounselandLitigationExpensesThroughaBack-StopFundSomeSettlements,includingtheMcKessonCorporation,CardinalHealth,Inc.,andAmerisourceBergenCorporation(“Distributor”)andJohnson&JohnsonlJanssen(“J&J”)settlements,mayprovideforthepaymentofalloraportionofthefeesandlitigationexpensesowedbyParticipatingLocalGovernmentstocounselspecificallyretainedtofilesuitintheopioidlitigation.IfanySettlementisinsufficienttocoverthefeeobligationsoftheParticipatingLocalGovernments(asdiscussedandmodifiedbyJudgePolster’sOrderofAugust6regardingfeesfortheDistributorandJ&Jsettlements),thedeficiencieswillbecoveredassetforthinfurtherdetailbelow.2.ThePartiesalsorecognizethat,asintheDistributorandJ&Jsettlements,certainOpioidSettlingDefendantsmayofferpremiumsbenefitingtheentirestateofColoradowhenParticipatingLocalGovernmentsagreetotheSettlement(s),therebysettlingtheirclaimsintheiron-goinglawsuits.Forexample,belowisthechartillustratinghowIncentivePaymentB(a25%premiumtotheentirestate)worksintheDistributorSettlementatSectionIV.F.2.b(p.20):PercentageofLitigatingSubdivisionPopulationthatisIncentiveBEligibleSubdivisionIncentivel’aynientBPopulation”EligibilityPercentageLipto5%0%5°’—.30%6+40%91+50%95+60%99%—95%l00’l00’3.IfthecourtinInRe:NationalPrescriptionOpiateLitigation,MDLNo.2804(N.D.Ohio),orifaSettlementestablishesacommonbenefitfundorsimilardevicetocompensateattorneysforservicesrenderedandexpensesincurredthathavebenefitedplaintiffsgenerallyinthelitigation(the“CommonBenefitFund”),1734 and/orrequirescertaingovernmentalplaintiffstopayashareoftheirrecoveriesfromdefendantsintotheCommonBenefitFund(“Court-OrderedCommonBenefitFundAssessment”),thentheParticipatingLocalGovernmentsshallberequiredtofirstseektohavetheirattorneys’feesandexpensespaidthroughtheCommonBenefitFund.4.FortheDistributorandJ&Jsettlementsonly,counselforParticipatingLocalGovernmentsshallhavetheirexpensesotherwiserecoverablefromColoradoParticipatingLocalGovernmentscompensatedonlythroughtheCommonBenefitFund(s)establishedinthosesettlement(s).Fortheavoidanceofdoubt,counselforParticipatingLocalGovernmentsmayrecovertheirattorneys’feesthroughtheDistributorandJ&JsettlementsandthroughtheotherapplicableprovisionsofthisSection(I).5.Inaddition,asameansofcoveringanydeficienciesinpayingcounselforParticipatingLocalGovernments,asupplementalColoradoAttorneyFeeBackStopFundshallbeestablished.TheColoradoAttorneyFeeBack-StopFundistobeusedtocompensatecounselforParticipatingLocalGovernmentsthatfiledaninitialcomplaintintheopioidlitigationbySeptember1,2020(“LitigatingParticipatingLocalGovernments”).6.PaymentsoutoftheColoradoAttorneyFeeBack-StopFundshallbedeterminedbyacommittee(the“OpioidFeeandExpenseCommittee”).TheOpioidFeeandExpenseCommitteeshallconsistofthefollowingfive(5)members:a.One(1)memberappointedbyCCIfromalitigatingcountyorfromalitigatingcountyandcitymunicipalcorporation;b.One(1)memberappointedbyCMLfromalitigatingcity;c.One(1)memberappointedjointlybyCCIandCMLfromanon-litigatingcountyorcity;d.One(1)memberappointedbytheAttorneyGeneral’sOffice;ande.One(1)neutralmemberjointlyappointedbyalloftheothermemberslistedabove.7.TheColoradoAttorneyFeeBack-StopFundshallbefundedasfollowsfromanySettlement,excludingsettlementsinvolvingMcKinseyandpaymentsresultingfromthePurdueorMallinckrodtbankruptcy.ForpurposesonlyofcalculatingthefundingoftheColoradoAttorneyFeeBack-StopFund,thePartiesdeem58%ofthetotalLGShareandRegionalSharetobeattributabletotheLitigatingLocalGovernments.TheColoradoAttorneyFeeBack-StopFundshallbefundedby8.7%ofthetotalLGShareand4.35%ofthetotalRegionalShareatthetimesuchfundsareactuallyreceived.NofundsdepositedintotheColoradoAttorneyFeeBack-StopFundwillbetakenfromtheStatewideInfrastructureShareorStateShare.1835 8.CounselforLitigatingParticipatingLocalGovernmentsmayapplytotheColoradoAttorneyFeeBack-StopFundonlyafterapplyingtotheCommonBenefitFund.9.CounselforLitigatingParticipatingLocalGovernmentsmayapplytotheColoradoAttorneyFeeBack-StopFundforonlyashortfallthatis,thedifferencebetweenwhattheirfeeagreementswouldentitlethemto(aslimitedbythisSection(I))minuswhattheyhavealreadycollectedfromtheCommonBenefitFund(includingboththe“commonbenefit”and“contingencyfee”calculations,ifany).Iftheyreceivefees/costsforcommonbenefitworkinthenationalfeefund,thesefees/costswillbeallocatedproportionatelyacrossalltheirlocalgovernmentopioidclientsbasedontheallocationmodelusedintheNegotiationClasswebsitetoallocatetheappropriateportiontoColoradoclients.10.CounselforLitigatingParticipatingLocalGovernmentsarelimitedtobeingpaid,atmost,andassumingadequatefundsareavailableinanyCommonBenefitFundandColoradoAttorneyFeeBack-StopFund,feesinanamountequalto15%oftheLGShareand7.5%oftheRegionalShareattributabletotheirColoradoclients.11.AnyfundsremainingintheColoradoAttorneyFeeBack-StopFundinexcessoftheamountsneededtocoverthefeesandlitigationexpensesowedbyLitigatingParticipatingLocalGovernmentstotheirrespectivecounselshallreverttotheParticipatingLocalGovernmentsaccordingtotheallocationsdescribedinSections(E)and(F).Everytwoyears,theOpioidFeeandExpenseCommitteeshallassesstheamountremainingintheColoradoAttorneyFeeBack-StopFundtodetermineifitisoverfunded.12.Despitethefactthatalitigatingentitybonusbenefitstheentirestate,noportionoftheStateShareshallbeusedtofundtheColoradoAttorneyFeeBack-StopFundorinanyotherwaytofundanyParticipatingLocalGovernment’sattorneys’feesandexpenses.Becausethestatedidnothireoutsidecounsel,anyfundsforattorneysfeesthatthestatereceivesfromtheJ&JandDistributorsettlementwillbedepositedintotheStateShare.13.ToparticipateintheColoradoAttorneyFeeBack-StopFund,counselmustfollowtherequirementsofC.R.S.§13-17-304.1936 ThisColoradoOpioidsSettlementMemorandumofUnderstandingissignedthisdayof,O2.Lby:ColoradorneyGeneralPhilipJ.Weiser2037 21 This Colorado Opioids Settlement Memorandum of Understanding is signed this ___ day of _____________, _____ by: ______________________________________________ Name & Title___________________________________ On behalf of ___________________________________ 38 Exhibit A 39 POTENTIAL OPIOID ABATEMENT APPROVED PURPOSES I. TREATMENT A. TREATMENT OF OPIOID USE DISORDER AND ITS EFFECTS 1. Expand availability of treatment, including Medication-Assisted Treatment (MAT), for Opioid Use Disorder (OUD) and any co-occurring substance use or mental health issues. 2. Supportive housing, all forms of FDA-approved MAT, counseling, peer-support, recovery case management and residential treatment with access to medications for those who need it. 3. Treatment of mental health trauma issues that resulted from the traumatic experiences of the opioid user (e.g., violence, sexual assault, human trafficking) and for family members (e.g., surviving family members after an overdose or overdose fatality). 4. Expand telehealth to increase access to OUD treatment, including MAT, as well as counseling, psychiatric support, and other treatment and recovery support services. 5. Fellowships for addiction medicine specialists for direct patient care, instructors, and clinical research for treatments. 6. Scholarships for certified addiction counselors. 7. Clinicians to obtain training and a waiver under the federal Drug Addiction Treatment Act to prescribe MAT for OUD. 8. Training for health care providers, students, and other supporting professionals, such as peer recovery coaches/recovery outreach specialists, including but not limited to training relating to MAT and harm reduction. 9. Dissemination of accredited web-based training curricula, such as the American Academy of Addiction Psychiatry’s Provider Clinical Support Service-Opioids web-based training curriculum and motivational interviewing. 10. Development and dissemination of new accredited curricula, such as the American Academy of Addiction Psychiatry’s Provider Clinical Support Service Medication-Assisted Treatment. 11. Development of a multistate/nationally accessible database whereby health care providers can list currently available in-patient and out-patient OUD treatment services that are accessible on a real-time basis. EXHIBIT A 40 12. Support and reimburse services that include the full American Society of Addiction Medicine (ASAM) continuum of care for OUD. 13. Improve oversight of Opioid Treatment Programs (OTPs) to assure evidence- informed practices such as adequate methadone dosing. B. INTERVENTION 1. Ensure that health care providers are screening for OUD and other risk factors and know how to appropriately counsel and treat (or refer, if necessary) a patient for OUD treatment. 2. Fund Screening, Brief Intervention and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) programs to reduce the transition from use to disorder. 3. Training and long-term implementation of SBIRT in key systems (health, schools, colleges, criminal justice, and probation), with a focus on the late adolescence and young adulthood when transition from misuse to opioid disorder is most common. 4. Purchase automated versions of SBIRT and support ongoing costs of the technology. 5. Training for emergency room personnel treating opioid overdose patients on post- discharge planning, including community referrals for MAT, recovery case management and/or support services. 6. Support work of Emergency Medical Systems, including peer support specialists, to connect individuals to treatment or other appropriate services following an opioid overdose or other opioid-related adverse event. 7. Create school-based contacts whom parents can engage to seek immediate treatment services for their child. 8. Develop best practices on addressing OUD in the workplace. 9. Support assistance programs for health care providers with OUD. 10. Engage non-profits and faith community as a system to support outreach for treatment. C. CRIMINAL-JUSTICE-INVOLVED PERSONS 1. Address the needs of persons involved in the criminal justice system who have OUD and any co-occurring substance use disorders or mental health (SUD/MH) issues. EXHIBIT A 41 2. Support pre-arrest diversion and deflection strategies for persons with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH issues, including established strategies such as: a. Self-referral strategies such as Angel Programs or the Police Assisted Addiction Recovery Initiative (PAARI); b. Active outreach strategies such as the Drug Abuse Response Team (DART) model; c. “Naloxone Plus” strategies, which work to ensure that individuals who have received Naloxone to reverse the effects of an overdose are then linked to treatment programs; d. Officer prevention strategies, such as the Law Enforcement Assisted Diversion (LEAD) model; or e. Officer intervention strategies such as the Leon County, Florida Adult Civil Citation Network. 3. Support pre-trial services that connect individuals with OUD and any co- occurring SUD/MH issues to evidence-informed treatment, including MAT, and related services. 4. Support treatment and recovery courts for persons with OUD and any co- occurring SUD/MH issues, but only if they provide referrals to evidence-informed treatment, including MAT. 5. Provide evidence-informed treatment, including MAT, recovery support, harm reduction, or other appropriate services to individuals with OUD and any co- occurring SUD/MH issues who are incarcerated, on probation, or on parole. 6. Provide evidence-informed treatment, including MAT, recovery support, harm reduction, or other appropriate re-entry services to individuals with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH issues who are leaving jail or prison or who have recently left jail or prison. 7. Support critical time interventions (CTI), particularly for individuals living with dual-diagnosis OUD/serious mental illness, and services for individuals who face immediate risks and service needs and risks upon release from correctional settings. D. WOMEN WHO ARE OR MAY BECOME PREGNANT 1. Evidence-informed treatment, including MAT, recovery, and prevention services for pregnant women or women who could become pregnant and have OUD. 2. Training for obstetricians and other healthcare personnel that work with pregnant women and their families regarding OUD treatment. EXHIBIT A 42 3. Other measures to address Neonatal Abstinence Syndrome, including prevention, care for addiction and education programs. 4. Child and family supports for parenting women with OUD. 5. Enhanced family supports and child care services for parents receiving treatment for OUD. E. PEOPLE IN TREATMENT AND RECOVERY 1. The full continuum of care of recovery services for OUD and any co-occurring substance use or mental health issues, including supportive housing, residential treatment, medical detox services, peer support services and counseling, community navigators, case management, and connections to community-based services. 2. Identifying successful recovery programs such as physician, pilot, and college recovery programs, and providing support and technical assistance to increase the number and capacity of high-quality programs to help those in recovery. 3. Training and development of procedures for government staff to appropriately interact and provide social and other services to current and recovering opioid users, including reducing stigma. 4. Community-wide stigma reduction regarding treatment and support for persons with OUD, including reducing the stigma on effective treatment. 5. Engaging non-profits and faith community as a system to support family members in their efforts to help the opioid user in the family. II. PREVENTION F. PRESCRIBING PRACTICES 1. Training for health care providers regarding safe and responsible opioid prescribing, dosing, and tapering patients off opioids. 2. Academic counter-detailing. 3. Continuing Medical Education (CME) on prescribing of opioids. 4. Support for non-opioid pain treatment alternatives, including training providers to offer or refer to multi-modal, evidence-informed treatment of pain. 5. Fund development of a multistate/national prescription drug monitoring program (PDMP) that permits information sharing while providing appropriate safeguards on sharing of private information, including but not limited to: EXHIBIT A 43 a. Integration of PDMP data with electronic health records, overdose episodes, and decision support tools for health care providers relating to OUD. b. Ensuring PDMPs incorporate available overdose/naloxone deployment data, including the United States Department of Transportation’s Emergency Medical Technician overdose database. 6. Educating dispensers on appropriate opioid dispensing. G. MISUSE OF OPIOIDS 1. Corrective advertising/affirmative public education campaigns. 2. Public education relating to drug disposal. 3. Drug take-back disposal or destruction programs. 4. Fund community anti-drug coalitions that engage in drug-abuse prevention efforts. 5. School-based programs that have demonstrated effectiveness in preventing drug misuse and seem likely to be effective in preventing the uptake and use of opioids. 6. Support community coalitions in implementing evidence-informed prevention, such as reduced social access and physical access, stigma reduction – including staffing, educational campaigns, or training of coalitions in evidence-informed implementation. 7. School and community education programs and campaigns for students, families, school employees, school athletic programs, parent-teacher and student associations, and others. 8. Engaging non-profits and faith community as a system to support prevention. H. OVERDOSE DEATHS AND OTHER HARMS 1. Increasing availability and distribution of naloxone and other drugs that treat overdoses to first responders, overdose patients, opioid users, families and friends of opioid users, schools, community navigators and outreach workers, drug offenders upon release from jail/prison, and other members of the general public. 2. Training and education regarding naloxone and other drugs that treat overdoses for first responders, overdose patients, patients taking opioids, families, schools, and other members of the general public. EXHIBIT A 44 3. Developing data tracking software and applications for overdoses/naloxone revivals. 4. Public education relating to emergency responses to overdoses. 5. Free naloxone for anyone in the community. 6. Public education relating to immunity and Good Samaritan laws. 7. Educating first responders regarding the existence and operation of immunity and Good Samaritan laws. 8. Syringe service programs, including supplies, staffing, space, peer support services, and the full range of harm reduction and treatment services provided by these programs. 9. Expand access to testing and treatment for infectious diseases such as HIV and Hepatitis C resulting from intravenous opioid use. III. ADDITIONAL AREAS I. SERVICES FOR CHILDREN 1. Support for children’s services: Fund additional positions and services, including supportive housing and other residential services, relating to children being removed from the home and/or placed in foster care due to custodial opioid use. J. FIRST RESPONDERS 1. Law enforcement expenditures relating to the opioid epidemic. 2. Educating first responders regarding appropriate practices and precautions when dealing with fentanyl or other drugs. 3. Increase electronic prescribing to prevent diversion and forgery. K. COMMUNITY LEADERSHIP 1. Regional planning to identify goals for opioid reduction and support efforts or to identify areas and populations with the greatest needs for treatment intervention services. 2. Government dashboard to track key opioid-related indicators and supports as identified through collaborative community processes. EXHIBIT A 45 L. STAFFING AND TRAINING 1. Funding for programs and services regarding staff training and networking to improve staff capability to abate the opioid crisis. 2. Support infrastructure and staffing for collaborative cross-systems coordination to prevent opioid misuse, prevent overdoses, and treat those with OUD (e.g., health care, primary care, pharmacies, PDMPs, etc.). M. RESEARCH 1. Funding opioid abatement research. 2. Research improved service delivery for modalities such as SBIRT that demonstrate promising but mixed results in populations vulnerable to OUD. 3. Support research for novel harm reduction and prevention efforts such as the provision of fentanyl test strips. 4. Support for innovative supply-side enforcement efforts such as improved detection of mail-based delivery of synthetic opioids. 5. Expanded research for swift/certain/fair models to reduce and deter opioid misuse within criminal justice populations that build upon promising approaches used to address other substances (e.g. Hawaii HOPE and Dakota 24/7). 6. Research expanded modalities such as prescription methadone that can expand access to MAT. N. OTHER 1. Administrative costs for any of the approved purposes on this list. 4828-8658-5793, v. 8 EXHIBIT A 46 Exhibit B 47 Colorado Local Governments* Government Name County Gov't Type Multi- County Adams County Adams County Arvada Adams City 2 counties Aurora Adams City 3 counties Bennett Adams City 2 counties Brighton Adams City 2 counties Commerce City Adams City Federal Heights Adams City Lochbuie Adams City 2 counties Northglenn Adams City 2 counties Thornton Adams City 2 counties Westminster Adams City 2 counties Alamosa County Alamosa County Alamosa Alamosa City Hooper Alamosa City Arapahoe County Arapahoe County Aurora Arapahoe City 3 counties Bennett Arapahoe City 2 counties Bow Mar Arapahoe City 2 counties Centennial Arapahoe City Cherry Hills Village Arapahoe City Columbine Valley Arapahoe City Deer Trail Arapahoe City Englewood Arapahoe City Foxfield Arapahoe City Glendale Arapahoe City Greenwood Village Arapahoe City Littleton Arapahoe City 3 counties Sheridan Arapahoe City Archuleta County Archuleta County Pagosa Springs Archuleta City Baca County Baca County Campo Baca City Pritchett Baca City Springfield Baca City Two Buttes Baca City Vilas Baca City Walsh Baca City Bent County Bent County Las Animas Bent City Boulder County Boulder County Boulder Boulder City Erie Boulder City 2 counties Jamestown Boulder City Lafayette Boulder City 1 EXHIBIT B 48 Colorado Local Governments* Government Name County Gov't Type Multi- County Longmont Boulder City 2 counties Louisville Boulder City Lyons Boulder City Nederland Boulder City Superior Boulder City 2 counties Ward Boulder City Broomfield Broomfield City/County Chaffee County Chaffee County Buena Vista Chaffee City Poncha Springs Chaffee City Salida Chaffee City Cheyenne County Cheyenne County Cheyenne Wells Cheyenne City Kit Carson Cheyenne City Clear Creek County Clear Creek County Central City Clear Creek City 2 counties Empire Clear Creek City Georgetown Clear Creek City Idaho Springs Clear Creek City Silver Plume Clear Creek City Conejos County Conejos County Antonito Conejos City La Jara Conejos City Manassa Conejos City Romeo Conejos City Sanford Conejos City Costilla County Costilla County Blanca Costilla City San Luis Costilla City Crowley County Crowley County Crowley Crowley City Olney Springs Crowley City Ordway Crowley City Sugar City Crowley City Custer County Custer County Silver Cliff Custer City Westcliffe Custer City Delta County Delta County Cedaredge Delta City Crawford Delta City Delta Delta City Hotchkiss Delta City Orchard City Delta City Paonia Delta City 2 EXHIBIT B 49 Colorado Local Governments* Government Name County Gov't Type Multi- County Denver Denver City/County Dolores County Dolores County Dove Creek Dolores City Rico Dolores City Douglas County Douglas County Aurora Douglas City 3 counties Castle Pines Douglas City Castle Rock Douglas City Larkspur Douglas City Littleton Douglas City 3 counties Lone Tree Douglas City Parker Douglas City Eagle County Eagle County Avon Eagle City Basalt Eagle City 2 counties Eagle Eagle City Gypsum Eagle City Minturn Eagle City Red Cliff Eagle City Vail Eagle City El Paso County El Paso County Calhan El Paso City Colorado Springs El Paso City Fountain El Paso City Green Mountain Falls El Paso City 2 counties Manitou Springs El Paso City Monument El Paso City Palmer Lake El Paso City Ramah El Paso City Elbert County Elbert County Elizabeth Elbert City Kiowa Elbert City Simla Elbert City Fremont County Fremont County Brookside Fremont City Cañon City Fremont City Coal Creek Fremont City Florence Fremont City Rockvale Fremont City Williamsburg Fremont City Garfield County Garfield County Carbondale Garfield City Glenwood Springs Garfield City New Castle Garfield City 3 EXHIBIT B 50 Colorado Local Governments* Government Name County Gov't Type Multi- County Parachute Garfield City Rifle Garfield City Silt Garfield City Gilpin County Gilpin County Black Hawk Gilpin City Central City Gilpin City 2 counties Grand County Grand County Fraser Grand City Granby Grand City Grand Lake Grand City Hot Sulphur Springs Grand City Kremmling Grand City Winter Park Grand City Gunnison County Gunnison County Crested Butte Gunnison City Gunnison Gunnison City Marble Gunnison City Mount Crested Butte Gunnison City Pitkin Gunnison City Hinsdale County Hinsdale County Lake City Hinsdale City Huerfano County Huerfano County La Veta Huerfano City Walsenburg Huerfano City Jackson County Jackson County Walden Jackson City Jefferson County Jefferson County Arvada Jefferson City 2 counties Bow Mar Jefferson City 2 counties Edgewater Jefferson City Golden Jefferson City Lakeside Jefferson City Lakewood Jefferson City Littleton Jefferson City 3 counties Morrison Jefferson City Mountain View Jefferson City Superior Jefferson City 2 counties Westminster Jefferson City 2 counties Wheat Ridge Jefferson City Kiowa County Kiowa County Eads Kiowa City Haswell Kiowa City Sheridan Lake Kiowa City Kit Carson County Kit Carson County 4 EXHIBIT B 51 Colorado Local Governments* Government Name County Gov't Type Multi- County Bethune Kit Carson City Burlington Kit Carson City Flagler Kit Carson City Seibert Kit Carson City Stratton Kit Carson City Vona Kit Carson City La Plata County La Plata County Bayfield La Plata City Durango La Plata City Ignacio La Plata City Lake County Lake County Leadville Lake City Larimer County Larimer County Berthoud Larimer City 2 counties Estes Park Larimer City Fort Collins Larimer City Johnstown Larimer City 2 counties Loveland Larimer City Timnath Larimer City 2 counties Wellington Larimer City Windsor Larimer City 2 counties Las Animas County Las Animas County Aguilar Las Animas City Branson Las Animas City Cokedale Las Animas City Kim Las Animas City Starkville Las Animas City Trinidad Las Animas City Lincoln County Lincoln County Arriba Lincoln City Genoa Lincoln City Hugo Lincoln City Limon Lincoln City Logan County Logan County Crook Logan City Fleming Logan City Iliff Logan City Merino Logan City Peetz Logan City Sterling Logan City Mesa County Mesa County Collbran Mesa City De Beque Mesa City Fruita Mesa City 5 EXHIBIT B 52 Colorado Local Governments* Government Name County Gov't Type Multi- County Grand Junction Mesa City Palisade Mesa City Mineral County Mineral County City of Creede Mineral City Moffat County Moffat County Craig Moffat City Dinosaur Moffat City Montezuma County Montezuma County Cortez Montezuma City Dolores Montezuma City Mancos Montezuma City Montrose County Montrose County Montrose Montrose City Naturita Montrose City Nucla Montrose City Olathe Montrose City Morgan County Morgan County Brush Morgan City Fort Morgan Morgan City Hillrose Morgan City Log Lane Village Morgan City Wiggins Morgan City Otero County Otero County Cheraw Otero City Fowler Otero City La Junta Otero City Manzanola Otero City Rocky Ford Otero City Swink Otero City Ouray County Ouray County Ouray Ouray City Ridgway Ouray City Park County Park County Alma Park City Fairplay Park City Phillips County Phillips County Haxtun Phillips City Holyoke Phillips City Paoli Phillips City Pitkin County Pitkin County Aspen Pitkin City Basalt Pitkin City 2 counties Snowmass Village Pitkin City Prowers County Prowers County 6 EXHIBIT B 53 Colorado Local Governments* Government Name County Gov't Type Multi- County Granada Prowers City Hartman Prowers City Holly Prowers City Lamar Prowers City Wiley Prowers City Pueblo County Pueblo County Boone Pueblo City Pueblo Pueblo City Rye Pueblo City Rio Blanco County Rio Blanco County Meeker Rio Blanco City Rangely Rio Blanco City Rio Grande County Rio Grande County Center Rio Grande City 2 counties Del Norte Rio Grande City Monte Vista Rio Grande City South Fork Rio Grande City Routt County Routt County Hayden Routt City Oak Creek Routt City Steamboat Springs Routt City Yampa Routt City Saguache County Saguache County Bonanza Saguache City Center Saguache City 2 counties Crestone Saguache City Moffat Saguache City Saguache Saguache City San Juan County San Juan County Silverton San Juan City San Miguel County San Miguel County Mountain Village San Miguel City Norwood San Miguel City Ophir San Miguel City Sawpit San Miguel City Telluride San Miguel City Sedgwick County Sedgwick County Julesburg Sedgwick City Ovid Sedgwick City Sedgwick Sedgwick City Summit County Summit County Blue River Summit City Breckenridge Summit City Dillon Summit City 7 EXHIBIT B 54 Colorado Local Governments* Government Name County Gov't Type Multi- County Frisco Summit City Montezuma Summit City Silverthorne Summit City Teller County Teller County Cripple Creek Teller City Green Mountain Falls Teller City 2 counties Victor Teller City Woodland Park Teller City Washington County Washington County Akron Washington City Otis Washington City Weld County Weld County Ault Weld City Berthoud Weld City 2 counties Brighton Weld City 2 counties Dacono Weld City Eaton Weld City Erie Weld City 2 counties Evans Weld City Firestone Weld City Fort Lupton Weld City Frederick Weld City Garden City Weld City Gilcrest Weld City Greeley Weld City Grover Weld City Hudson Weld City Johnstown Weld City 2 counties Keenesburg Weld City Kersey Weld City La Salle Weld City Lochbuie Weld City 2 counties Longmont Weld City 2 counties Mead Weld City Milliken Weld City Northglenn Weld City 2 counties Nunn Weld City Pierce Weld City Platteville Weld City Raymer (New Raymer)Weld City Severance Weld City Thornton Weld City 2 counties Timnath Weld City 2 counties Windsor Weld City 2 counties 8 EXHIBIT B 55 Colorado Local Governments* Government Name County Gov't Type Multi- County Yuma County Yuma County Eckley Yuma City Wray Yuma City Yuma Yuma City *This list includes all 64 Colorado counties and all 271 municipalities listed in the 2019 Census. Cities located in multiple counties are listed under each corresponding county subheading. City and County of Denver and City and County of Broomfield are counted in both the city and county totals. The City of Carbonate is not included in this list, as there was no population in the 2019 Census data. 9 This list will be reconciled as necessary to be consistent with the terms of Settlement(s) with Opioid Settling Defendant(s) EXHIBIT B 56 Exhibit C 57 EXHIBIT C58 Exhibit D 59 Exhibit D - Allocations to Colorado County Areas County Percentage of LG Share Adams 9.4247% Alamosa 0.5081% Arapahoe 10.8071% Archuleta 0.1370% Baca 0.0592% Bent 0.1133% Boulder 5.7936% Broomfield 1.0014% Chaffee 0.3604% Cheyenne 0.0159% Clear Creek 0.1380% Conejos 0.2108% Costilla 0.0552% Crowley 0.0934% Custer 0.0412% Delta 0.5440% Denver 15.0042% Dolores 0.0352% Douglas 3.6696% Eagle 0.6187% El Paso 11.9897% Elbert 0.2804% Fremont 0.9937% Garfield 0.8376% Gilpin 0.0561% Grand 0.2037% Gunnison 0.1913% Hinsdale 0.0112% Huerfano 0.2505% Jackson 0.0310% Jefferson 10.5173% Kiowa 0.0142% Kit Carson 0.0940% La Plata 0.8127% Lake 0.0990% Larimer 6.5211% Las Animas 0.6304% Lincoln 0.0819% Logan 0.3815% Mesa 2.8911% Mineral 0.0039% Moffat 0.2326% Montezuma 0.4429% Page 1 EXHIBIT D 60 Montrose 0.5695% Morgan 0.4677% Otero 0.4486% Ouray 0.0535% Park 0.1674% Phillips 0.0714% Pitkin 0.1747% Prowers 0.1727% Pueblo 5.6757% Rio Blanco 0.1013% Rio Grande 0.2526% Routt 0.3837% Saguache 0.0666% San Juan 0.0097% San Miguel 0.1005% Sedgwick 0.0618% Summit 0.3761% Teller 0.6219% Washington 0.0357% Weld 3.8908% Yuma 0.0992% TOTAL 100.0000% Page 2 EXHIBIT D 61 Exhibit E 62 Government Name Intracounty Share Adams County 68.3372% Arvada (2 Counties)0.2632% Aurora (3 Counties)4.6336% Bennett (2 Counties)0.1670% Brighton (2 Counties)1.4527% Commerce City 4.7314% Federal Heights 1.1457% Lochbuie (2 Counties)0.0001% Northglenn (2 Counties)2.0913% Thornton (2 Counties)10.6435% Westminster (2 Counties)6.5342% Alamosa County 85.3075% Alamosa 14.6818% Hooper 0.0108% Arapahoe County 42.7003% Aurora (3 Counties)35.5997% Bennett (2 Counties)0.0324% Bow Mar (2 Counties)0.0159% Centennial 0.4411% Cherry Hills Village 0.6685% Columbine Valley 0.1601% Deer Trail 0.0003% Englewood 5.5850% Foxfield 0.0372% Glendale 1.2289% Greenwood Village 2.8305% Littleton (3 Counties)8.5654% Sheridan 2.1347% Archuleta County 90.0864% Pagosa Springs 9.9136% Baca County 85.9800% Campo 2.4443% Pritchett 1.5680% Springfield 7.0100% Exhibit E - Intracounty Allocations1,2 The below chart depicts the default percentage that each Local Government will receive from the LG Share amount attributed to its County Area, as described in Section (E)(3) of the MOU. The chart assumes full participation by all Local Governments Page 1 EXHIBIT E 63 Government Name Intracounty Share Two Buttes 0.4766% Vilas 0.9070% Walsh 1.6141% Bent County 80.9608% Las Animas 19.0392% Boulder County 47.6311% Boulder 31.7629% Erie (2 Counties)0.3634% Jamestown 0.0086% Lafayette 3.3203% Longmont (2 Counties)14.6833% Louisville 1.4455% Lyons 0.5916% Nederland 0.1646% Superior (2 Counties)0.0258% Ward 0.0030% Broomfield County/City 100.0000% Chaffee County 74.8440% Buena Vista 5.8841% Poncha Springs 4.2369% Salida 15.0350% Cheyenne County 66.8002% Cheyenne Wells 0.8586% Kit Carson 32.3412% Clear Creek County 92.2164% Central City (2 Counties)0.0000% Empire 0.3364% Georgetown 1.9063% Idaho Springs 4.7625% Silver Plume 0.7784% Conejos County 77.1204% Antonito 4.6338% La Jara 2.4313% Manassa 1.0062% Romeo 2.4270% Sanford 12.3812% Page 2 EXHIBIT E 64 Government Name Intracounty Share Costilla County 97.3454% Blanca 1.2036% San Luis 1.4509% Crowley County 80.7081% Crowley 4.3597% Olney Springs 8.3683% Ordway 0.1853% Sugar City 6.3786% Custer County 96.6858% Silver Cliff 0.7954% Westcliffe 2.5188% Delta County 76.3512% Cedaredge 3.6221% Crawford 0.4938% Delta 16.2658% Hotchkiss 1.0963% Orchard City 0.1473% Paonia 2.0236% Denver County/City 100.0000% Dolores County 76.3307% Dove Creek 17.3127% Rico 6.3566% Douglas County 71.8404% Aurora (3 Counties)0.2099% Castle Pines 0.2007% Castle Rock 13.5204% Larkspur 0.0856% Littleton (3 Counties)0.0156% Lone Tree 5.2786% Parker 8.8487% Eagle County 60.8236% Avon 7.6631% Basalt (2 Counties)2.2311% Eagle 3.1376% Gypsum 1.7469% Minturn 0.7771% Page 3 EXHIBIT E 65 Government Name Intracounty Share Red Cliff 0.0957% Vail 23.5250% El Paso County 18.4181% Calhan 0.0228% Colorado Springs 80.1161% Fountain 0.9892% Green Mountain Falls (2 Counties)0.0149% Manitou Springs 0.2411% Monument 0.1492% Palmer Lake 0.0455% Ramah 0.0033% Elbert County 86.5840% Elizabeth 10.2633% Kiowa 1.5455% Simla 1.6072% Fremont County 60.7882% Brookside 0.0348% Cañon City 30.9017% Coal Creek 0.0476% Florence 8.0681% Rockvale 0.0687% Williamsburg 0.0907% Garfield County 76.3371% Carbondale 2.4698% Glenwood Springs 11.8141% New Castle 1.4295% Parachute 1.0653% Rifle 5.2733% Silt 1.6110% Gilpin County 46.8613% Black Hawk 46.3909% Central City (2 Counties)6.7478% Grand County 80.1046% Fraser 2.4903% Granby 5.4008% Grand Lake 0.3174% Hot Sulphur Springs 0.1431% Kremmling 2.9284% Page 4 EXHIBIT E 66 Government Name Intracounty Share Winter Park 8.6154% Gunnison County 88.9185% Crested Butte 2.3562% Gunnison 5.9501% Marble 0.1714% Mount Crested Butte 2.5657% Pitkin 0.0381% Hinsdale County 76.0940% Lake City 23.9060% Huerfano County 68.2709% La Veta 11.0719% Walsenburg 20.6572% Jackson County 61.5339% Walden 38.4661% Jefferson County 58.2140% Arvada (2 Counties)11.9733% Bow Mar (2 Counties)0.0087% Edgewater 0.6604% Golden 3.4815% Lakeside 0.0030% Lakewood 15.9399% Littleton (3 Counties)0.6176% Morrison 0.2205% Mountain View 0.1344% Superior (2 Counties)0.0000% Westminster (2 Counties)5.4779% Wheat Ridge 3.2689% Kiowa County 93.2138% Eads 5.3777% Haswell 0.6402% Sheridan Lake 0.7682% Kit Carson County 86.3178% Bethune 0.1841% Burlington 12.0640% Flagler 0.4264% Seibert 0.0291% Stratton 0.9012% Page 5 EXHIBIT E 67 Government Name Intracounty Share Vona 0.0775% La Plata County 66.8874% Bayfield 1.6292% Durango 29.2985% Ignacio 2.1849% Lake County 73.4523% Leadville 26.5477% Larimer County 56.0589% Berthoud (2 Counties)0.4139% Estes Park 0.3502% Fort Collins 18.5702% Johnstown (2 Counties)0.0711% Loveland 23.4493% Timnath (2 Counties)0.2964% Wellington 0.3653% Windsor (2 Counties)0.4248% Las Animas County 77.8076% Aguilar 0.0751% Branson 0.0101% Cokedale 0.0188% Kim 0.0101% Starkville 0.0087% Trinidad 22.0696% Lincoln County 91.3222% Arriba 0.3444% Genoa 0.2222% Hugo 1.4778% Limon 6.6333% Logan County 72.7982% Crook 0.0931% Fleming 0.3413% Iliff 0.0095% Merino 0.4702% Peetz 0.2029% Sterling 26.0848% Mesa County 60.8549% Collbran 0.0920% Page 6 EXHIBIT E 68 Government Name Intracounty Share De Beque 0.0123% Fruita 1.6696% Grand Junction 37.1505% Palisade 0.2208% Mineral County 87.6744% City of Creede 12.3256% Moffat County 91.7981% Craig 8.1862% Dinosaur 0.0157% Montezuma County 79.6682% Cortez 18.6459% Dolores 0.6106% Mancos 1.0753% Montrose County 92.8648% Montrose 6.5980% Naturita 0.1551% Nucla 0.0703% Olathe 0.3118% Morgan County 61.6991% Brush 8.5522% Fort Morgan 27.8214% Hillrose 0.1986% Log Lane Village 0.6424% Wiggins 1.0863% Otero County 60.8168% Cheraw 0.1888% Fowler 1.0413% La Junta 25.9225% Manzanola 0.6983% Rocky Ford 8.8215% Swink 2.5109% Ouray County 76.0810% Ouray 17.6541% Ridgway 6.2649% Park County 96.3983% Alma 0.7780% Page 7 EXHIBIT E 69 Government Name Intracounty Share Fairplay 2.8237% Phillips County 52.3463% Haxtun 13.9505% Holyoke 33.1803% Paoli 0.5228% Pitkin County 47.1379% Aspen 42.0707% Basalt (2 Counties)1.1156% Snowmass Village 9.6757% Prowers County 70.4524% Granada 0.9965% Hartman 0.3164% Holly 4.9826% Lamar 21.5860% Wiley 1.6661% Pueblo County 54.6622% Boone 0.0019% Pueblo 45.3350% Rye 0.0008% Rio Blanco County 78.2831% Meeker 9.1326% Rangely 12.5843% Rio Grande County 68.0724% Center (2 Counties)0.7713% Del Norte 6.7762% Monte Vista 20.4513% South Fork 3.9288% Routt County 58.5353% Hayden 1.0679% Oak Creek 0.6360% Steamboat Springs 39.4499% Yampa 0.3109% Saguache County 92.8796% Bonanza 0.1367% Center (2 Counties)6.3687% Crestone 0.0137% Page 8 EXHIBIT E 70 Government Name Intracounty Share Moffat 0.3553% Saguache 0.2460% San Juan County 87.0423% Silverton 12.9577% San Miguel County 48.7493% Mountain Village 25.7930% Norwood 0.4078% Ophir 0.0816% Sawpit 0.0272% Telluride 24.9411% Sedgwick County 98.7331% Julesburg 0.3830% Ovid 0.0295% Sedgwick 0.8544% Summit County 57.0567% Blue River 0.5011% Breckenridge 26.1112% Dillon 4.1421% Frisco 6.5096% Montezuma 0.0169% Silverthorne 5.6623% Teller County 66.1557% Cripple Creek 17.2992% Green Mountain Falls (2 Counties)0.0322% Victor 3.1685% Woodland Park 13.3445% Washington County 99.1320% Akron 0.7659% Otis 0.1021% Weld County 51.9387% Ault 0.3202% Berthoud (2 Counties)0.0061% Brighton (2 Counties)0.0927% Dacono 0.6104% Eaton 0.4573% Erie (2 Counties)0.8591% Evans 4.5121% Page 9 EXHIBIT E 71 Government Name Intracounty Share Firestone 1.4648% Fort Lupton 0.8502% Frederick 1.2228% Garden City 0.1514% Gilcrest 0.1580% Greeley 30.6922% Grover 0.0852% Hudson 0.0066% Johnstown (2 Counties)1.5416% Keenesburg 0.0215% Kersey 0.1378% La Salle 0.4128% Lochbuie (2 Counties)0.4004% Longmont (2 Counties)0.0154% Mead 0.0941% Milliken 1.5373% Northglenn (2 Counties)0.0030% Nunn 0.2558% Pierce 0.0948% Platteville 0.3712% Raymer (New Raymer)0.0597% Severance 0.0403% Thornton (2 Counties)0.0000% Timnath (2 Counties)0.0000% Windsor (2 Counties)1.5865% Yuma County 75.5598% Eckley 2.5422% Wray 10.2148% Yuma 11.6832% Page 10 1 These allocations are based on the allocation model used in the Negotiation Class website. The allocation model is the product of prolonged and intensive research, analysis, and discussion by and among members of the court-appointed Plaintiffs’ Executive Committee and Settlement Committee and their retained public health and health economics experts, as well as a series of meetings with scores of cities, counties and subdivisions. Additional information about the allocation model is available on the Negotiation Class website. The allocations in the Negotiation Class website use two different methodologies: County-Level Allocation The allocation model uses three factors, based on reliable, detailed, and objective data collected and reported by the federal government, to determine the share of a settlement fund that each county will receive. The three factors are: (1) the amount of opioids shipped to the county, (2) the number of opioid deaths in that county, and (3) the number of people who suffer opioid use disorder in that county. County/Municipal-Level Allocation The county/municipal-level allocation is a default allocation to be used if another agreement is not reached between the county and its constituent cities. The formula uses U.S. Census Bureau data on local government spending. This data covers cities and counties for 98% of the U.S. population. If a jurisdiction lacked this data, it was extrapolated based on available data. 2 The municipalities of Bow Mar, Johnstown, and Timnath were not reflected as being in multiple counties in the Negotiation Class website. The estimated allocations to those cities are based on the same methodology used in the website, in consultation with the expert. For cities in multiple counties, please see each county in which that city lies. EXHIBIT E 72 Exhibit F 73 Region Number Region Description Total State Share 1 Northwest 0.9522% 2 Larimer 6.5211% 3 Weld 3.8908% 4 Logan 1.5896% 5 North Central 2.1061% 6 Boulder 5.7936% 7 Broomfield 1.0014% 8 Adams 9.4247% 9 Arapahoe 10.8071% 10 Jefferson 10.7114% 11 Denver 15.0042% 12 Douglas 3.6696% 13 Mesa 2.8911% 14 Southwest 1.4700% 15 Central 1.5627% 16 El Paso/Teller 12.6116% 17 Southwest Corner 1.4375% 18 South Central 1.0973% 19 Southeast 7.4580% Total 100.0000% Regional Allocations EXHIBIT F 74 Exhibit G 75 Regional Governance Models A. Membership Structure Single-County Regions 1. Voting Members (Recommended List: Participating Local Governments to Decide) • 1 or 2 representatives appointed by the county (can be commissioners) • 1 representative appointed from the public health department • 1 representative from the county human services department • 1 representative appointed from law enforcement within region (sheriff, police, local city or town district attorney, etc.) • 1 representative appointed from a municipal or county court system within region • 1-3 representatives (total) appointed by the cities within the county (or other city or cities agreed upon) (can be councilmembers and mayors) • Such other representatives as participating counties/cities agree on (not to include providers who may be recipients of funds) 2. Non-Voting Members (Optional but strongly encouraged) • Representatives from behavioral health providers • Representatives from health care providers • Recovery/treatment experts • Other county or city representatives • A representative from the Attorney General’s Office • Community representative(s), preferably those with lived experience with the opioid crisis • Harm reduction experts Multi-County Regions 1. Voting Members (Recommended List: Participating Local Governments to Decide) • 1 representative appointed by each county (can be commissioners) • 1 representative appointed by a rotating city within each county (or other city agreed upon) (can be councilmembers and mayors) • 1 representative from each public health department within the region • 1 representative from a county human services department • At least 1 representative appointed from law enforcement within region (sheriff, police, local city or town district attorney, etc.) • 1 representative from a municipal or county court system within region • Such other representatives as participating counties/cities agree on (not to include providers who may be recipients of funds) 2. Non-Voting Members (Optional) • Representatives from behavioral health providers EXHIBIT G 76 • Representatives from health care providers • Recovery/treatment experts • Other county or city representatives • A representative from the Attorney General’s Office • Community representative(s), preferably those with lived experience with the opioid crisis. • Harm reduction experts Single-County Single-City Regions (Denver & Broomfield) 1. Voting Members (Recommended List: Participating Local Government to Decide)1 • 1 representative appointed by the city and county • 1 representative appointed from the public health department • 1 representative from the county human services department • 1 representative appointed from law enforcement within region (sheriff, police, district attorney, etc.) • 1 representative appointed from a municipal or county court system within region • Such other representatives as participating counties/cities agree on (not to include providers who may be recipients of funds) 2. Non-Voting Members (Optional) • Representatives from behavioral health providers • Representatives from health care providers • Recovery/treatment experts • Other county or city representatives • A representative from the Attorney General’s Office • Community representative(s), preferably those with lived experience with the opioid crisis. • Harm reduction experts B. Member Terms • Regions may establish terms of appointment for members. Appointment terms may be staggered. C. Procedures • Regions will be governed by an intergovernmental agreement (“IGA”) or memorandum of understanding (“MOU”). • Regions may adopt the Model Colorado Regional Opioid Intergovernmental Agreement, attached here as Exhibit G-1, in its entirety or alter or amend it as they deem appropriate. 1 In Denver, the Mayor shall make voting member appointments to the Regional Council. In Broomfield, the City and County Manager shall make voting member appointments to the Regional Council. EXHIBIT G 77 • Regions may establish their own procedures through adoption of bylaws (model bylaws to be made available). • Meetings of regional board/committee shall be open to the public and comply with the Colorado Open Meetings Law (including requirement to keep minutes). D. Financial Responsibility/Controls • A local government entity shall nominate and designate a fiscal agent for the Region. • A Regional fiscal agent must be appointed by the Regional Council on an annual basis. A Regional fiscal agent may serve as long as the Regional Council determines is appropriate, including the length of any Settlement that contemplates the distribution of Opioid Funds within Colorado. However, the Regional fiscal agent also can change over time. • Regional fiscal agents must be a board of county commissioners or a city or town council or executive department, such as a department of finance. • Yearly reporting by fiscal agent (using standard form) to the Abatement Council. • All documents subject to CORA. E. Conflicts of Interest • Voting members shall abide by the conflict-of-interest rules applicable to local government officials under state law. F. Ethics Laws • Voting members shall abide by applicable state or local ethics laws, as appropriate. G. Authority • The Regional Council for each region shall have authority to decide how funds allocated to the region shall be distributed in accordance with the Colorado MOU and shall direct the fiscal agent accordingly. • Any necessary contracts will be entered into by the fiscal agent, subject to approval by the Regional Council. H. Legal Status • The region shall not be considered a separate legal entity, unless the Participating Local Governments decide, through an IGA, to create a separate governmental entity. EXHIBIT G 78 Exhibit G-1 79 MODEL COLORADO REGIONAL OPIOID INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT 2 THIS MODEL COLORADO REGIONAL OPIOID INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT (the “Regional Agreement”) is made between _________________, a Participating Local Government, as defined in the Colorado MOU, in the __________________ Region (“____________”) and ______________________, a Participating Local Government in the ___________ Region, (“_____________”), individually herein a “Regional PLG” and collectively the “Regional PLGs.”” RECITALS WHEREAS, the State of Colorado and Participating Local Governments executed the Colorado Opioids Summary Memorandum of Understanding on _______ 2021 (the “Colorado MOU”), establishing the manner in which Opioid Funds shall be divided and distributed within the State of Colorado; WHEREAS, the Regional Agreement assumes and incorporates the definitions and provisions contained in the Colorado MOU, and the Regional Agreement shall be construed in conformity with the Colorado MOU3; WHEREAS, all Opioid Funds, regardless of allocation, shall be used for Approved Purposes; WHEREAS, Participating Local Governments shall organize themselves into Regions, as further depicted in Exhibit E to the Colorado MOU; 2 This Model Regional Agreement is meant to serve as an example for the various Regions and to facilitate the flow of Opioid Funds to their intended purposes. Regions are free to adopt this Regional Agreement in its entirety or alter or amend it as they deem appropriate. 3 When drafting agreements like this Regional Agreement, Regional PLGs should be conscious of the definitions used therein so as not to confuse such definitions with those used in the Colorado MOU. The Definitions in the Colorado MOU shall supersede any definitions used by Regional PLGs in a Regional Agreement. EXHIBIT G-1 80 WHEREAS, Regions may consist of Single-County Regions, Multi-County Regions, or Single County- Single City Regions (Denver and Broomfield). WHEREAS, there shall be a 60% direct allocation of Opioid Funds to Regions through a Regional Share; WHEREAS, each Region shall be eligible to receive a Regional Share according to Exhibit C to the Colorado MOU; WHEREAS, the Colorado MOU establishes the procedures by which each Region shall be entitled to Opioid Funds from the Abatement Council and administer its Regional Share allocation; WHEREAS, the procedures established by the Colorado MOU include a requirement that each Region shall create its own Regional Council; WHEREAS, all aspects of the creation, administration, and operation of the Regional Council shall proceed in accordance with the provisions of the Colorado MOU; WHEREAS, each such Regional Council shall designate a fiscal agent from a county or municipal government within that Region; WHEREAS, each such Regional Council shall submit a two-year plan to the Abatement Council that identifies the Approved Purposes for which the requested funds will be used, and the Regional Council’s fiscal agent shall provide data and a certification to the Abatement Council regarding compliance with its two-year plan on an annual basis; WHEREAS, the Regional Agreement pertains to the procedures for the Regional PLGs to establish a Regional Council, designate a fiscal agent, and request and administer Opioid Funds in a manner consistent with the Colorado MOU; EXHIBIT G-1 81 NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements hereinafter set forth and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the Regional PLGs incorporate the recitals set forth above and agree as follows: 1. DEFINITIONS. The defined terms used in this Regional Agreement shall have the same meanings as in the Colorado MOU4. Capitalized terms used herein and not otherwise defined within the Regional Agreement or in the Colorado MOU shall have the meanings ascribed to them in the body of the Regional Agreement. 2. OBLIGATIONS OF THE REGIONAL PLGS. The Regional PLGs shall perform their respective obligations as set forth in the Regional Agreement, the Colorado MOU and the accompanying exhibits to the Colorado MOU and incorporated herein by reference. 3. REGIONAL COUNCIL. 3.1. Purpose: In accordance with the Colorado MOU, a Regional Council, consisting of representatives appointed by the Regional PLGs, shall be created to oversee the procedures by which a Region may request Opioid Funds from the Abatement Council and the procedures by which the allocation of its Region’s Share of Opioid Funds are administered. 3.2. Membership: The Regional Council of a Multi-County or Single County Region shall consist of the following: a. Multi-County Region: (i) Voting Members. Voting Members shall be appointed by the Regional PLGs. The Regional PLGs shall collaborate to appoint Regional Council members and to the extent practicable, Voting Members shall be selected from different counties and cities. No single county or city should dominate the make-up of the Regional Council. Voting Members shall be selected as follows: (1) 1 representative appointed by each county (can be commissioners). (2) 1 representative appointed from a rotating city within each county (or other city agreed upon) (can be councilmembers and mayors). A rotating city member shall be selected by majority vote of the cities within each county who do not have a Voting Member currently sitting on the Regional 4 See FN 2, supra. EXHIBIT G-1 82 Council. (3) 1 representative from each public health department within the region. (4) 1 representative from a county human services department. (5) At least 1 representative appointed from law enforcement within the region (sheriff, police, local city or town district attorney, etc.). (6) 1 representative from a municipal or county court system within the region. b. Single-County Region: (i) Voting Members. Voting Members shall be appointed by the Regional PLGs. The Regional PLGs shall collaborate to appoint Regional Council members and to the extent practicable, Voting Members shall be selected from different cities within the region. No single city should dominate the make-up of the Regional Council. Voting Members shall be selected as follows: (1) 1 or 2 representatives appointed by the county (can be commissioners) (2) 1 representative appointed from the public health department (3) 1 representative from the county human services department (4) 1 representative appointed from law enforcement within region (sheriff, police, local city or town district attorney, etc.) (5) 1 representative appointed from a municipal or county court system within region (6) 1-3 representatives (total) appointed by rotating cities within the county (or other city or cities agreed upon) (can be councilmembers and mayors). Rotating city members shall be selected by majority vote of the cities who do not have a Voting Member currently sitting on the Regional Council. (7) Such other representatives as participating counties/cities agree on (not to include providers who may be recipients of EXHIBIT G-1 83 funds) c. Non-Voting Members. For both Multi-County and Single County Regions, Non-Voting Members are optional but are strongly encouraged. Non-voting members shall serve in an advisory capacity. Any Non-Voting Members shall be appointed by the Regional PLGs and may be comprised of all or some of the following, not to include potential recipients of funds: (i) Representatives from behavioral health providers. (ii) Representatives from health care providers. (iii) Recovery/treatment experts. (iv) Other county or city representatives. (v) A representative from the Attorney General’s Office. (vi) Community representative(s), preferably those with lived experience with the opioid crisis. (vii) Harm reduction experts. d. Acting Chair: The Voting Members for both Multi-County and Single- County Regions shall appoint one member to serve as Acting Chair of the Regional Council. The Acting Chair’s primary responsibilities shall be to schedule periodic meetings and votes of the Regional Council as needed and to serve as the point of contact for disputes within the Region. The Acting Chair must be either a Member from a county within a Region, such as a county commissioner or their designee, or a Member from a city or town within a Region, such as a mayor or city or town council member or their designee. e. Non-Participation: A Local Government that chooses not to become a Participating Local Government in the Colorado MOU shall not receive any Opioid Funds from the Regional Share or participate in the Regional Council. f. Terms: The Regional Council shall be established within ninety (90) days of the first Settlement being entered by a court of competent jurisdiction, including any bankruptcy court. In order to do so, within sixty (60) days of the first Settlement being entered, CCI and CML shall jointly recommend six (6) Voting Members, and so long as such recommendations comply with the terms of Section 3.2 (a) or (b), the Regional Council shall consist of CCI/CML’s recommended Members for EXHIBIT G-1 84 an initial term not to exceed one year.5 Thereafter, Voting Members shall be appointed in accordance with Section 3.2 (a) or (b) and shall serve two- year terms. Following the expiration of that two-year term, the Regional PLGs, working in concert, shall reappoint that Voting Member, or appoint a new Voting Member according to Section 3.2 (a) or (b). (i) If a Voting Member resigns or is otherwise removed from the Regional Council prior to the expiration of their term, a replacement Voting Member shall be appointed within sixty (60) days in accordance with Section 3.2 (a) or (b) to serve the remainder of the term. If the Regional PLGs are unable to fill a Voting Member vacancy within sixty (60) days, the existing Voting Members of the Regional Council at the time of the vacancy shall work collectively to appoint a replacement Voting Member in accordance with Section 3.2 (a) or (b). At the end of his or her term, the individual serving as that replacement Voting Member may be reappointed by the Regional PLGs to serve a full term consistent with this Section. (ii) The purpose of the two-year term is to allow Regional PLGs an increased opportunity to serve on the Regional Council. However, Regional Council members who have already served on the Regional Council may be appointed more than once and may serve consecutive terms if appointed to do so by the Regional Council. 3.3. Duties: The Regional Council is primarily responsible for engaging with the Abatement Council on behalf of its Region and following the procedures outlined in the Colorado MOU for requesting Opioid Funds from the Regional Share, which shall include developing 2-year plans, amending those plans as appropriate, and providing the Abatement Council with data through its fiscal agent regarding Opioid Fund expenditures. Upon request from the Abatement Council, the Regional Council may also be subject to an accounting from the Abatement Council. 3.4. Governance: A Regional Council may establish its own procedures through adoption of bylaws if needed. Any governing documents must be consistent with the other provisions in this section and the Colorado MOU. 3.5. Authority: The terms of the Colorado MOU control the authority of a Regional Council and a Regional Council shall not stray outside the bounds of the authority and power vested by the Colorado MOU. Should a Regional Council require legal assistance in determining its authority, 5 Local Governments within Multi-County or Single County Regions may decide to select initial Voting Members of the Regional Council between themselves and without CCI and CML involvement. However, the Regional Council must be established within ninety (90) days of the first Settlement being entered by a court of competent jurisdiction, including any bankruptcy court. EXHIBIT G-1 85 it may seek guidance from the legal counsel of the county or municipal government of the Regional Council’s fiscal agent at the time the issue arises. 3.6. Collaboration: The Regional Council shall facilitate collaboration between the State, Participating Local Governments within its Region, the Abatement Council, and other stakeholders within its Region for the purposes of sharing data, outcomes, strategies, and other relevant information related to abating the opioid crisis in Colorado. 3.7. Transparency: The Regional Council shall operate with all reasonable transparency and abide by all Colorado laws relating to open records and meetings. To the extent the Abatement Council requests outcome-related data from the Regional Council, the Regional Council shall provide such data in an effort to determine best methods for abating the opioid crisis in Colorado. 3.8. Conflicts of Interest: Voting Members shall abide by the conflict-of-interest rules applicable to local government officials under state law. 3.9. Ethics Laws: Voting Members shall abide by their local ethics laws or, if no such ethics laws exist, by applicable state ethics laws. 3.10. Decision Making: The Regional Council shall seek to make all decisions by consensus. In the event consensus cannot be achieved, the Regional Council shall make decisions by a majority vote of its Members. 4. REGIONAL FISCAL AGENT 4.1. Purpose: According to the Colorado MOU, the Regional Council must designate a fiscal agent for the Region prior to the Region receiving any Opioid funds from the Regional Share. All funds from the Regional Share shall be distributed to the Regional Council’s fiscal agent for the benefit of the entire Region. 4.2. Designation: The Regional Council shall nominate and designate a fiscal agent for the Region by majority vote. Regional fiscal agents must be a board of county commissioners or a city or town council or executive department, such as a department of finance. 4.3. Term: A Regional fiscal agent must be appointed by the Regional Council on an annual basis. A Regional fiscal agent may serve as long as the Regional Council determines is appropriate, including the length of any Settlement that contemplates the distribution of Opioid Funds within Colorado. 4.4. Duties: The Regional fiscal agent shall receive, deposit, and make available Opioid Funds distributed from the Abatement Council and provide expenditure reporting data to the EXHIBIT G-1 86 Abatement Council on an annual basis. In addition, the Regional fiscal agent shall perform certain recordkeeping duties outlined below. a. Opioid Funds: The Regional fiscal agent shall receive all Opioid Funds as distributed by the Abatement Council. Upon direction by the Regional Council, the Regional fiscal agent shall make any such Opioid Funds available to the Regional Council. b. Reporting: On an annual basis, as determined by the Abatement Council, the Regional fiscal agent shall provide to the Abatement Council the Regional Council’s expenditure data from their allocation of the Regional Share and certify to the Abatement Council that the Regional Council’s expenditures were for Approved Purposes and complied with its 2-year plan. c. Recordkeeping: The Regional fiscal agent shall maintain necessary records with regard the Regional Council’s meetings, decisions, plans, and expenditure data. 4.5. Authority: The fiscal agent serves at the direction of the Regional Council and in service to the entire Region. The terms of the Colorado MOU control the authority of a Regional Council, and by extension, the Regional fiscal agent. A Regional fiscal agent shall not stray outside the bounds of the authority and power vested by the Colorado MOU. 5. REGIONAL TWO-YEAR PLAN 5.1. Purpose: According to the Colorado MOU, as part of a Regional Council’s request to the Abatement Council for Opioid Funds from its Regional Share, the Regional Council must submit a 2-year plan identifying the Approved Purposes for which the requested funds will be used. 5.2 Development of 2-Year Plan: In developing a 2-year plan, the Regional Council shall solicit recommendations and information from all Regional PLGs and other stakeholders within its Region for the purposes of sharing data, outcomes, strategies, and other relevant information related to abating the opioid crisis in Colorado. At its discretion, a Regional Council may seek assistance from the Abatement Council for purposes of developing a 2-year plan. 5.3 Amendment: At any point, a Regional Council’s 2-year plan may be amended so long as such amendments comply with the terms of the Colorado MOU and any Settlement. 6. DISPUTES WITHIN REGION. In the event that any Regional PLG disagrees with a decision of the Regional Council, or there is a dispute regarding the appointment of Voting or Non-Voting Members to the Regional Council, that Regional PLG shall inform the Acting Chair of its dispute at the earliest EXHIBIT G-1 87 possible opportunity. In Response, the Regional Council shall gather any information necessary to resolve the dispute. Within fourteen (14) days of the Regional PLG informing the Acting Chair of its dispute, the Regional Council shall issue a decision with respect to the dispute. In reaching its decision, the Regional Council may hold a vote of Voting Members, with the Acting Chair serving as the tie- breaker, or the Regional Council may devise its own dispute resolution process. However, in any disputes regarding the appointment of a Voting Member, that Voting Member will be recused from voting on the dispute. The decision of the Regional Council is a final decision. 7. DISPUTES WITH ABATEMENT COUNCIL. If the Regional Council disputes the amount of Opioid Funds it receives from its allocation of the Regional Share, the Regional Council shall alert the Abatement Council within sixty (60) days of discovering the information underlying the dispute. However, the failure to alert the Abatement Council within this time frame shall not constitute a waiver of the Regional Council’s right to seek recoupment of any deficiency in its Regional Share. 8. RECORDKEEPING. The acting Regional fiscal agent shall be responsible for maintaining records consistent with the Regional Agreement. 9. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVES. Each Regional PLGs’ representative designated below shall be the point of contact to coordinate the obligations as provided herein. The Regional PLGs designate their authorized representatives under this Regional Agreement as follows: 9.1. ______ designates the ____ of the ________ or their designee(s). 9.2. ______ designates the ____ of the ________ or their designee(s). 10. OBLIGATIONS OF THE REGIONAL PLGS. The Regional PLGs shall perform their respective obligations as set forth in the Regional Agreement, the Colorado MOU and the accompanying exhibits to the Colorado MOU and incorporated herein by reference. 11. TERM. The Regional Agreement will commence on _______, and shall expire on the date the last action is taken by the Region, consistent with the terms of the Colorado MOU and any Settlement. (the “Term”). 12. INFORMATIONAL OBLIGATIONS. Each Regional PLG hereto will meet its obligations as set forth in § 29-1-205, C.R.S., as amended, to include information about this Regional Agreement in a filing with the Colorado Division of Local Government; however, failure to do so shall in no way affect the validity of this Regional Agreement or any remedies available to the Regional PLGs hereunder. 13. CONFIDENTIALITY. The Regional PLGs, for themselves, their agents, employees and representatives, agree that they will not divulge any confidential or proprietary information they receive from another Regional PLG or otherwise have access to, except as may be required by law. Nothing in this Regional EXHIBIT G-1 88 Agreement shall in any way limit the ability of the Regional PLGs to comply with any laws or legal process concerning disclosures by public entities. The Regional PLGs understand that all materials exchanged under this Regional Agreement, including confidential information or proprietary information, may be subject to the Colorado Open Records Act., § 24-72-201, et seq., C.R.S., (the “Act”). In the event of a request to a Regional PLG for disclosure of confidential materials, the Regional PLG shall advise the Regional PLGs of such request in order to give the Regional PLGs the opportunity to object to the disclosure of any of its materials which it marked as, or otherwise asserts is, proprietary or confidential. If a Regional PLG objects to disclosure of any of its material, the Regional PLG shall identify the legal basis under the Act for any right to withhold. In the event of any action or the filing of a lawsuit to compel disclosure, the Regional PLG agrees to intervene in such action or lawsuit to protect and assert its claims of privilege against disclosure of such material or waive the same. If the matter is not resolved, the Regional PLGs may tender all material to the court for judicial determination of the issue of disclosure. 14. GOVERNING LAW; VENUE. This Regional Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of Colorado. Venue for any legal action relating solely to this Regional Agreement will be in the applicable District Court of the State of Colorado for the county of the Region’s fiscal agent. Venue for any legal action relating to the Colorado MOU shall be in a court of competent jurisdiction where a Settlement or consent decree was entered, as those terms are described or defined in the Colorado MOU. If a legal action relates to both a Regional Agreement and the Colorado MOU, venue shall also be in a court of competent jurisdiction where a Settlement or consent decree was entered. 15. TERMINATION. The Regional PLGs enter into this Regional Agreement to serve the public interest. If this Regional Agreement ceases to further the public interest, a Regional PLG, in its discretion, may terminate their participation in the Regional Agreement, in whole or in part, upon written notice to the other Regional PLGs. Each Regional PLG also has the right to terminate the Regional Agreement with cause upon written notice effective immediately, and without cause upon thirty (30) days prior written notice to the other Regional PLGs. A Regional PLG’s decision to terminate this Regional Agreement, with or without cause, shall have no impact on the other Regional PLGs present or future administration of its Opioid Funds and the other procedures outlined in this Regional Agreement. Rather, a Regional PLG’s decision to terminate this Regional Agreement shall have the same effect as non-participation, as outlined in Section 3.2 (e). 16. NOTICES. “Key Notices” under this Regional Agreement are notices regarding default, disputes, or termination of the Regional Agreement. Key Notices shall be given in writing and shall be deemed EXHIBIT G-1 89 received if given by confirmed electronic transmission that creates a record that may be retained, retrieved and reviewed by a recipient thereof, and that may be directly reproduced in paper form by such a recipient through an automated process, but specifically excluding facsimile transmissions and texts when transmitted, if transmitted on a business day and during normal business hours of the recipient, and otherwise on the next business day following transmission; certified mail, return receipt requested, postage prepaid, three business days after being deposited in the United States mail; or overnight carrier service or personal delivery, when received. For Key Notices, the Regional PLGs will follow up any electronic transmission with a hard copy of the communication by the means described above. All other communications or notices between the Regional PLGs that are not Key Notices may be done via electronic transmission. The Regional PLGs agree that any notice or communication transmitted by electronic transmission shall be treated in all manner and respects as an original written document; any such notice or communication shall be considered to have the same binding and legal effect as an original document. All Key Notices shall include a reference to the Regional Agreement, and Key Notices shall be given to the Regional PLGs at the following addresses: _____________________________ _____________________________ 17. GENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS 17.1. Independent Entities. The Regional PLGs enter into this Regional Agreement as separate, independent governmental entities and shall maintain such status throughout. 17.2. Assignment. This Regional Agreement shall not be assigned by any Regional PLG without the prior written consent of all Regional PLGs. Any assignment or subcontracting without such consent will be ineffective and void and will be cause for termination of this Regional Agreement. 17.3. Integration and Amendment. This Regional Agreement represents the entire agreement between the Regional PLGs and terminates any oral or collateral agreement or understandings. This Regional Agreement may be amended only by a writing signed by the Regional PLGs. If any provision of this Regional Agreement is held invalid or unenforceable, no other provision shall be affected by such holding, and the remaining provision of this Regional Agreement shall continue in full force and effect. EXHIBIT G-1 90 17.4. No Construction Against Drafting Party. The Regional PLGs and their respective counsel have had the opportunity to review the Regional Agreement, and the Regional Agreement will not be construed against any Regional PLG merely because any provisions of the Regional Agreement were prepared by a particular Regional PLG. 17.5. Captions and References. The captions and headings in this Regional Agreement are for convenience of reference only and shall not be used to interpret, define, or limit its provisions. All references in this Regional Agreement to sections (whether spelled out or using the § symbol), subsections, exhibits or other attachments, are references to sections, subsections, exhibits or other attachments contained herein or incorporated as a part hereof, unless otherwise noted. 17.6. Statutes, Regulations, and Other Authority. Any reference in this Regional Agreement to a statute, regulation, policy or other authority shall be interpreted to refer to such authority then current, as may have been changed or amended since the execution of this Regional Agreement. 17.7. Conflict of Interest. No Regional PLG shall knowingly perform any act that would conflict in any manner with said Regional PLG’s obligations hereunder. Each Regional PLG certifies that it is not engaged in any current project or business transaction, directly or indirectly, nor has it any interest, direct or indirect, with any person or business that might result in a conflict of interest in the performance of its obligations hereunder. No elected or employed member of any Regional PLG shall be paid or receive, directly or indirectly, any share or part of this Regional Agreement or any benefit that may arise therefrom. 17.8. Inurement. The rights and obligations of the Regional PLGs to the Regional Agreement inure to the benefit of and shall be binding upon the Regional PLGs and their respective successors and assigns, provided assignments are consented to in accordance with the terms of the Regional Agreement. 17.9. Survival. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, the Regional PLGs understand and agree that all terms and conditions of this Regional Agreement and any exhibits that require continued performance or compliance beyond the termination or expiration of this Regional Agreement shall survive such termination or expiration and shall be enforceable against a Regional PLG if such Regional PLG fails to perform or comply with such term or condition. 17.10. Waiver of Rights and Remedies. This Regional Agreement or any of its provisions may not be waived except in writing by a Regional PLG’s authorized representative. The failure of a EXHIBIT G-1 91 Regional PLG to enforce any right arising under this Regional Agreement on one or more occasions will not operate as a waiver of that or any other right on that or any other occasion. 17.11. No Third-Party Beneficiaries. Enforcement of the terms of the Regional Agreement and all rights of action relating to enforcement are strictly reserved to the Regional PLGs. Nothing contained in the Regional Agreement gives or allows any claim or right of action to any third person or entity. Any person or entity other than the Regional PLGs receiving services or benefits pursuant to the Regional Agreement is an incidental beneficiary only. 17.12. Records Retention. The Regional PLGs shall maintain all records, including working papers, notes, and financial records in accordance with their applicable record retention schedules and policies. Copies of such records shall be furnished to the Parties request. 17.13. Execution by Counterparts; Electronic Signatures and Records. This Regional Agreement may be executed in two or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which shall constitute one and the same instrument. The Regional PLGs approve the use of electronic signatures for execution of this Regional Agreement. All use of electronic signatures shall be governed by the Uniform Electronic Transactions Act, C.R.S. §§ 24-71.3-101, et seq. The Regional PLGs agree not to deny the legal effect or enforceability of the Regional Agreement solely because it is in electronic form or because an electronic record was used in its formation. The Regional PLGs agree not to object to the admissibility of the Regional Agreement in the form of an electronic record, or a paper copy of an electronic document, or a paper copy of a document bearing an electronic signature, on the ground that it is an electronic record or electronic signature or that it is not in its original form or is not an original. 17.14. Authority to Execute. Each Regional PLG represents that all procedures necessary to authorize such Regional PLG’s execution of this Regional Agreement have been performed and that the person signing for such Regional PLG has been authorized to execute the Regional Agreement. REMAINDER OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 4826-9997-5642, v. 7 EXHIBIT G-1 92 Colorado Opioids Settlement Memorandum of Understanding Summary Below is a brief overview of the key provisions outlined in the Colorado Opioids Settlement Memorandum of Understanding (“Colorado MOU”). The Colorado MOU was signed by Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser on August 26, 2021. In order to receive the full settlement payments for all of Colorado, strong participation by local governments signing on to the Colorado MOU is necessary. Local governments and the State prepared the Colorado MOU, which prioritizes regionalism, collaboration, and abatement in the sharing and distribution of opioid settlement funds. The points below summarize the framework laid out in the Colorado MOU for distributing and sharing opioids settlement proceeds throughout Colorado. Please see the full Colorado MOU and exhibits for additional details. While Colorado’s local governments are currently being asked to participate in recent settlements with the “Big 3” Distributors (AmerisourceBergen, Cardinal Health, and McKesson) and Johnson & Johnson, the Colorado MOU is intended to apply to all current and future opioid settlements. A. Allocation of Settlement Funds The Colorado MOU provides the framework for fairly dividing and sharing settlement proceeds among the state and local governments in Colorado. Under the Colorado MOU, settlement proceeds will be distributed as follows: 1. 10% directly to the State (“State Share”) 2. 20% directly to Participating Local Governments (“LG Share”) 3. 60% directly to Regions (“Regional Share”) 4. 10% to specific abatement infrastructure projects (“Statewide Infrastructure Share”) Under the Colorado MOU, all settlement funds must be used only for “Approved Purposes,” a long and broad list that focuses on abatement strategies. These strategies emphasize prevention, treatment, and harm reduction. Some examples of these strategies include training health care providers on opioid use disorder (“OUD”) treatment and responsible prescribing, expanding telehealth and mobile services for treatment, and increasing naloxone and rescue breathing supplies. The list of Approved Purposes is broad enough to be flexible for local communities, while ensuring that settlement funds are used to combat the opioid epidemic. The list of Approved Purposes is attached as Exhibit A to the MOU, unless the term is otherwise defined in a settlement. 93 B. General Abatement Fund Council A General Abatement Fund Council (the “Abatement Council”), consisting of representatives appointed by the State and Participating Local Governments, will ensure that the distribution of opioid funds complies with the terms of any settlement and the terms of the Colorado MOU. The Abatement Council will consist of 13 members, seven appointed by the State and six appointed by the Participating Local Governments. C. Local Government Share (20%) Twenty percent of settlement funds will be paid directly to Participating Local Governments. Exhibit D to the Colorado MOU lists the percentage to each County Area (that is, the county government plus the municipalities within that county), and Exhibit E further breaks down those allocations to an intracounty level using a default allocation. The allocations to each County Area in Exhibit D are based on three factors that address critical causes and effects of the opioid crisis: (1) the number of persons suffering opioid use disorder in the county; (2) the number of opioid overdose deaths that occurred in the county; and (3) the amount of opioids distributed within the county. The intracounty allocations in Exhibit E are a default allocation that will apply unless the local governments in a County Area enter into a written agreement providing for a different allocation. These allocations are based on a model, developed by health economist experts, which uses data from the State and Local Government Census on past spending relevant to opioid abatement. Participating Local Governments will provide data on expenditures from the LG Share to the Abatement Council on an annual basis. If a local government wishes, it may forego its LG Share and direct it to the Regional Share. A local government that chooses not to participate or sign onto the Colorado MOU will not receive funds from the LG Share and the portion of the LG Share that it would have received will instead be re-allocated to the Regional Share for the region where that local government is located. D. Regional Share (60%) Sixty percent of settlement funds will be allocated to single- or multi-county regions made up of local governments. These regions were drawn by local governments to make use of existing local infrastructure and relationships. The regional map is shown below, as well as in Exhibit C to the Colorado MOU: 94 Allocations to regions will be calculated according to the percentages in Exhibit F. Each region will create its own “Regional Council” to determine what Approved Purposes to fund with that region’s allocation from the Regional Share. Regional governance models are attached to the Colorado MOU as Exhibit G. Each region may draft its own intra-regional agreements, bylaws, or other governing documents to determine how the Regional Council will operate, subject to the terms of the Colorado MOU. Each Regional Council will provide expenditure data to the Abatement Council on an annual basis. A local government that chooses not to participate or sign onto the Colorado MOU shall not receive any opioid funds from the Regional Share and shall not participate in the Regional Councils. E. State Share (10%) Ten percent of settlement funds will be allocated directly to the State for statewide priorities in combating the opioid epidemic. The State maintains full discretion over distribution of the State Share anywhere within the State of Colorado. On an annual basis, the State shall provide all data on expenditures from the State Share, including administrative costs, to the Abatement Council. F. Statewide Infrastructure Share (10%) Ten percent of the settlement funds will be allocated to a Statewide Infrastructure Share to promote capital improvements and provide operational assistance for the development or improvement of infrastructure necessary to abate the opioid crisis anywhere in Colorado. 95 The Abatement Council shall establish and publish policies and procedures for the distribution and oversight of the Statewide Infrastructure Share, including processes for local governments or regions to apply for opioid funds from the Statewide Infrastructure Share. G. Attorneys’ Fees and Expenses Paid Through a Back-Stop Fund To a large extent, the national opioid settlements occurred because of the pressure that litigating entities and their counsel exerted on defendants through their lawsuits. The attorneys’ fee provision equitably allocates the cost of attorneys’ fees, while also allowing non-litigating entities to share in the 25% premium for releases by the litigating entities in the “Big 3” Distributor and Johnson & Johnson settlements. The work that was done by the litigating entities and their law firms in the litigation has substantially contributed to achieving the settlements that are currently being offered and those that are anticipated in the future. The Attorney General and local governments have agreed to a “Back-Stop Fund” for attorneys’ fees and costs. Before a law firm can apply to the Back-Stop Fund, it must first apply to any national common benefit fee fund. The Back-Stop Fund will only be used to pay the difference between what law firms are owed and the amount they have received from a national common benefit fee fund. Attorneys’ fees are limited to 8.7% of the total LG Share and 4.35% of the total Regional Share. No funds will be taken from the Statewide Infrastructure Share or State Share. A committee will be formed to oversee payments from the Back-Stop Fund. The committee will include litigating and non-litigating entities. Importantly, any excess money in the Back-Stop fund, after attorneys’ fees and costs are paid, will go back to the local governments. H. Participation in the Colorado MOU and Expected Timeline The MOU was designed to ensure that as many local governments as possible would agree to its terms. Strong participation from local governments is needed to receive the full settlement payments for all of Colorado. On August 26, 2021, Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser signed the MOU. It is projected that settlement funds from the “Big 3” Distributor/Johnson & Johnson settlements could be made available as soon as July 2022 and will be distributed within Colorado according to the MOU. Along with the MOU, each local government will need to sign a Subdivision Settlement Participation Form for each of the settlements (the “Big 3” Distributor settlement and the Johnson & Johnson settlement) releasing their legal claims and stating they are participating in the settlements. In addition, a Colorado Subdivision Escrow Agreement should be signed to ensure legal claims are released only when 95% participation by certain local governments has been reached. That 95% participation threshold is important because it triggers certain amounts of incentive payments under the settlements and signals to the settling pharmaceutical companies that the settlements have wide acceptance. A copy of the MOU with signature pages for each local government, the Subdivision Settlement Participation Forms, and the Colorado Subdivision Escrow Agreement will be 96 provided by the Attorney General’s Office. The documents should be executed by the individual or body with authority to do so on behalf of their respective county or municipality and submitted by mail or email to either CCI or CML at the following addresses: For Counties: Colorado Counties, Inc. 800 Grant, Ste 500 Denver, CO 80203 Email: Kyley Burress at KBurress@ccionline.org Katie First at KFirst@ccionline.org For Municipalities: Colorado Municipal League 1144 N. Sherman St. Denver, CO 80203 Email: opioidsettlement@cml.org If you have any questions, please reach out to Heidi Williams of the Colorado AG’s office at Heidi.Williams@coag.gov. 4836-1115-5960, v. 7 97 Colorado Opioids Settlement MOU: Frequently Asked Questions 1. What does this “settle” and why does Colorado need an MOU? Nationwide settlements have been reached with the “Big 3” opioid distributors (McKesson, Cardinal Health, and AmerisourceBergen) and opioid manufacturer Johnson & Johnson to resolve claims by state and local governments that these companies contributed to the opioid epidemic. The claims being settled include those raised by local governments in the national multi-district litigation (“MDL”), In Re: National Prescription Opiate Litigation, MDL 2804 (N.D. Ohio). More information about these settlements can be found at https://nationalopioidsettlement.com/. The Colorado MOU establishes the framework for distributing and sharing these settlement proceeds throughout Colorado. Local governments and the State prepared the Colorado MOU, which prioritizes regionalism, collaboration, and abatement. It is expected that the Colorado MOU will also be used for settlements with other opioid defendants in the future, including any settlement from Purdue Pharma’s bankruptcy proceeding. Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser signed the MOU on August 26, 2021. The Colorado MOU is included in this packet from the Attorney General’s Office and can also be found at www.coag.gov/opioids. 2. Who put together the Colorado MOU? Local government officials from across Colorado were involved in the negotiation of the Colorado MOU with the Attorney General’s Office. County commissioners, mayors, county and city attorneys, and other stakeholders came together with the assistance of Colorado Counties, Inc. (“CCI”) and the Colorado Municipal League (“CML”) to establish the framework and negotiate the details of the Colorado MOU. 3. How much money will Colorado receive and over what period of time? Funds from the Big 3 and Johnson & Johnson settlements will be distributed over a period of years. The Big 3 distributors will pay a maximum of $21 billion over 18 years, while Johnson & Johnson will pay a maximum of $5 billion over no more than nine years. In total, up to approximately $22.8 billion in settlement proceeds will be payable to state and local subdivisions nationwide. Each state receives a percentage of that recovery, and Colorado’s maximum share from these settlements will likely be more than $300 million. However, as discussed more below, Colorado will receive its maximum share of settlement payments only if enough local governments sign on to the deal. Also, the settling defendants have the option to “walk away” from the deals if there is not enough participation, so it is important that a “critical mass” of local governments signs on soon. Otherwise, the entire deal could fall through. 98 4. How can we maximize Colorado’s recovery? The MOU was designed to ensure that as many local governments as possible would agree to its terms. The Big 3 Distributor and Johnson & Johnson settlements include incentive payments based on how many governments participate. Strong participation from local governments is needed to receive the full settlement payments for all of Colorado. Local governments should sign the Colorado Subdivision Escrow Agreement to ensure their legal claims are released only when 95% participation by local governments has been reached, which secures significant incentive payments under these settlement agreements. For more information on the incentive payments, please see the graphics below: 99 5. Is participation limited to litigating entities? No, participation is not limited to governments that filed suit in the opioid litigation. Money from these settlements will be used for opioid crisis abatement in communities across Colorado, regardless of whether they have chosen to sue. All Colorado local governments are eligible to participate in the settlements and join the MOU, and the MOU does not allocate more funds to cities and counties that chose to file suit—all cities and counties in Colorado are allocated funds based on the same objective factors. 6. How will settlement proceeds be divided within the state under the Colorado MOU? Under the Colorado MOU, settlement proceeds will be distributed as follows: • 10% directly to the State (“State Share”) • 20% directly to Participating Local Governments (“LG Share”) • 60% directly to Regions (“Regional Share”) • 10% to specific abatement infrastructure projects (“Statewide Infrastructure Share”) 7. How will the money be spent? Under the Colorado MOU, all settlement funds must be used only for “Approved Purposes,” a long and broad list that focuses on abatement strategies. These strategies emphasize prevention, treatment, and harm reduction. Some examples of these strategies include training health care providers on opioid use disorder (“OUD”) treatment and responsible prescribing, expanding telehealth and mobile services for treatment, and increasing naloxone and rescue breathing 100 supplies. The list of Approved Purposes is broad enough to be flexible for local communities, while ensuring that settlement funds are used to combat the opioid epidemic. The list of Approved Purposes is attached as Exhibit A to the MOU, unless the term is otherwise defined in a settlement. To ensure that settlement funds are in fact used only for Approved Purposes, a General Abatement Fund Council (the “Abatement Council”) will be formed. This committee will consist of thirteen representatives appointed by the State and Participating Local Governments to ensure opioid funds are spent in compliance with the terms of the settlements and the Colorado MOU. 8. How will direct payments to local governments be allocated? Under the Colorado MOU, 20% of the settlement funds will be paid directly to local governments. A list of the percentage of settlement funds that will be allocated to each County Area (that is, the county government plus the municipalities within that county) is Exhibit D to the Colorado MOU. Those allocations are further broken down to an intracounty level in Exhibit E, which is a default allocation. The allocations to each County Area are based on three factors that address the relative severity of the opioid crisis: (a) the number of persons suffering from Opioid Use Disorder in the county; (b) the number of opioid overdose deaths in the county; and (c) the amount of opioids distributed within the county (measured in Morphine Milligram Equivalent units). The intracounty allocations in Exhibit E are based on a default allocation model that will apply unless the local governments in a County Area enter into an agreement that provides for a different allocation model. These allocations are based on a model developed by health economist experts, which use data from the State and Local Governments Census on past spending relevant to opioid abatement. To ensure transparency and that settlement funds are used for Approved Purposes, local governments that receive settlement funds directly will be required to provide expenditure data to the Abatement Council on an annual basis. Local governments that wish to join the MOU but do not wish to receive any direct payments have the option to redirect their payments to the Regional allocation described below. A local government that chooses not to participate or sign onto the Colorado MOU will not receive funds from the LG Share and the portion of the LG share that it would have received will instead be re-allocated to the Regional Share described below. 9. How will payments to Regions be allocated? Under the Colorado MOU, 60% of the settlement funds will be allocated to single- or multi- county regions made up of local governments. Local governments in Colorado worked collaboratively to develop the Regional Map, which emphasizes existing local infrastructure and relationships. The regional map is below, as well as included in the Colorado MOU as Exhibit C: 101 For more information on the percentages of settlement funds that will be allocated to each Region, please see Exhibit F of the Colorado MOU. 10. How will the Regions be governed? Each Region will create its own “Regional Council” consisting of members from the constituent local governments to determine what Approved Purposes to fund with the Region’s allocation. The Regional Council will have the power to make spending decisions in the Region. The Regions will designate a fiscal agent prior to receiving any settlement funds. Regional governance models are attached to the Colorado MOU as Exhibit G. Each Region may draft its own intra-regional agreements, bylaws, or other governing documents to determine how the Regional Council will operate. Each Regional Council will provide expenditure data to the Abatement Council on an annual basis. 11. How will the Statewide Infrastructure Share work? Many stakeholders have expressed a need for capital improvements across Colorado, and particularly in underserved areas, to abate the opioid crisis. The Colorado MOU directly addresses this by allocating 10% of settlement funds going to these projects. This money will be distributed by a statewide committee based on need. The Abatement Council will establish and publish policies and procedures for the distribution and oversight of the Statewide Infrastructure Share, including processes for local governments or regions to apply for opioid funds from the Statewide Infrastructure Share. 102 12. How will attorneys’ fees and expenses be paid? The Attorney General and local governments have agreed to a “Back-Stop Fund” for attorneys’ fees and costs. The attorneys’ fee provision in the Colorado MOU equitably allocates the cost of attorneys’ fees across all local governments, while also allowing non-litigating entities to share in the 25% premium for releases signed by the litigating entities in the “Big 3” Distributor and Johnson & Johnson settlements. Before a law firm can apply to the Back-Stop Fund, it must first apply to any national common benefit fee fund. The Back-Stop Fund will only be used to pay the difference between what law firms are owed and the amount they have received from a national common benefit fee fund. Attorneys’ fees are limited to 8.7% of the total LG Share and 4.35% of the total Regional Share. No funds will be taken from the Statewide Infrastructure Share or State Share. A committee will be formed to oversee payments from the Back-Stop Fund. The committee will include litigating and non-litigating entities. Importantly, any excess money in the Back-Stop fund, after attorneys’ fees and costs are paid, will go back to the local governments. 13. Why is this a great result for local governments? The Colorado MOU will ensure effective and efficient use of funds without dilution or diversion of opioid settlement money to unrelated purposes or unnecessary overhead expenses. In the Colorado MOU the local governments control 80% of the settlement funds. • Bottom-Up Approach – The need is at the local level, so the resources should be, too. • Local Voices – The communities bearing the brunt of this burden must have a meaningful seat at the table to make decisions about where resources go. • Flexibility – The Colorado MOU provides an opportunity for local governments to decide how to entrust their own regional funds without unnecessary red tape. 14. How do I sign the MOU? Local governments should sign four documents. a. First is the MOU. b. Next, each local government will need to sign a Subdivision Settlement Participation Form for each of the two settlements (the “Big 3” Distributor settlement and the Johnson & Johnson settlement) releasing their legal claims and stating they are participating in the settlements. c. In addition, a Colorado Subdivision Escrow Agreement should be signed to ensure legal claims are released only when 95% participation by certain local governments has been reached, which secures a significant portion of the incentive payments described in FAQ 4, above. Under the terms of the Colorado Subdivision Escrow Agreement, CCI (for counties) or 103 CML (for municipalities) will hold the MOUs and the Subdivision Settlement Participation Forms for each of the settlements in escrow until 95% participation by local governments has been reached as to specified incentive payments under the respective settlement agreements. Copies of the Subdivision Settlement Participation Forms, the MOU with signature pages for each local government, and the Colorado Subdivision Escrow Agreement will be provided by the Attorney General’s Office. The documents should be executed by the individual or body with authority to do so on behalf of their respective county or municipality and submitted by mail or email to either CCI or CML at the following addresses: For Counties: Colorado Counties, Inc. 800 Grant, Ste 500 Denver, CO 80203 Email: Kyley Burress KBurress@ccionline.org Katie First KFirst@ccionline.org For Municipalities: Colorado Municipal League 1144 N. Sherman St. Denver, CO 80203 Email: opioidsettlement@cml.org If you have any questions, please reach out to Heidi Williams of the Colorado AG’s office at Heidi.Williams@coag.gov. 4831-7831-1416, v. 5 104 86 revised July 30, 2021 EXHIBIT K Settlement Participation Form Governmental Entity: City of Aspen State: Colorado Authorized Official: Sara Ott, City Manager Address 1: 130 S. Galena Street Address 2: City, State, Zip: Aspen, CO 81611 Phone: 970-920-5083 Email: sara.ott@cityofaspen.com The governmental entity identified above (“Governmental Entity”), in order to obtain and in consideration for the benefits provided to the Governmental Entity pursuant to the Settlement Agreement dated July 21, 2021 (“Janssen Settlement”), and acting through the undersigned authorized official, hereby elects to participate in the Janssen Settlement, release all Released Claims against all Released Entities, and agrees as follows. 1.The Governmental Entity is aware of and has reviewed the Janssen Settlement, understands that all terms in this Election and Release have the meanings defined therein, and agrees that by this Election, the Governmental Entity elects to participate in the Janssen Settlement and become a Participating Subdivision as provided therein. 2.The Governmental Entity shall, within 14 days of the Reference Date and prior to the filing of the Consent Judgment, dismiss with prejudice any Released Claims that it has filed. 3.The Governmental Entity agrees to the terms of the Janssen Settlement pertaining to Subdivisions as defined therein. 4.By agreeing to the terms of the Janssen Settlement and becoming a Releasor, the Governmental Entity is entitled to the benefits provided therein, including, if applicable, monetary payments beginning after the Effective Date. 5.The Governmental Entity agrees to use any monies it receives through the Janssen Settlement solely for the purposes provided therein. 6.The Governmental Entity submits to the jurisdiction of the court in the Governmental Entity’s state where the Consent Judgment is filed for purposes limited to that court’s role as provided in, and for resolving disputes to the extent provided in, the Janssen Settlement. 7.The Governmental Entity has the right to enforce the Janssen Settlement as provided therein. 105 87 revised July 30, 2021 8.The Governmental Entity, as a Participating Subdivision, hereby becomes a Releasor for all purposes in the Janssen Settlement, including but not limited to all provisions of Section IV (Release), and along with all departments, agencies, divisions, boards, commissions, districts, instrumentalities of any kind and attorneys, and any person in their official capacity elected or appointed to serve any of the foregoing and any agency, person, or other entity claiming by or through any of the foregoing, and any other entity identified in the definition of Releasor, provides for a release to the fullest extent of its authority. As a Releasor, the Governmental Entity hereby absolutely, unconditionally, and irrevocably covenants not to bring, file, or claim, or to cause, assist or permit to be brought, filed, or claimed, or to otherwise seek to establish liability for any Released Claims against any Released Entity in any forum whatsoever. The releases provided for in the Janssen Settlement are intended by the Parties to be broad and shall be interpreted so as to give the Released Entities the broadest possible bar against any liability relating in any way to Released Claims and extend to the full extent of the power of the Governmental Entity to release claims. The Janssen Settlement shall be a complete bar to any Released Claim. 9.In connection with the releases provided for in the Janssen Settlement, each Governmental Entity expressly waives, releases, and forever discharges any and all provisions, rights, and benefits conferred by any law of any state or territory of the United States or other jurisdiction, or principle of common law, which is similar, comparable, or equivalent to § 1542 of the California Civil Code, which reads: General Release; extent. A general release does not extend to claims that the creditor or releasing party does not know or suspect to exist in his or her favor at the time of executing the release that, if known by him or her, would have materially affected his or her settlement with the debtor or released party. A Releasor may hereafter discover facts other than or different from those which it knows, believes, or assumes to be true with respect to the Released Claims, but each Governmental Entity hereby expressly waives and fully, finally, and forever settles, releases and discharges, upon the Effective Date, any and all Released Claims that may exist as of such date but which Releasors do not know or suspect to exist, whether through ignorance, oversight, error, negligence or through no fault whatsoever, and which, if known, would materially affect the Governmental Entities’ decision to participate in the Janssen Settlement. 10.Nothing herein is intended to modify in any way the terms of the Janssen Settlement, to which Governmental Entity hereby agrees. To the extent this Election and Release is interpreted differently from the Janssen Settlement in any respect, the Janssen Settlement controls. 106 88 revised July 30, 2021 I have all necessary power and authorization to execute this Election and Release on behalf of the Governmental Entity. Signature: _____________________________ Name: _____________________________ Title: _____________________________ Date: _____________________________ 107 DISTRIBUTORS’ 9.18.21 EXHIBIT UPDATES K-1 EXHIBIT K Subdivision Settlement Participation Form Governmental Entity: City of Aspen State: Colorado Authorized Official: Sara Ott, City Manager Address 1: 130 S. Galena Street Address 2: City, State, Zip: Aspen, Colorado 81611 Phone: 970-920-5083 Email: sara.ott@cityofaspen.com The governmental entity identified above (“Governmental Entity”), in order to obtain and in consideration for the benefits provided to the Governmental Entity pursuant to the Settlement Agreement dated July 21, 2021 (“Distributor Settlement”), and acting through the undersigned authorized official, hereby elects to participate in the Distributor Settlement, release all Released Claims against all Released Entities, and agrees as follows. 1.The Governmental Entity is aware of and has reviewed the Distributor Settlement, understands that all terms in this Participation Form have the meanings defined therein, and agrees that by signing this Participation Form, the Governmental Entity elects to participate in the Distributor Settlement and become a Participating Subdivision as provided therein. 2.The Governmental Entity shall, within 14 days of the Reference Date and prior to the filing of the Consent Judgment, secure the dismissal with prejudice of any Released Claims that it has filed. 3.The Governmental Entity agrees to the terms of the Distributor Settlement pertaining to Subdivisions as defined therein. 4.By agreeing to the terms of the Distributor Settlement and becoming a Releasor, the Governmental Entity is entitled to the benefits provided therein, including, if applicable, monetary payments beginning after the Effective Date. 5.The Governmental Entity agrees to use any monies it receives through the Distributor Settlement solely for the purposes provided therein. 6.The Governmental Entity submits to the jurisdiction of the court in the Governmental Entity’s state where the Consent Judgment is filed for purposes limited to that court’s role as provided in, and for resolving disputes to the extent provided in, the Distributor Settlement. The Governmental Entity likewise agrees to arbitrate before the National Arbitration Panel as provided in, and for resolving disputes to the extent otherwise provided in, the Distributor Settlement. 108 DISTRIBUTORS’ 9.18.21 EXHIBIT UPDATES K-2 7. The Governmental Entity has the right to enforce the Distributor Settlement as provided therein. 8. The Governmental Entity, as a Participating Subdivision, hereby becomes a Releasor for all purposes in the Distributor Settlement, including, but not limited to, all provisions of Part XI, and along with all departments, agencies, divisions, boards, commissions, districts, instrumentalities of any kind and attorneys, and any person in their official capacity elected or appointed to serve any of the foregoing and any agency, person, or other entity claiming by or through any of the foregoing, and any other entity identified in the definition of Releasor, provides for a release to the fullest extent of its authority. As a Releasor, the Governmental Entity hereby absolutely, unconditionally, and irrevocably covenants not to bring, file, or claim, or to cause, assist or permit to be brought, filed, or claimed, or to otherwise seek to establish liability for any Released Claims against any Released Entity in any forum whatsoever. The releases provided for in the Distributor Settlement are intended by the Parties to be broad and shall be interpreted so as to give the Released Entities the broadest possible bar against any liability relating in any way to Released Claims and extend to the full extent of the power of the Governmental Entity to release claims. The Distributor Settlement shall be a complete bar to any Released Claim. 9. The Governmental Entity hereby takes on all rights and obligations of a Participating Subdivision as set forth in the Distributor Settlement. 10. In connection with the releases provided for in the Distributor Settlement, each Governmental Entity expressly waives, releases, and forever discharges any and all provisions, rights, and benefits conferred by any law of any state or territory of the United States or other jurisdiction, or principle of common law, which is similar, comparable, or equivalent to § 1542 of the California Civil Code, which reads: General Release; extent. A general release does not extend to claims that the creditor or releasing party does not know or suspect to exist in his or her favor at the time of executing the release, and that if known by him or her would have materially affected his or her settlement with the debtor or released party. A Releasor may hereafter discover facts other than or different from those which it knows, believes, or assumes to be true with respect to the Released Claims, but each Governmental Entity hereby expressly waives and fully, finally, and forever settles, releases and discharges, upon the Effective Date, any and all Released Claims that may exist as of such date but which Releasors do not know or suspect to exist, whether through ignorance, oversight, error, negligence or through no fault whatsoever, and which, if known, would materially affect the Governmental Entities’ decision to participate in the Distributor Settlement. 109 DISTRIBUTORS’ 9.18.21 EXHIBIT UPDATES K-3 11. Nothing herein is intended to modify in any way the terms of the Distributor Settlement, to which Governmental Entity hereby agrees. To the extent this Participation Form is interpreted differently from the Distributor Settlement in any respect, the Distributor Settlement controls. I have all necessary power and authorization to execute this Participation Form on behalf of the Governmental Entity. Signature: _____________________________ Name: _____________________________ Title: _____________________________ Date: _____________________________ 110 Colorado Subdivision Escrow Agreement Governmental Entity: City of Aspen State: CO Authorized Official: Sara Ott, City Manager Address 1: 130 S. Galena Street Address 2: City, State, Zip: Aspen, CO 81611 Phone: 970-920-5083 Email: sara.ott@cityofaspen.com The governmental entity identified above (“Governmental Entity”) hereby provides Colorado Counties, Inc. (for counties) or the Colorado Municipal League (for municipalities) (“Escrow Agent”) the enclosed copies of the Governmental Entity’s endorsed Subdivision Settlement Participation Forms and the Colorado Opioids Settlement Memorandum of Understanding (“Colorado MOU”), to be held in escrow. The Subdivision Settlement Participation Forms apply respectively to (1) the National Settlement Agreement with McKesson Corporation, Cardinal Health, Inc., and AmerisourceBergen Corporation, dated July 21, 2021 (“Distributor Settlement”); and (2) the National Settlement Agreement with Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., and its parent company Johnson & Johnson, dated July 21, 2021 (“J&J Settlement”). Pursuant to this Agreement, the Subdivision Settlement Participation Forms and the Colorado MOU will be released only if there is 95% participation by local governments in Colorado as further explained below. Purpose of this Agreement By endorsing a Subdivision Settlement Participation Form in the Distributor Settlement and the J&J Settlement, a governmental entity agrees to participate in those settlements and release any legal claims it has or may have against those settling pharmaceutical companies. This Colorado Subdivision Escrow Agreement is meant to ensure that the legal claims of governmental entities in Colorado will be released only when 95% participation by certain governmental entities has been reached. That 95% participation threshold is important because it signals to the settling pharmaceutical companies that the settlement has wide acceptance which will then secure significant incentive payments under these settlement agreements. Escrow The Escrow Agent shall promptly report the receipt of any Governmental Entity’s endorsed Subdivision Settlement Participation Forms and Colorado MOUs to the Colorado Attorney General’s Office and to the law firm of Keller Rohrback L.L.P. These documents shall be released by the Escrow Agent to the Colorado Attorney General’s Office if and when the Escrow Agent is notified by the Attorney General’s Office and Keller Rohrback that that the threshold 95% participation levels have been reached for both the Distributor Settlement and the J&J Settlement, as further described below. If by December 29, 2021, the Escrow Agent has not received notification that the threshold 95% levels have been reached for both the Distributor Settlement and the J&J Settlements, then the documents being escrowed shall be returned to the Governmental Entities and all copies shall be destroyed. 111 Distributor Settlement The Attorney General’s Office and Keller Rohrback shall jointly submit a written notification to the Escrow Agent when it has been determined that the percentages of populations eligible for Incentives B and C, as described in Sections IV.F.2 and IV.F.3 of the Distributor Settlement, are each 95% or more. For purposes of this Escrow Agreement, the percentages of populations eligible for Incentives B and C under the Distributor Settlement will include governmental entities that sign a Subdivision Settlement Participation Form subject to an escrow agreement and governmental entities that sign a Subdivision Settlement Participation Form that is not subject to an escrow agreement. J&J Settlement The Attorney General’s Office and Keller Rohrback shall jointly submit a written notification to the Escrow Agent when it has been determined that the Participation or Case-Specific Resolution Levels for Incentives B and C, as described in Sections V.E.5 and V.E.6 of the J&J Settlement, are each 95% or more. For purposes of this Escrow Agreement, the percentages or populations eligible for Incentives B and C under the J&J Settlement will include governmental entities that sign a Subdivision Settlement Participation Form subject to an escrow agreement and governmental entities that sign a Subdivision Settlement Participation Form that is not subject to an escrow agreement. Colorado Subdivision Name ____________________ _________________________ ________________ Authorized Signature Date 4849-3731-1228, v. 8 112 1 REGULAR MEETING ASPEN CITY COUNCIL OCTOBER 12, 2021 At 5:00 p.m. Mayor Torre called the regular meeting to order with Councilors Doyle, Hauenstein, Mesirow and Richards in person. SCHEDULED PUBLIC APPEARANCES: Mayor Torre introduced Steve Aitken, Director of Golf and the Aspen High School Golf Team. Mr. Aitken said something really special happened this past week. The Aspen High School Golf Team are State 3A Champions. This is really a culmination of Aspen Junior Golf and the City of Aspen Golf Club and the school district. This golf team won back in 2018 and again this year. He introduced the coaches Coulter Young, Tom Doyle, Brian DallaBetta and Mary Wolf. Mary has brought this team to a state champ title for the second time in three years. He introduced the team: Senior Lucas Lee, Senior Will Stiller, Junior Sky Sosna, Senior NicPevny senior. He said Nic got a hole in one in 2019. In 2020, he won the individual state championship. In 2021, he shot 69. He will play golf at the University of Denver next fall. Congratulations to the team. It’s a big honor to be up here talking about them and elevation for this community. Mayor Torre read the proclamation and had the team come stand in front of them. Photos were taken of council and the team. CITIZEN COMMENTS: Sarah Pletts – Ms. Pletts handed out a piece she wrote and read in support of the arts question on the ballot. By supporting and mentoring creative and sensitive people is how to keep this going and she’s grateful for John, Torre and Skippy to bring this up and is also thankful for Rachel and Ward as well. Being an artist has gone awry over the past several years. She’s asking to set up a true arts endowment. The best is yet to come. CONSENT CALENDAR: Councilor Richards motioned to approve, Councilor Mesirow seconded. Roll call vote: Doyle, yes; Hauenstein, yes; Mesirow, yes; Richards, yes; Torre, yes. 5-0, motion carried. COUNCIL MEMBER COMMENTS: Councilor Hauenstein started off by expressing his appreciation for attending the CML conference in Denver last week and recapped the highlights. He said the best session for him was one called the hero effect with Kevin Bommer. For him, it was perfection of a presentation. He said there was discussion of electric vehicles, and he wants to gauge the council on having a trackless tram presentation and their interest. He sees as a real possibility for the future. Peter Newmanwould come present to them pro bono. The council said they have interest in hearing a presentation. Councilor Hauenstein said they are all concerned with mental health in the community, and it’s been since 2017 that they have had a free presentation for the community. It takes courage to engage and inject yourself into someone’s life, but if they are talking suicide, you must engage them. Everyone wants to participate in this as a community event. He said he would like for Sara to orchestrate it. He sent out a series of questions he would like to have addressed. Hewould love to have two events a year to address mental health in Aspen. Mayor Torre said the council spoke about this subject last week. He said after talking to Sara, she wants more specifics on what we want to achieve, etc. along with a basic framework. We spoke about a free 113 2 REGULAR MEETING ASPEN CITY COUNCIL OCTOBER 12, 2021 community gathering addressing the issues and would like to see this happen sooner than later. It’s good timing to hold this before ski season kicks in. There is collaboration with the county to make sure the production and content is helpful. We’re looking for that community connection and “we are here for you” messaging. Community training to identify someone in need also could be another idea. We need to normalize the conversation around depression and thoughts of suicide and possibly have peer groups to continue so that it’s not a onetime subject. Set up a continuing effort. We want to leave today’s meeting with a little bit of direction. Councilor Richards thanked Mayor Torre and Ward for batting this back and forth and working on it. She wants to support this, but she is really concerned with making sure they do it right. It should be more of a full county; multiple municipality effort and we should be taking more time to organize it. Maybe do a kickoff in November, and then organize a couple bigger events. Any one of these topics could be a full 2- hour meeting. ACRA, Ski Co, Aspen Valley Hospital, should all be involved. She’d like to hear from the APD and the sheriff as well. We need to hear all groups including Mountain Family Health. She wants to target it in a way to think about who is going to attend. She wants to work with the professionals to tell us how to get the right people in the room or the message continuing to go out. Mayor Torre said he likes having partners in this, and likes having involvement, but he thinks including all the groups Rachel mentioned, is having too many people involved. He spoke about optimizing the media coverage. We want to figure out how to have the launch and then continue on with it. He wants to see something done sooner than later. Councilor Doyle said our biggest hurdle is that we have so many avenues for people to get help and we’re not reaching the people who need it most and that’s what we need the answer to. That is the goal. Thank you to Torre and Ward for spearheading this and now is an important time especially. Councilor Mesirow thanked Ward and Torre. Your comments today really demonstrate you doing the work on a lot of issues. It’s amazing. Torre is doing amazing bringing everyone’s vision forward. Rachel, you bring decades of experience. He 1000% supports this idea. We don’t know the right way to do this, but simply setting the intention of bringing it forward is good. The city is playing the organizer, bringing in funds and locating a space and providing the box. We will empower the appropriate people to facilitate; the Hope Center, Cackie and the kids, Pathfinders. We need to provide connection because these things are all caused by disconnection. He suggested a mental health fair. Mayor Torre said he liked the mental health fair idea. Councilor Mesirow said it could be a choose your own adventure and let the community build its own soup. Mayor Torre said council has a hope for convening stakeholders, working towards a program or some community outreach campaign. There is an idea of gathering at the Wheeler but also looking to you to figure out what program looks best there. He asked what more she needs from them. Ms. Ott asked Mr. True if a motion should be used so that she can carry this to partners and articulate that to them. She suggests that she will take a stab of what that statement is and if it’s right or wrong, she will inquire individually. She doesn’t want to craft a motion on the fly. Mr. True said they could do a formal motion or a resolution at a later meeting. 114 3 REGULAR MEETING ASPEN CITY COUNCIL OCTOBER 12, 2021 Ms. Ott said she wants a written statement to make sure she’s captured the essence. She said council still has $15,000 for funding that has not been designated for use by the council and we are getting down to the last few weeks of the year. Mayor Torre asked about using the tobacco tax. She explained to the rest of the council besides Councilor Hauenstein, who was here in 2017, that the tobacco tax dollars were meant to be for a regranting program. Councilor Richards suggested having a special meeting next week. Ms. Ott said she doesn’t need a special meeting; they can add it to the agenda of a work session next week. Councilor Doyle touched on some of the CML sessions that he attended last week. Mayor Torre announced that it’s Guest Services Appreciation month. ACRA has sponsored a best guest service staff member which people can vote for on the Aspen Time website. ACRA is also sponsoring the “surprise and delight” visits. They will be surprising businesses in town and presenting them with tokens of appreciation. Lastly, ballots for the county election have arrived at your mailing address, so please be sure to vote in the Pitkin County election. Councilor Mesirow said he will be attending a program in California for the week. He is nervous but looking forward to it. Second thing, this weekend he went to a gathering in Newark, New Jersey. It’s called “Breakout Today”. It’s about seeing a city through the eyes of the people changing it. It’s a very diverse group. Some of the people come from very rough areas and are amazing changemakers. It was a stark experience for him. The sense of possibility and “get in and do” was so palpable and made him realize what the world would be like ifwe can start to connect these things. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: Ms. Ott said everything is in place for the changes at the Wheeler Opera House regarding vaccines and testing, effective this Friday. Because of the meeting schedule for budgets, we moved the EOTC prep meeting to be on the regular meeting agenda for October 26 th. She’s speaking with water department about drought conditions, and they are likely to bring a resolution to council on the 26 th to change to stage 1 restrictions. We’re losing some eligibility under stage 2, but we’re not out of the drought by any means though. John Krueger has given us his retirement date and will be with us through the end of the year. We are sucking every minute out of him until then, and he’s been a great sport about it. When Paul Schultz comes back down, give him a high 5. He’s been named as one of the volunteers of the year by Pitkin County. He supports many of our special events here in town. Councilor Richards saidthey should honor him at the next regular meeting. Ms. Ott said the state ballot questions all have their own nuance. She asked council if they would like an update and they all said yes. Ms. Ott said she will have Ron Leblanc help Tara Nelson with the updates. As for the new city hall timeline, furniture is beginning to arrive. We are getting very close. The last week of October, the people at the Mill Street building will move. The first week of November, the city staff who are leaving the Armory will move. There is some equipment that Grassroots needs that will not be ready. Let’s think about it and we can talk one on one about that. She is still in negotiations with Pitkin County to use some of the Armory building. She thinks it’s an amenable option and will take some planning on both parts but will create some consistency for them. She’s proposing to bring back in 2022, some options about public process for this building. We’re 115 4 REGULAR MEETING ASPEN CITY COUNCIL OCTOBER 12, 2021 spending time doing research on the staff side to bring some options back to get a timeline going. There is design money in the budget for 2022. She will have an official opening day sometime next week. She thinks the building will be CO’d the second week of November. Councilor Mesirow asked if we’re including Jackie Long in the thought process for the Armory. Ms. Ott said it’s up to Pitkin Cunty to decide if they want to sublease etc. Councilor Richards suggested a vacancy at the Red Brick for nonprofits. Ms. Ott gave some suggested information for a path forward for Jackie. She also explained the process of how rooms are rented when they become available at the Red Brick. Ms. Ott reminded them of how the schedule works towards the end of the year. We will have abbreviated office hours the Wednesday prior to Thanksgiving. Christmas eve and New Year’s Eve are the normal recognized holiday dates and no early closings. Council meetings will wrap up on December 14th. You will have a housing summit on the 5th and 6 th, and a regular meeting on the 7 th. January 10 th will be the first meeting in 2022. Councilor Richards motioned; Councilor Hauenstein seconded. Roll call vote: Doyle, yes; Hauenstein, yes; Mesirow, yes; Richards, yes; Torre, yes. 5-0, motion carried. ______________________________ City Clerk, Nicole Henning 116 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Torre and Aspen City Council THROUGH: Phillip Supino, Community Development Director FROM: Sarah Yoon, Preservation Planner; Community Development MEMO DATE: October 18, 2021 MEETING DATE: October 26, 2021 RE: Call Up Notice, HPC approval for 135 W. Francis – Conceptual Major Development, Relocation, Setback Variations, and a Floor Area Bonus, HPC Resolution #13, Series of 2021 APPLICANT: Francis Street Holdings LLC REPRESENTATIVE: Kim Raymond Architecture + Interiors LOCATION: Street Address: 135 W. Francis Street The “Aspen Extreme” House Legal Description: Lot A and the West One-Half of Lot B, Block 56, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado Parcel Identification: PID# 2735-124-21-001 CURRENT ZONING & USE: R-6 (Medium-Density Residential); Duplex, may not be legally established PROPOSED USE: Single-family home PROCESS SUMMARY: Certain land use approvals granted by HPC or P&Z require that Council be notified of the decision through a brief staff summary. The notification is not a public hearing and no applicant presentation or public comment has been accepted in the past. During the Call Up Notice, City Council may uphold the HPC or P&Z decision. Alternatively, Council may request more detailed information be provided through a presentation by staff and the applicant at a future meeting. After hearing the additional project description, Council may uphold the boards’ decision or may remand it to require reconsideration of specific issues at a new public hearing. HPC’s or P&Z’s decision on remand shall be final. BACKGROUND: 135 W. Francis is a historically designated landmark on a 4,500 sf corner lot in the R-6 zone district. A Victorian era home is located on this property. Significant alterations were made to the historic home as part of a 1980s remodel, however, the 1904 Sanborn Map reveals that the historic home still occupies the original location on the site. The property’s historical significance was further enhanced when it was featured in the 1993 film Aspen Extreme, where T.J. sits in a tree swing while courting local radio D.J. Robin. Site Locator Map – 135 W. Francis Street 135 117 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The proposal for Conceptual Major Development includes the removal of all non-historic alterations and additions. The historic home will be restored using historic maps, photos and physical evidence. Excavation underneath the resource will trigger Relocation, but the historic home will put back in its historic location on the site. The Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) reviewed three separate design iterations of this project before it was finally approved with conditions. Approval was granted to excavate a basement addition and construct a new addition to the rear of the property. The new addition meets relevant Design Guidelines and successfully maintains the historic home’s prominence on the lot. The request for a rear yard setback variation is directly associated with keeping the historic landmark in its original location. As a corner lot, maintaining this contextual relationship was considered an important character defining feature that needed to be preserved. A 60 s.f. floor area bonus and setback variations were granted to the proposed design. Staff supported the proposal with conditions at the third public hearing and HPC approved the project with a unanimous vote of 4-0 on September 22nd. Staff recommends Council uphold HPC’s decision. Figure 2 – Approved West Elevation (viewed from N. 1st Street) FINANCIAL IMPACTS: N/A ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: N/A ALTERNATIVES: N/A RECOMMENDED MOTION: “I move to uphold HPC’s approval for 135 W. Francis – Conceptual Major Development, Relocation, Setback Variations, and Floor Area Bonus.” CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: _______________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________. Figure 1 – 135 W. Francis, 2021 118 EXHIBITS: A – HPC memo, September 22, 2021 B – HPC approved plans C – Draft HPC meeting minutes, September 22, 2021 D – HPC Resolution #13, Series of 2021 119 Page 1 of 7 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | P: 970.920.5197 | cityofaspen.com MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission FROM: Sarah Yoon, Historic Preservation Planner THROUGH: Amy Simon, Planning Director MEETING DATE: September 22, 2021 RE: 135 W. Francis Street – Conceptual Major Development, Relocation, Setback Variations and Floor Area Bonus, CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING APPLICANT /OWNER: Francis Street Holdings LLC REPRESENTATIVE: Kim Raymond Architecture + Interiors LOCATION: Street Address: 135 W. Francis Street Legal Description: Lot A and the West One-Half of Lot B, Block 56, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado Parcel Identification Number: PID# 2735-124-21-001 CURRENT ZONING & USE R-6 (Moderate-Density Residential); Duplex, may not be legally established PROPOSED ZONING & USE: Single family home SUMMARY: The applicant requests approval for Conceptual Major Development to demolish the existing non-historic addition, relocate the historic resource on a new basement foundation and construct a new addition to the rear of the property. Setback variations and a floor area bonus of 60 s.f. are requested for this proposal. As a historically designated landmark, this project is exempt from Residential Design Standards Review (RDS). STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval with conditions listed on page 6 of this memo for the proposed design. Site Locator Map – 135 W. Francis Street 135 120 Page 2 of 7 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | P: 970.920.5197 | cityofaspen.com BACKGROUND: 135 W. Francis Street is a 4,500 s.f. corner lot in the R-6 zone district that contains a Victorian era miner’s cabin. This property was designated historic via Ordinance No.77-1981. Shortly after its designation, the current addition was approved and completed in 1984. Building permit files indicate changes occurred to the south elevation of the historic resource around 1969, but more significant changes were made during the 1980s remodel and expansion. Exterior alterations occurred over time, however, according to the 1904 Sanborn map (Figure 2), the home appears to occupy the original location on the site. Currently there is one other historic property to the east that aligns in terms of front yard setback with this property along West Francis Street. REQUEST OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION (HPC) The Applicant is requesting the following land use approvals: • Major Development (Section 26.415.070.D) to demolish the non-historic addition from the 1980s and construct a new addition to the rear of the property. • Relocation (Section 26.415.090) to lift the historic home and place it on a new basement foundation but maintain the same historic location on the site. • Setback Variation (Section 26.415.110.C) request for the new addition, above and below grade. • Floor Area Bonus (Section 26.415.110.F) request for a 60 s.f. floor area bonus for the proposed design and restoration efforts. The Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) is the final review authority, however, this project is subject to Call-up Notice by City Council. Figure 1 – 135 W. Francis, 2021 Figure 2 – Sanborn Map, 1904 Figure 3 – 135 W. Francis, July 1963 Source: Aspen Historical Society 121 Page 3 of 7 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | P: 970.920.5197 | cityofaspen.com PROJECT SUMMARY: The applicant proposes to remove the impactful addition from the 1980s and restore the south elevation of the historic resource. Since the project is a corner lot, three of the four elevations are clearly exposed and visible to the public which makes design compatibility of critical importance. The applicant proposes to maintain the location of the historic home on the lot. The proposed new addition is connected to the historic resource with a 10’ long connecting element. The applicant requests setback variations for the rear and west side yards and a 60 s.f. floor area bonus. STAFF COMMENTS: Following the July 28th HPC hearing, the applicant redesigned the project to address the comments related to relocation and building form. The revised proposal maintains the historic home’s setback relationship to the lot and reduces the length of the connecting element to 10’. The form of the new addition utilizes gable roofs that relate to the historic home. To maintain the original site placement of the resource, rear yard setback variations were slightly increased so the new addition could be appropriately distanced from the resource. Overall, staff finds the revised design meets the Design Guidelines and applicable land use code criteria, but staff recommends HPC further discuss the wing wall architectural detail on the west elevation of the new addition and the overall compatibility of new roof form. Staff recommends HPC further discuss the following topics in more detail. 1. Site Planning & Relocation & Parking: The applicant proposes to lift the historic resource to excavate the basement and create positive drainage once the resource is set on the new foundation. The Design Guidelines support slight changes to the finished grade to address drainage issues, but the applicant must clearly demonstrate the level of change for review (Design Guideline 9.4). If there is evidence of a historic stone foundation it must be restored, otherwise, the new foundation may be a simple concrete finish or a foundation clad with painted metal flashing (Design Guideline 9.5). Lightwells are proposed for the livability of the subgrade space. The lightwell adjacent to the historic home does not abut the foundation as designed. Additional details are required for this light well and it will need to be screened from the street according to Design Guideline 9.6. The stormwater mitigation plan calls for a water quality vault and 8” drain basin grates along the east side of the property. The Design Guidelines require minimal visual impact of elements associated with stormwater mitigation and drainage at the foreground of the resource. In addition, the applicant will need to coordinate with the Parks and Engineering Departments about their comments to site impacts on existing trees. See Exhibit B for more details. This property does not appear to currently have any code compliant parking spaces. According to the code, a single-family residence must provide two code compliant parking spaces (Code Section 26.515.040). If the project does not trigger the 40% demo threshold, the applicant may retain the existing non-conformity related to parking. The proposed design provides for one compliant parking space in the proposed one car garage. 2. Historic Landmark – Restoration: A preservation plan will be required to call out the existing conditions and the proposed restoration of the historic resource. Staff supports the applicant’s proposal to restore important architectural features such as the chimney and the secondary porch with the supporting historic documents as a guide for the restoration. As part of the preservation plan, additional evidence must be provided for the front porch entry that is currently accessed from the side. The 122 Page 4 of 7 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | P: 970.920.5197 | cityofaspen.com existing non-historic addition constructed in the 80s will be removed and the areas covered by non- historic material will be restored in accordance with the design guidelines. Staff supports the removal of the detrimental non-historic addition and the restoration of historic home guided by historic maps, photos and physical evidence. 3. New Addition – Form, Materials and Fenestration: The proposed new addition is a two-story tall structure behind the historic home along the alley. The height of the new addition closely relates to the height of the historic home and the flat roof form has been replaced with gable roofs where visible from the street. While staff finds the gable roof solution to be more in line with the Design Guidelines, a sizable portion of the proposed roof is a flat roof deck. Staff requests HPC discuss the design of the proposed roof forms in its entirety. The building footprint of the new addition is minimal in size and the proposed material and fenestraion relate to the historic resource. To create articulation in the new addition, the applicant proposes wing walls on the west elevation that project into the side yard setback. Staff requests this detail be discussed in conjuction with the request for the side yard setback. Figure 4 – Proposed West Elevation (along N. 1st Street) from July 28th Figure 5 – Revised West Elevation (along N. 1st Street) 4. Setback Variations & Floor Area Bonus: Setback variations and floor area bonuses are benefits available to historic properties granted by the HPC. They are site-specific approvals that are tied to a design reviewed for compatibility and appropriateness. Setback Variations: The applicant requests a reduction of the 10’ rear yard setback requirement for the livable space above and below grade. The building footprint of the garage encroaches into the rear 123 Page 5 of 7 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | P: 970.920.5197 | cityofaspen.com yard setback by 2’-8” where 5’-0” is required. This request is directly linked to the historic home staying in its historic location on the lot. The livable space above and below grade require a setback reduction of approximately 7’-4” as designed. The livable space above grade is specifically the deck on top of the garage, which does not create additional mass. Staff supports the requests associated with the rear yard setback because it mitigates adverse impacts to the historic resource. The west side yard setback request is for the extruded wing walls on the new addition. This design element is visible from the west elevation and provides articulation, however, when viewed from the north (front) elevation, it has some visual impact. Staff recommends HPC discuss the appropriateness of this design detail and the request for the side yard setback variation. See ExhibitA.3 for staff findings. Floor Area Bonus: The applicant has pointed out different areas for restoration of the historic resource that include the restoration of a secondary porch as seen in historic photos and the removal of an impactful non-historic addition. A 4,500 s.f. lot is eligible for a maximum of a 250 s.f. bonus, of which the applicant requests 60 s.f of additional floor area for the proposed design. Staff finds the request for a floor area bonus is met with the revised design and the plans for restoration of the historic resource. REFERRAL COMMENTS: The application was referred out to other City departments who have requirements that will significantly affect the permit review. Please see Exhibit B for full comments. Zoning Department: 1. Provide zoning summary sheet and update dimensional requirements form. 2. Review site plan comments and provide clarifying information: dimensions, projections in the setbacks, proposed topography, etc. 3. Confirm floor area calculations on sheets A.1.05-A 1.07. 4. Provide height over topography sheet. 5. Provide demolition calculations. 6. See comments on elevation sheets A.3.01-A.3.04. Parks Department: 1. Move water quality vault to the south to keep excavation away from the cottonwood. 2. Keep all stormwater piping out of driplines of trees, especially the cottonwoods in the NW corner. 3. Move window well in the SE corner to the south side of the house and use a one-sided pour for remaining window well. 4. Air-spading is required in driplines of all trees for curb and gutter and any other driplines that are impacted by activity. 5. Inspection of exposed roots by City Forester will be required before any root cutting can occur. 6. Fence post locations within the driplines of trees will need to be approved by the City Forester. 7. Irrigation of all grass and trees will be required throughout the project. 8. Remove Item 3 in Notes on Page C2. 9. Plan on enclosing most of the front and side yard with a 6' tree protection fence. 10. Carefully remove existing storm inlet and piping within the dripline of cottonwood. 11. Submit for a tree removal permit. 124 Page 6 of 7 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | P: 970.920.5197 | cityofaspen.com Building Department: 1. Fire sprinklers are required because the fire area exceeds 5,000 s.f. Exterior walls and projects will not need to be fire-rated because they are more than three feet from the property line. 2. Snow stops will be required at all roof pitches that shed onto walking and driving paths and into emergency escape and rescue opening window wells. 3. If edge of the spa is within 18” of the edge of roof deck, the guard around the spa is to be extended an additional 18”. Engineering Department (previous comments that may be applicable): 1. Major Development within the Urban Runoff Management Plan is triggered. The proposed water quality vault must be at least 10’ from the property corners. Infiltration vaults follow the same guidelines as a drywell. Variances may be requested by Engineering. 2. Confirm that the transformer capacity is sufficient for new the proposal. Work with City Electric to determine capacity. 3. Verify if the structure will have a fire suppression system and call out water service line size. 4. Engineering and Parks must examine excavation for the proposed water quality vault. No excavation is allowed within the right-of-way or tree drip lines of large trees. 5. Provide stabilization information for the proposed relocation of the historic resource at building permit. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends HPC continue this application with the following direction: 1.) Continue to work with the relevant City Departments regarding the preliminary stormwater mitigation and drainage plans for the site and clarify the anticipated visual impacts for the plan for Final Review. Minimize visible impacts of stormwater features in the foreground of the historic resource. 2.) Provide detailed roof plan showing the location of gutters, downspouts, snow clips and vents, for Final Review. 3.) Lightwell curb heights to be 6” or less in height. Provide curb height information for lightwell adjacent to the historic resource and appropriate screening will be required. 4.) Provide a detailed Preservation Plan including existing conditions documenting investigation of historic framing and proposed treatment, to be reviewed by staff and monitor prior to building permit submission. Special attention is required for the front entry porch as part of this plan. 5.) A 60 sf floor area bonus is granted for the approved design. 6.) The following setback variation for the proposed addition is granted: • 2’-8” rear yard setback reduction for the proposed garage, as represented in the approved application • 7’-4” rear yard setback reduction for the living spaces on the upper level and below grade, as represented in the approved application • 1’-0” west side yard setback reduction for extruded architectural features on the west elevation of the new addition • 1’-0” combined side yard setback reduction 7.) Provide financial assurances of $30,000 for the relocation of the historic home onto a new basement foundation, to be provided prior to building permit submission. 125 Page 7 of 7 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | P: 970.920.5197 | cityofaspen.com 8.) A development application for a Final Development Plan shall be submitted within one (1) year of the date of approval of a Conceptual Development Plan. Failure to file such an application within this time period shall render null and void the approval of the Conceptual Development Plan. The Historic Preservation Commission may, at its sole discretion and for good cause shown, grant a one-time extension of the expiration date for a Conceptual Development Plan approval for up to six (6) months provided a written request for extension is received no less than thirty (30) days prior to the expiration date. ATTACHMENTS: Resolution #____, Series of 2021 Exhibit A.1 – Historic Preservation Design Guidelines Criteria / Staff Findings Exhibit A.2 – Relocation Review Criteria / Staff Findings Exhibit A.3 – Setback Variations Review Criteria / Staff Findings Exhibit A.4 – Floor Area Bonus / Staff Findings Exhibit B – Referral Comments Exhibit C – Application 126 Scale: AS NOTED ISSUE SCHEMATIC DESIGN HPC CONCEPTUAL 1" ACTUAL IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE P R E C E D E N C E O V E R S C A L E D DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE . ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. A 0.1 9/2/21 GENERAL INFORMATION DATE www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-2252DI PAOLA RESIDENCE135 W. FRANCIS ST.ASPEN, COLORADO 8161101/21/21 02/12/21 CONTRACTOR - - STRUCTURAL ENGINEER - - CIVIL ENGINEER - - MECHANICAL ENGINEER - - 13 4 2 1 A7.1 LOCATION KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. 802 EAST COOPER AVE #4 ASPEN, CO 81611 970-925-2252 ARCHITECT DIPAOLA RESIDENCE ABBREVIATIONS MATERIAL LEGEND VICINITY MAP PROJECT TEAMAPPLICABLE CODES PROJECT DATA SHEET INDEX (CONTINUED) SHEET INDEXSYMBOL LEGEND Subdivision: CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN Block: 120 Lot: F & G PARCEL ID NUMBER: ZONING: LOT SIZE: BLDG USE: OCC. GROUP: CONST. TYPE: CLIMATE ZONE: FIRE SPRINKLERS: LAND USE CATEGORY: TOWNSHIP: RANGE: SECTION: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - PLT. S.T.D.SLOPE TO DRAIN A A.B. A.F.F. A.F.G. A/C ABC ABS ABV. ACB ACOU. ACT ADD. AG AHU AL. or ALUM. ALT. ANL ASPH. AVG AWG B.M. B.N. B.O. B.O.F. B.U. B/C BD. BLDG BLK. BLKG. BM. BR BRG. BRZ C.A.P. C.D. C.I.P. C.J. C.O. C.T. CAB CAM. CCTV CEM. CER CFM CH CKT. BKR. CL or C.L. CLG. CLKG. CLO. CLR. CMU CNTRD. COL. COMB. CONC. CONST. CONT. CONTR. CU d D.F. D.G. D.S. D/W DBL. DEMO DIA. or Ø DIAG. DIM. DL DN. DR E.A. E.F. E.J. E.N. E.W. EA. EL ELECT. ELEV. EMC EMT ENT EQ. EQUIP. EST. EVAP. EWC EXC EXH. EXIST. or E EXT. F.A. F.C. F.C.O. F.D. F.E. F.N. F.O. F.S. F/G FAB. FACP FDC FDN. FHC FIN. FL FLG. FLUOR. FP FTG. FURN. G.I. GA. GALV. GAR. GFCI GFI GL GLB GM GM GRC GYP. GYP. BD. H.B. H.C. H.M. H/C HDBD. HDW HGT. HOR. HTR HVAC HW HYD. I.C. I.D. I.F. ID IG IMC IMPG INCL. INSUL. INT. J-BOX JCT JT. K-D KD KO L.E.D. L.FT. LAM LAT. LAV LD. LIN. LINO. LT. LTG. LVL M.B. M.H. M.I. M.O. MAR. MAS. MAT'L MAX. MECH. MED. MFG. MFR. MIN. MISC. MOD MTL. MUL N.I.C. N.T.S. NCM NFC NLR. NO. NOM. O.C. O.D. O.H. O.I. O.R. OAI OH OPNG. OPPO. P.C. P.L. P.LAM. P.O.C. PERP. or PH or Ø PL. PLAS. PLUMB. PLYWD. PORC. PERF. PREFAB. PSF PSI PTN. PVC PWR. Q.T. QTY. R R.D.L. R.D.O. R.O. R.O.W. or R/W REF REF. REINF. REQ'D. RET. REV. RM RMV. S.C. S.D. S.O.V. S/L S/S SC SCHED. SECT. SES SH SHT'G. SIM. SPA. SPECS SPKR. SQ. FT. SQ. IN. STC STD. STL. SUSP. SW SYM SYS. T & G T.B. T.M.B. T.O. T.O.B. T.O.C. T.O.F. T.O.J. T.O.M. T.O.S. T.O.W. T.S. T.V. TEL. TH. THD. THK. THRU TLT. TRANS. TYP. UNF. UR V.B. V.I.F. VA VERT. WC WDW WCT WP WT. W/ W/O WD. W.I. YD. AMPERES ANCHOR BOLT ABOVE FINISHED FLOOR ABOVE FINISHED GRADE AIR CONDITIONING AGGREGATE BASE COURSE ACRYLONITRILE-BUTADIENE-STYRENE ABOVE ASBESTOS-CEMENT BOARD ACOUSTIC ACOUSTICAL CEILING TILE ADDITION or ADDENDUM ABOVE GRADE AIR HANDLER UNIT ALUMINUM ALTERNATE ANNEALED ASPHALT AVERAGE AMERICAN WIRE GAUGE ANGLE BENCH MARK BOUNDARY NAILING BOTTOM OF BOTTOM OF FOOTING BUILT UP BACK OF CURB BOARD BUILDING BLOCK BLOCKING BEAM BRASS BEARING BRONZE CONCRETE ASBESTOS PIPE CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS CAST IN PLACE CONTROL JOINT CLEAN OUT CERAMIC TILE CABINET CAMBER CLOSED CIRCUIT TELEVISION CEMENT CERAMIC CUBIC FEET PER MINUTE CHANNEL CIRCUIT BREAKER CENTERLINE CEILING CAULKING CLOSET CLEAR CONCRETE MASONRY UNIT CENTERED COLUMN COMBINATION CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION CONTINUOUS CONTRACTOR COPPER PENNY DRINKING FOUNTAIN DECOMPOSED GRANITE DOWN SPOUT DISHWASHER DOUBLE DEMOLITION DIAMETER DIAGONAL DIMENSION DEAD LOAD DOWN DOOR EXPANSION ANCHOR EXHAUST FAN EXPANSION JOINT END NAILING EACH WAY EACH ELEVATION "ELECTRIC, ELECTRICAL" ELEVATOR ELECTRICAL METALLIC CONDUIT ELECTRICAL METALLIC TUBING ELECTRICAL NON-METALLIC TUBING EQUAL EQUIPMENT ESTIMATE EVAPORATIVE COOLER ELECTRIC DRINKING COOLER EXCAVATE EXHAUST EXISTING EXTERIOR FIRE ALARM FAN COIL FLOOR CLEAN OUT FLOOR DRAIN FIRE EXTINGUISHER FIELD NAILING FACE OF FLOOR SINK FIBERGLASS FABRICATE FIRE ALARM CONTROL PANEL FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTION FOUNDATION FIRE HOSE CABINET FINISH FLOOR FLOORING FLUORESCENT FIRE PROOF FOOTING FURNISH GALVANIZED IRON GAUGE GALVANIZED GARAGE GROUND FAULT CIRCUIT INTERRUPTER GROUND FAULT INTERRUPTER GLASS GLUE LAMINATED BEAM GRADE MARK GATE VALVE GALVANIZED RIGID TUBING GYPSUM GYPSUM BOARD HOSE BIBB HOLLOW CORE HOLLOW METAL HANDICAPPED HARDBOARD HARDWARE HEIGHT HORIZONTAL HEATER HEATING, VENTILATING & AIR CONDITIONING HOT WATER HYDRAULIC INTERCOM OUTLET INSIDE DIAMETER INSIDE FACE IDENTIFICATION ISOLATED GROUND INTERMEDIATE METALLIC CONDUIT IMPREGNATED INCLUDE, INCLUSIVE INSULATION INTERIOR JUNCTION BOX JUNCTION JOINT KNOCK DOWN KILN DRIED KNOCK OUT LIGHT EMITTING DIODE LINEAR FEET LAMINATE LATERAL LAVATORY LEAD LINEAR LINOLEUM LIGHT LIGHTING LAMINATED VENEER LUMBER MACHINE BOLT MANHOLE MALLEABLE IRON MASONRY OPENING MARBLE MASONRY MATERIAL MAXIMUM MECHANICAL MEDIUM MANUFACTURING MANUFACTURER MINIMUM MISCELLANEOUS MODULAR METAL MULLION NOT IN CONTRACT NOT TO SCALE NON-CORROSIVE METAL NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION NAILER NUMBER NOMINAL ON CENTER OUTSIDE DIAMETER OVER HANG ORNAMENTAL IRON OUTSIDE RADIUS OUTSIDE AIR INTAKE OVER HEAD OPENING OPPOSITE PRECAST CONCRETE PROPERTY LINE PLASTIC LAMINATE POINT OF CONNECTION PERPENDICULAR PHASE PLASTER PLATE PLASTIC PLUMBING PLYWOOD PORCELAIN PERFORATED PREFABRICATED POUNDS PER SQUARE FOOT POUNDS PER SQUARE INCH PARTITION POLYVINYLCLORIDE POWER QUARRY TILE QUANTITY RADIUS ROOF DRAIN LEADER ROOF DRAIN OVERFLOW ROUGH OPENING RIGHT OF WAY REFRIGERATOR REFERENCE REINFORCED REQUIRED RETURN REVISION ROOM REMOVE SOLID CORE SMOKE DETECTOR SHUT OFF VALVE SKYLIGHT STAINLESS STEEL SELF CLOSING SCHEDULE SECTION SERVICE ENTRANCE SECTION SHEET SHEATHING SIMILAR SPACE SPECIFICATIONS SPEAKER SQUARE FEET SQUARE INCHES SOUND TRANSMISSION CLASS STANDARD STEEL SUSPENDED SWITCH SYMMETRICAL SYSTEM TONGUE AND GROOVE THROUGH BOLT TELEPHONE MOUNTING BOARD TOP OF TOP OF BEAM TOP OF CURB TOP OF FOOTING TOP OF JOIST TOP OF MASONRY TOP OF SLAB TOP OF WALL TUBE STEEL TELEVISION OUTLET TELEPHONE THRESHOLD THREADED THICK THROUGH TOILET TRANSFORMER TYPICAL UNFINISHED URINAL VAPOR BARRIER VERIFY IN FIELD VOLT AMPERE VERTICAL WATER CLOSET WINDOW WAINSCOT WEATHER PROOF WEIGHT WITH WITHOUT WOOD WROUGHT IRON YARD VCT VINYL COMPOSITION TILE JOISTJST. ALL CODES REFERENCED ARE TO BE USED AS AMENDED BY THE STATE OF COLORADO AND LOCAL JURISDICTION. NOTE: CODES BELOW ARE APPLICABLE ONLY IN AREAS. BECAUSE THE SCOPE OF WORK IS LESS THAN 40%, THE PROJECT IS NOT SUBJECT TO UPDATE TO CURRENT CODE -2015 INTERNATIONAL RESIDENTIAL CODE -2015 INTERNATION MECHANICAL CODE -2015 INTERNATIONAL PLUMBING CODE -2015 INTERNATIONAL FUEL & GAS CODE -2015 IECC (INTERNATIONAL ENERGY CONSERVATION CODE) - PITKIN COUNTY EFFICIENT BUILDING CODE -2014 NATIONAL ELECTRICAL CODE FINISH WOOD WOOD STUD BLOCKING STEEL STEEL STUD FRAMED WALL BATT INSULATION PLYWOOD CONCRETE STONE CMU SAND GRAVEL GWB COMPACTED SOIL SPRAY-FOAM INSULATION RIGID INSULATION GRID LINE BREAK LINE MATCH LINE REVISION A-701 ELEVATION MARKER SECTION MARKER DETAIL CUT DETAIL 1 A-501 ELEVATION D01 W01 ROOM NAME 101 INTERIOR ELEVATION MARKER ELEVATION NUMBER SHEET NUMBER SECTION NUMBER SHEET NUMBER DETAIL NUMBER SHEET NUMBER SHEET NUMBER ELEVATION NUMBER SPOT ELEVATION DOOR MARK WINDOW MARK ROOM NAME AND NUMBER 1 A-301 1 A-201 11 MAXIMUM FLOOR AREA: - - SQ FT ALLOWABLE DECK (15% OF MAX FLOOR AREA): - - SQ FT FRONT SETBACK: 10'-0" SIDE SETBACKS: 5'-0" REAR SETBACK: 10'-0" MAXIMUM HEIGHT (PRINCIPAL STRUCTURE) (FT.): 25'-0" 135 W. FRANCIS STREET ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 127 Scale: AS NOTED ISSUE SCHEMATIC DESIGN HPC CONCEPTUALDI PAOLA RESIDENCE135 W. FRANCIS ST.ASPEN, COLORADO 816111" ACTUAL IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE P R E C E D E N C E O V E R S C A L E D DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE . ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. A.1.01 9/2/21 EXISTING: SITE PLAN DATE 01/21/21 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-225202/12/21123456 BBCCEEDDAAE1E17'-2"14'-4"1°PROPERTY LINEGRAVEL PARKINGEDGE OF PAVEMENTNORTH 1ST STREET 75.45 ROW EDGE OF PAVEMENT 5' SETBACK LINE10' SETBACK LINEN SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 128 Scale: AS NOTED ISSUE SCHEMATIC DESIGN HPC CONCEPTUALDI PAOLA RESIDENCE135 W. FRANCIS ST.ASPEN, COLORADO 816111" ACTUAL IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE P R E C E D E N C E O V E R S C A L E D DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE . ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. A.1.02 9/2/21 PROPOSED: SITE PLAN DATE 01/21/21 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-225202/12/2112345 BBCCEEDDFFGG07HHAA6II0.52A 3.12A 3.12A 3.12A 3.45'-2 3/4"4'-11 1/2"18'-4 1/4"10'-0"47'-1 1/2"4'-4"10'-0" 2'-5 1/2"5'-0"1'-10"31'-0"2'-2"5'-0"14'-4"7'-2"DOWNSPOUT DOWNSPOUT DOWNSPOUT DOWNSPOUTDOWNSPOUT PROPERTY LINE5' SETBACK LINE10' SETBACK LINEGRAVEL PARKINGEDGE OF PAVEMENTEDGE OF PAVEMENT788678877888788710' SETBACK LINEPROPERTY LINE3.5DOWNSPOUT FENCE NN SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 129 Scale: AS NOTED ISSUE SCHEMATIC DESIGN HPC CONCEPTUAL 1" ACTUAL IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE P R E C E D E N C E O V E R S C A L E D DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE . ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. A.1.05 9/2/21 EXISTING FAR CALCULATIONS DATE www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-2252DI PAOLA RESIDENCE135 W. FRANCIS ST.ASPEN, COLORADO 8161101/21/21 02/12/21 RG FRGF WDR2A 3.12A 3.12 A 3.1 1'-0"2'-2 3/4"1'-0"5'-0"2 A 3.1 GAS METER PROPERTY LINE5' SETBACK LINE 10' SETBACK LINE 10' SETBACK LINE PROPERTY LINE 1,612 sq ft 122 sq ft 2A 3.12A 3.12 A 3.1 2 A 3.18"8"2'-4"5'MASTER BEDROOM BEDROOM HALL BATH OPEN TO BELOW LOFT 5' SETBACK LINE 10' SETBACK LINE 10' SETBACK LINE PROPERTY LINE 515 sq ft 129 sq ft SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"2 EXISTING MAIN LEVEL FAR SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"3 EXISTING UPPER LEVEL FAR 130 Scale: AS NOTED ISSUE SCHEMATIC DESIGN HPC CONCEPTUALDI PAOLA RESIDENCE135 W. FRANCIS ST.ASPEN, COLORADO 816111" ACTUAL IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE P R E C E D E N C E O V E R S C A L E D DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE . ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. A.1.06 9/2/21 PROPOSED FAR CALCULATIO NS DATE 01/21/21 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-225202/12/21 7 5 4 3.5 3 2 1 0 318 sq ft 32 sq ft1. 5. H G F E D C B A 896 sq ft 2.23 sq ft23 sq ft 0 1 2 3 3.5 4 5 7 350 sq ft 3. A B C D E F G H 518 sq ft328 sq ft 4.6.22 sq ft 22 sq ft W/DW/D2A 3.12A 3.12 A 3.1 1 2 3 6 5 4 2 A 3.1 2,876 sq ft SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"1 FAR ELEVATION - NORTH SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"2 FAR ELEVATION - EAST SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"3 FAR ELEVATION - SOUTH SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"4 FAR ELEVATION - WEST SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"1 PROPOSED LOWER LEVEL FAR 131 Scale: AS NOTED ISSUE SCHEMATIC DESIGN HPC CONCEPTUAL 1" ACTUAL IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE P R E C E D E N C E O V E R S C A L E D DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE . ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. A.1.07 9/2/21 PROPOSED FAR CALCULATIONS DATE www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-2252DI PAOLA RESIDENCE135 W. FRANCIS ST.ASPEN, COLORADO 8161101/21/21 02/12/21 81 sq ftF 2A 3.12A 3.12 A 3.1 2 A 3.1 1,540 sq ft 376 sq ft 121 sq ft 22 sq ft 2A 3.12A 3.12 A 3.1 2 A 3.1 DNUP(INTO BEDROOM)627 sq ft 169 sq ft 433 sq ft 2A 3.12A 3.12 A 3.1 2 A 3.1 DN ROOF TOP DECK 5' SETBACK LINE 10' SETBACK LINE 10' SETBACK LINE PROPERTY LINE 244 sq ft 84 sq ft SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"2 PROPOSED MAIN LEVEL FAR SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"3 PROPOSED UPPER LEVEL FAR SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"4 PROPOSED ROOFTOP DECK FAR 132 Scale: AS NOTED ISSUE SCHEMATIC DESIGN HPC CONCEPTUALDI PAOLA RESIDENCE135 W. FRANCIS ST.ASPEN, COLORADO 816111" ACTUAL IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE P R E C E D E N C E O V E R S C A L E D DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE . ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. A.2.02 9/2/21 EXISTING MAIN LEVEL PLAN DATE 01/21/21 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-225202/12/21RGFRGFWDRF123456 BBCCEEDDAAE1E17'-2"4'-4"10'-0"ENTRYENTRYPORCHPROPERTY LINE5' SETBACK LINE10' SETBACK LINEDININGROOMLIVINGROOMBEDROOMKITCHENLAUNDRYBATHROOMKITCHENLIVING/DININGBEDROOMBATHROOMWOOD DECKGRAVEL PARKINGEDGE OF PAVEMENTEDGE OF PAVEMENTWOODENTRYN SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 133 Scale: AS NOTED ISSUE SCHEMATIC DESIGN HPC CONCEPTUALDI PAOLA RESIDENCE135 W. FRANCIS ST.ASPEN, COLORADO 816111" ACTUAL IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE P R E C E D E N C E O V E R S C A L E D DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE . ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. A.2.03 9/2/21 EXISTING UPPER LEVEL PLAN DATE 01/21/21 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-225202/12/21123456 BBCCEEDDAAE1E1MASTERBEDROOM BEDROOM HALLBATHOPENTO BELOWLOFT5' SETBACK LINE10' SETBACK LINEN SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 134 Scale: AS NOTED ISSUE SCHEMATIC DESIGN HPC CONCEPTUALDI PAOLA RESIDENCE135 W. FRANCIS ST.ASPEN, COLORADO 816111" ACTUAL IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE P R E C E D E N C E O V E R S C A L E D DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE . ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. A.2.04 9/2/21 EXISTING ROOF PLAN DATE 01/21/21 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-225202/12/21123456 BBCCEEDDAAE1E1PROPERTY LINE5' SETBACK LINE10' SETBACK LINEN SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 135 Scale: AS NOTED ISSUE SCHEMATIC DESIGN HPC CONCEPTUALDI PAOLA RESIDENCE135 W. FRANCIS ST.ASPEN, COLORADO 816111" ACTUAL IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE P R E C E D E N C E O V E R S C A L E D DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE . ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. A.2.05 9/2/21 PROPOSED LOWER LEVEL PLAN DATE 01/21/21 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-225202/12/21 5A 5.35A 5.3W/DW/D12345BBCCEEDDFFGG07HHAA6II0.511 1/2"14'-11"5 1/2"13'-8 1/2"11 1/2"11 1/2" 15'-7 1/4" 5 1/2" 10'-0"3 1/2"6'-0"5 1/2"12'-1"5 1/2"5'-11"6'-0"11 1/2"3 1/2"24'-2"11 1/2"34'-6 1/2"84'-7 1/4"3 1/2"9'-11 1/2"7'-3 3/4"5 1/2"1'-9 3/4"12'-9 1/2"6'-10"31'-0"7'-2"3'-0"4'-0"12'-3"5'-9"6'-0"11 1/2"1'-3 1/4"13'-11 1/2"3 1/2"5'-9"3 1/2"13'-3"5 1/2"9'-1 1/4"3 1/2" 12'-5"3 1/2"12'-6 3/4"3 1/2"5'-5 1/2"5 1/2"9'-0"11 1/2"2"2 3/4"11 1/2"14'-1 3/8"3 1/2"5'-3 5/8"5 1/2"12'-5 1/2"11 1/2"2 3/4"5 1/2"3'-9"6'-1 3/4"3 1/2"6'-0 1/4"8'-11"3 1/2"3'-6 3/4"3 1/2"8'-10"5 1/2"1'-4 3/4"5'-2" 3 1/2" 10'-1 3/4" 6'-0" 3 1/2"3 1/2"2'-0"4'-10 1/4"3 1/2"10'-4 1/4"6'-0 1/2"3 1/2"8'-7"5 1/2"3'-5 1/2"10" 3'-0"10"8'-8 1/8"8'-5"10"3'-0"10" 5'-7 5/8"10"3'-0" 10"1'-11 1/4" 10"3'-0" 10"10"3'-0"3'-3 1/2"1'-11 1/4"16'-11"17'-7 1/2"5'-2 3/4"5'-0" 2'-4"2A 3.12A 3.12A 3.1GUEST MASTER BATHGUEST MASTERBEDROOMGUEST MASTERCLOSETGYMLAUNDRYKID'S PLAY ROOMMECHANICALWETBARUPTHEATREBATH 2CLOSET 2BATH 3BATH 4BEDROOM 2BEDROOM 3BEDROOM 4(BUNK ROOMELECTRICALCLOSET / THEATEREQUIPMENTTVCLOSET 4CLOSET 3LINENPOWDEROWNER'SCLOSETBENCHBENCH1A 5.31A 5.32A 5.32A 5.33A 5.33A 5.36A 5.36A 5.37A 5.37A 5.38A 5.38A 5.32A 3.43.54A 5.34A 5.3NSCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 136 Scale: AS NOTED ISSUE SCHEMATIC DESIGN HPC CONCEPTUALDI PAOLA RESIDENCE135 W. FRANCIS ST.ASPEN, COLORADO 816111" ACTUAL IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE P R E C E D E N C E O V E R S C A L E D DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE . ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. A.2.06 9/2/21 PROPOSED MAIN LEVEL PLAN DATE 01/21/21 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-225202/12/21 5A 5.35A 5.3F12345BBCCEEDDFFGG07HHAA6II0.52A 3.12A 3.12A 3.15 1/2" 5 1/2"10'-0"4'-0"3'-9 1/4"5 1/2"11'-4"5 1/2"5'-3 1/2"5 1/2"5'-6 1/2"5 1/2"14'-2 1/4"2'-0"3'-2"3'-0"3'-6 7/8"13'-6 1/8"2'-6"2'-0" 18'-0 1/8"6 1/8"5'-2 7/8"7'-11 1/8"6'-1"3'-8 5/8"9'-10 3/4"11'-8 3/8"3'-0"3'-0"4'-0" 5'-5 1/2" 17'-5 1/4"5 1/2" 6'-11 1/2"17'-10 3/4" 8'-8 5/8" 2'-0 5/8" 16'-0 1/8" 5 1/2"5 1/2"2'-6 1/2"5 1/2"3'-6 1/2"2'-9 1/4"2'-5 1/2"4'-11 1/2"18'-4 1/4"10'-0"25'-10 1/2"10'-0 1/2"5'-11 5/8"5'-3"4'-4"10'-0"8'-4 1/2"5 1/2"17'-8 1/2"5 1/2"1'-0"5 1/2"21'-1 1/2"3 1/2"4'-0"5 1/2"9'-7"5 1/2"5'-6 1/8"5 1/2"3'-3 1/2"1'-11 1/4"1'-10"3'-0"4'-0"12'-3"5'-9"6'-0"2'-2"5'-0"5'-0"17'-7 1/2"5'-2 3/4"16'-11"1'-0"2'-2 3/4"1'-0"5'-0"5 1/2"9'-4 1/8"5 1/2"5'-7 7/8"5 1/2"5 1/2"6'-5 1/2" 20'-9 1/2"5 1/2"13'-10 7/8"3 1/2"2'-3 1/8"5 1/2"16'-8 1/2"5 1/2"T.O.PLY100'-0"T.O.PLY 99'-4 1/2"-9 3/4"T.O.FF: 7887.51' (100'-2 1/4"T.O.PLY:7887.32' (100'-0")T.O.PLY 99'-4 1/2"1A 5.31A 5.32A 5.32A 5.33A 5.33A 5.36A 5.36A 5.37A 5.37A 5.38A 5.38A 5.32A 3.4GAS METERPANTRYUPDNENTRYENTRYPORCHKITCHENOVENSWARMINGDWR & MWSINKRANGESINKHISTORICPORCH TO BEREBUILTPROPERTY LINE5' SETBACK LINE10' SETBACK LINEPATIOCLOSETSTEP"SCREEN"LIVINGROOMDININGROOMBEDROOM 1BATH 1GARAGECLOSETDRESSERUPPANTRYBENCHSTEPELECT. METERTELEPHONECATVMUD ROOMPOWDERROOMCLOSETSAND CUBBIESFIREPLACEWINE CABINETTV10' SETBACK LINEPROPERTY LINE3.55 1/2"4A 5.34A 5.3NSCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 137 Scale: AS NOTED ISSUE SCHEMATIC DESIGN HPC CONCEPTUALDI PAOLA RESIDENCE135 W. FRANCIS ST.ASPEN, COLORADO 816111" ACTUAL IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE P R E C E D E N C E O V E R S C A L E D DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE . ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. A.2.07 9/2/21 PROPOSED UPPER LEVEL PLAN DATE 01/21/21 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-225202/12/21 5A 5.35A 5.312345BBCCEEDDFFGG07HHAA6II0.51A 5.31A 5.32A 5.32A 5.33A 5.33A 5.36A 5.36A 5.37A 5.37A 5.38A 5.38A 5.35 1/2"21'-7 3/4"5'-5 1/4"5 1/2"3'-9 1/4"5 1/2"12'-11 3/8" 5 1/2" 2'-1 1/4" 5 1/2" 5 1/2"9'-6 1/8"5'-1 1/2" 4'-9 1/8"5 1/2"3'-8 5/8"6 1/8"9'-7 1/2"5 1/2"6'-8 7/8"5 1/2"5'-2 3/4"16'-11"4'-11 3/4" 5 1/2" 10'-6 1/4" 5 1/2"9'-5 3/4"3 1/2"7'-8"5 1/2"5 1/2"32'-7 1/2"5 1/2"1'-2 1/4"12'-10 3/8"10'-0"11 1/2"5 1/2" 6'-5 1/2" 5 1/2"1'-0"15'-0"5 1/2"3'-10 1/4"5 1/2"12'-10 1/4"5 1/2"17'-7 1/2"5'-2 3/4"5 1/2"5 1/2"3'-9 1/4"5 1/2"12'-4 3/4"5 1/2"10'-0"5 1/2"5 1/2"16'-5 1/2"3 1/2"3'-6 3/4"5 1/2"12'-10 1/4"5'-0"1'-10"3'-0"4'-0"12'-3"5'-9"6'-0"2'-2"5'-0"2'-9 1/4"2'-5 1/2"4'-11 1/2"18'-4 1/4"10'-0"25'-10 1/2"10'-0 1/2"5'-11 5/8"5'-3"4'-4"10'-0" 8" 8" 2'-4"5'-0"GUEST MASTER BEDROOMGUEST MASTER BATHFIREPLACE AND TV IN CABINETRYCLOSETWCDNSTEAMSHOWERDECKCONNECTINGGLASS LINK BELOWMASTERBEDROOMMASTERBATHDNUP(INTO BEDROOM)WCSTEAMSHOWERMASTERCLOSETLINENBENCH5' SETBACK LINE10' SETBACK LINE10' SETBACK LINEPROPERTY LINE3.54A 5.34A 5.3NSCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 138 Scale: AS NOTED ISSUE SCHEMATIC DESIGN HPC CONCEPTUALDI PAOLA RESIDENCE135 W. FRANCIS ST.ASPEN, COLORADO 816111" ACTUAL IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE P R E C E D E N C E O V E R S C A L E D DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE . ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. A.2.08 9/2/21 PROPOSED: ROOFTOP DECK DATE 01/21/21 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-225202/12/21 5A 5.35A 5.312345BBCCEEDDFFGG07HHAA6II0.51A 5.31A 5.32A 5.32A 5.33A 5.33A 5.36A 5.36A 5.37A 5.37A 5.38A 5.38A 5.35'-2 3/4"16'-11"1'-10"7'-5"18'-4 1/4" 1'-4 3/4"9'-2 7/8"7'-2 5/8"6 1/8"7'-4"17'-7 1/2"10'-8 3/4"6'-4"7'-4 1/8"6'-9 1/4"15'-5 5/8"2'-3"4'-6 3/8"5'-4 1/8"5'-4 1/8"2'-10 3/4"5'-9 7/8"5'-9 7/8"6'-11 1/8"4'-4 1/8"4'-4 1/8"17'-7 1/2"5'-2 3/4"DNROOF TOPDECK5' SETBACK LINE10' SETBACK LINE10' SETBACK LINEPROPERTY LINE3.54A 5.34A 5.3NSCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 139 Scale: AS NOTED ISSUE SCHEMATIC DESIGN HPC CONCEPTUALDI PAOLA RESIDENCE135 W. FRANCIS ST.ASPEN, COLORADO 816111" ACTUAL IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE P R E C E D E N C E O V E R S C A L E D DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE . ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. A.2.09 9/2/21 PROPOSED ROOF PLAN DATE 01/21/21 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-225202/12/21 5A 5.35A 5.312345BBCCEEDDFFGG07HHAA6II0.52A 3.12A 3.12A 3.11A 5.31A 5.32A 5.32A 5.33A 5.33A 5.36A 5.36A 5.37A 5.37A 5.38A 5.38A 5.32A 3.45'-2 3/4"4'-11 1/2"18'-4 1/4"10'-0"47'-1 1/2"4'-4"10'-0" 2'-5 1/2"5'-0"1'-10"31'-0"2'-2"5'-0"14'-4"7'-2"DOWNSPOUT DOWNSPOUT DOWNSPOUT DOWNSPOUTDOWNSPOUT PROPERTY LINE5' SETBACK LINE10' SETBACK LINE10' SETBACK LINEPROPERTY LINE3.54A 5.34A 5.3DOWNSPOUT FENCE NSCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 140 Scale: AS NOTED ISSUE SCHEMATIC DESIGN HPC CONCEPTUAL 1" ACTUAL IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE P R E C E D E N C E O V E R S C A L E D DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE . ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. A.3.01 9/2/21 EXISTING ELEVATIONS: NORTH & EAST DATE www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-2252DI PAOLA RESIDENCE135 W. FRANCIS ST.ASPEN, COLORADO 8161101/21/21 02/12/21 5 4 3 2 16 T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 100' - 0" T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 100' - 0" T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 109' - 4 1/2" T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 109' - 4 1/2"PROPERTY LINE5' SETBACKPROPERTY LINE5' SETBACKHISTORIC RESOURCELOCATIONE D C B A T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 100' - 0" T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 109' - 4 1/2"T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 108' - 11 1/2" T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 99' - 0"PROPERTY LINE5' SETBACK10' SETBACKPROPERTY LINE10' SETBACKHISTORIC RESOURCELOCATIONSCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 EXISTING: ELEVATION NORTH SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"2 EXISTING: ELEVATION EAST 141 Scale: AS NOTED ISSUE SCHEMATIC DESIGN HPC CONCEPTUAL 1" ACTUAL IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE P R E C E D E N C E O V E R S C A L E D DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE . ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. A.3.02 9/2/21 EXISTING ELEVATIONS: SOUTH & WEST DATE www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-2252DI PAOLA RESIDENCE135 W. FRANCIS ST.ASPEN, COLORADO 8161101/21/21 02/12/21 A B C D E T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 100' - 0" T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 109' - 4 1/2" T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 100' - 0" = 7889.31' T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 109' - 4 1/2"PROPERTY LINE5' SETBACKPROPERTY LINE5' SETBACKHISTORIC RESOURCELOCATION1 2 3 4 5 6 T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 99' - 0" T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 108' -11 1/2" T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 100' - 0" T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 108' - 11 1/2" T.O.PLY DECK LEVEL 118' - 8" T.O.PLY DECK LEVEL 118' - 8" T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 99' - 4 1/2"PROPERTY LINE5' SETBACKPROPERTY LINE5' SETBACKSCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"4 EXISTING: ELEVATION WEST SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"3 EXISTING: ELEVATION SOUTH 142 Scale: AS NOTED ISSUE SCHEMATIC DESIGN HPC CONCEPTUAL 1" ACTUAL IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE P R E C E D E N C E O V E R S C A L E D DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE . ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. A.3.03 9/2/21 PROPOSED ELEVATIONS: NORTH & EAST DATE www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-2252DI PAOLA RESIDENCE135 W. FRANCIS ST.ASPEN, COLORADO 8161101/21/21 02/12/21 5 4 3 2 173.5 060.5 25'-0"9'-4 1/2"T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 100' - 0" T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 100' - 0" T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 109' - 4 1/2" T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 109' - 4 1/2"PROPERTY LINE5' SETBACKPROPERTY LINE5' SETBACKHISTORIC RESOURCELOCATIONE D C BHG AIF 3'-0" GAS METER T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 100' - 0" T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 109' - 4 1/2" T.O.PLY ROOF TOP LEVEL 119' - 8"ELECT. METERTELEPHONECATVT.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 108' - 11 1/2" T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 99' - 0" T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 99' - 0"PROPERTY LINE5' SETBACK10' SETBACKPROPERTY LINE10' SETBACKHISTORIC RESOURCELOCATION7 3.5 00.5 25'-0"9'-7"9'-8 1/2"T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 100' - 0" T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 100' - 0" T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 108' - 11 1/2" T.O.PLY DECK LEVEL 118' - 8" T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 99' - 4 1/2"PROPERTY LINE5' SETBACKPROPERTY LINE5' SETBACKSCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 PROPOSED: ELEVATION NORTH SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"2 PROPOSED: ELEVATION EAST SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 PROPOSED: ELEVATION NORTH 2 143 Scale: AS NOTED ISSUE SCHEMATIC DESIGN HPC CONCEPTUAL 1" ACTUAL IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE P R E C E D E N C E O V E R S C A L E D DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE . ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. A.3.04 9/2/21 PROPOSED ELEVATIONS: SOUTH & WEST DATE www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-2252DI PAOLA RESIDENCE135 W. FRANCIS ST.ASPEN, COLORADO 8161101/21/21 02/12/21 A B C D E H I T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 100' - 0" T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 109' - 4 1/2" T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 119' - 8" T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 100' - 0" = 7889.31' T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 109' - 4 1/2"PROPERTY LINE5' SETBACKPROPERTY LINE5' SETBACKHISTORIC RESOURCELOCATIONF G 0 1 2 3 3.5 4 5 760.5 T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 99' - 0" T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 108' -11 1/2" T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 100' - 0" T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 108' - 11 1/2" T.O.PLY DECK LEVEL 118' - 8" T.O.PLY DECK LEVEL 118' - 8" T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 99' - 4 1/2"PROPERTY LINE5' SETBACKPROPERTY LINE5' SETBACK0 1 2 3 3.5 4 5 760.5 T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 100' - 0" T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 109' - 4 1/2" T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 100' - 0" T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 109' - 4 1/2" T.O.PLY DECK LEVEL 119' - 8" T.O.PLY DECK LEVEL 119' - 8" MUD ROOMPROPERTY LINE5' SETBACKPROPERTY LINE5' SETBACKHISTORIC RESOURCELOCATIONSCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"4 PROPOSED: ELEVATION WEST SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"3 PROPOSED: ELEVATION SOUTH SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"3 PROPOSED: ELEVATION SOUTH 2 144 Scale: AS NOTED ISSUE SCHEMATIC DESIGN HPC CONCEPTUALDI PAOLA RESIDENCE135 W. FRANCIS ST.ASPEN, COLORADO 816111" ACTUAL IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE P R E C E D E N C E O V E R S C A L E D DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE . ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. A.4.01 9/2/21 EXISTING BUILDING SECTIONS DATE 01/21/21 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-225202/12/21 1 2 3 4 5 6 T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 100' - 0" T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 100' - 0"HISTORIC RESOURCELOCATION1 2 3 4 5 6 T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 100' - 0" T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 100' - 0"HISTORIC RESOURCELOCATION1 2 3 4 5 6 T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 100' - 0" T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 100' - 0" T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 109' - 4 1/2" T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 109' - 4 1/2"HISTORIC RESOURCELOCATIONSCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 EXISTING: SECTION 1 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"2 EXISTING: SECTION 2 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"3 EXISTING: SECTION 3 145 Scale: AS NOTED ISSUE SCHEMATIC DESIGN HPC CONCEPTUALDI PAOLA RESIDENCE135 W. FRANCIS ST.ASPEN, COLORADO 816111" ACTUAL IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE P R E C E D E N C E O V E R S C A L E D DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE . ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. A.4.02 9/2/21 EXISTING BUILDING SECTIONS DATE 01/21/21 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-225202/12/21 A B C D E T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 100' - 0" T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 109' - 4 1/2"HISTORIC RESOURCELOCATION10' SETBACKPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE5' SETBACK10' SETBACKE D C B A T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 100' - 0" T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 109' - 4 1/2" T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 99' - 4 1/2"PROPERTY LINE5' SETBACK10' SETBACKPROPERTY LINE10' SETBACKHISTORIC RESOURCELOCATIONSCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"6 EXISTING: SECTION 6 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"5 EXISTING: SECTION 5 146 Scale: AS NOTED ISSUE SCHEMATIC DESIGN HPC CONCEPTUALDI PAOLA RESIDENCE135 W. FRANCIS ST.ASPEN, COLORADO 816111" ACTUAL IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE P R E C E D E N C E O V E R S C A L E D DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE . ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. A.4.04 9/2/21 PROPOSED BUILDING SECTIONS DATE 01/21/21 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-225202/12/21 1 2 3 4 5 6 10'-8 5/8"5'-2 1/8"5'-9"9'-5"15'-0"25'-0"KITCHEN ENTRY T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 100' - 0" T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 100' - 0" T.O.PLY SLAB LOWER LEVEL 88' - 0" GUEST MASTER BEDROOM THEATRE T.O.PLY SLAB LOWER LEVEL 86' - 4" T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 108' - 11 1/2" T.O.PLY DECK LEVEL 118' - 8" T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 108' - 11 1/2" T.O.PLY DECK LEVEL 118' - 8"HISTORIC RESOURCELOCATION0 1 2 3 3.5 4 5 760.5 T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 100' - 0" T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 100' - 0" T.O.PLY SLAB LOWER LEVEL 88' - 0" LAUNDRYKID'S PLAY ROOM LIVING ROOM T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 108' - 11 1/2" T.O.PLY DECK LEVEL 118' - 8" T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 108' - 11 1/2" T.O.PLY DECK LEVEL 118' - 8" T.O.PLY SLAB LOWER LEVEL 88' - 0"HISTORIC RESOURCELOCATIONSCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 BUILDING SECTION 1 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"2 BUILDING SECTION 2 147 Scale: AS NOTED ISSUE SCHEMATIC DESIGN HPC CONCEPTUALDI PAOLA RESIDENCE135 W. FRANCIS ST.ASPEN, COLORADO 816111" ACTUAL IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE P R E C E D E N C E O V E R S C A L E D DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE . ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. A.4.05 9/2/21 PROPOSED BUILDING SECTIONS DATE 01/21/21 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-225202/12/21 0 1 2 3 3.5 4 5 760.5 15'-0"25'-0"T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 100' - 0" T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 108' - 11 1/2" T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 100' - 0" T.O.PLY DECK LEVEL 118' - 8" T.O.SLAB LOWER LEVEL 88' - 0" T.O.SLAB LOWER LEVEL 88' - 0" BATH 2 MECHANICAL MUD ROOM T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 99' - 4 1/2" CLOSET 2 T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 108' - 11 1/2" T.O.PLY DECK LEVEL 118' - 8"HISTORIC RESOURCELOCATION0 1 2 3 3.5 4 5 6 70.5 T.O.SLAB MAIN LEVEL 99' - 0" T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 108' -11 1/2" T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 108' - 11 1/2" T.O.PLY DECK LEVEL 118' - 8" T.O.PLY DECK LEVEL 118' - 8" T.O.SLAB LOWER LEVEL 88' - 0" T.O.SLAB LOWER LEVEL 88' - 0" T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 99' - 4 1/2" HALLBEDROOM 2 BATH 4 BATH 1 GARAGE MASTER CLOSET STAIRS SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"3 BUILDING SECTION 3 4 BUILDING SECTION 4 148 Scale: AS NOTED ISSUE SCHEMATIC DESIGN HPC CONCEPTUALDI PAOLA RESIDENCE135 W. FRANCIS ST.ASPEN, COLORADO 816111" ACTUAL IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE P R E C E D E N C E O V E R S C A L E D DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE . ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. A.4.06 9/2/21 PROPOSED BUILDING SECTIONS DATE 01/21/21 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-225202/12/21 H G F E D C B AI 7 1/2"15'-0"25'-0"T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 100' - 0" T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 109' - 4 1/2"T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 108' - 11 1/2" T.O.PLY DECK LEVEL 118' - 8" T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 99' - 4 1/2" T.O.PLY SLAB LOWER LEVEL 88' - 0" MASTER BATHROOM GARAGE MUD ROOM LIVING ROOM GUEST MASTER BATH GUEST MASTER BATH GUEST MASTER BEDROOM GUEST MASTER CLOSETLAUNDRY MECHANICALBATH 4 BEDROOM 4 (BUNK ROOM T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 99' - 0" T.O.PLY SLAB LOWER LEVEL 88' - 0"PROPERTY LINE5' SETBACK10' SETBACKPROPERTY LINE10' SETBACKHISTORIC RESOURCELOCATION0 1 2 3 3.5 4 5 760.5 15'-0"25'-0"8'-8"T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 99' - 0" T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 108' -11 1/2" T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 100' - 0" T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 108' - 11 1/2" T.O.PLY DECK LEVEL 118' - 8" T.O.PLY DECK LEVEL 118' - 8" T.O.SLAB LOWER LEVEL 88' - 0" T.O.SLAB LOWER LEVEL 88' - 0" CLOSET 3BEDROOM 3 BEDROOM 4 (BUNK ROOM BEDROOM 1 GARAGE MASTER BEDROOM MASTER BATHROOM ROOFTOP DECK T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 99' - 4 1/2" SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"6 BUILDING SECTION 6 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"5 BUILDING SECTION 5 149 Scale: AS NOTED ISSUE SCHEMATIC DESIGN HPC CONCEPTUALDI PAOLA RESIDENCE135 W. FRANCIS ST.ASPEN, COLORADO 816111" ACTUAL IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE P R E C E D E N C E O V E R S C A L E D DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE . ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. A.4.07 9/2/21 PROPOSED BUILDING SECTIONS DATE 01/21/21 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-225202/12/21 A B C D E G HF I 15'-0"25'-0"9'-4"T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 99' - 4 1/2" T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 108' - 11 1/2" T.O.PLY DECK LEVEL 118' - 8" T.O.SLAB LOWER LEVEL 88' - 0" T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 100' - 0" T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 109' - 4 1/2" T.O.SLAB LOWER LEVEL 85' - 6" BATH 2 BEDROOM 2 BEDROOM 3POWDEROWNER'S CLOSET BEDROOM 1BATH 1 MASTER BEDROOM BATH 3 MASTER CLOSET DINING ROOM THEATER PROPERTY LINE5' SETBACK10' SETBACKPROPERTY LINE10' SETBACKHISTORIC RESOURCELOCATIONA B C D E F G H I 15'-0"9'-6 7/8"T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 99' - 4 1/2" T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 108' - 11 1/2" T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 118' - 8" T.O.PLY SLAB LOWER LEVEL 88' - 0" T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 100' - 0" T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 109' - 4 1/2" T.O.SLAB LOWER LEVEL 85' - 6" MASTER BEDROOM CLOSETBEDROOM 1KITCHEN THEATER FAMILY ROOM LINEN BEDROOM 3BATH 2 BATH 3 MASTER CLOSET BEDROOM 2 T.O.SPRING POINT 118' - 5 1/2" LIVING ROOM GUEST MASTER BEDROOMHISTORIC RESOURCELOCATION10' SETBACKPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE5' SETBACK10' SETBACKSCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"8 BUILDING SECTION 8 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"7 BUILDING SECTION 7 150 Scale: AS NOTED ISSUE SCHEMATIC DESIGN HPC CONCEPTUALDI PAOLA RESIDENCE135 W. FRANCIS ST.ASPEN, COLORADO 816111" ACTUAL IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE P R E C E D E N C E O V E R S C A L E D DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE . ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. 0.0 9/2/21 3D VIEWS DATE 01/21/21 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-225202/12/21 5 CORNER VIEW 4 EAST VIEW 3 WEST VIEW 2 VIEW FROM ALLEY 1 FRONT VIEW 151 501 E. Hyman Ave. Suite 205-Aspen, CO 81611 www.kimraymondarchitects.com AUGUST 31, 2021 135 W. FRANCIS ST. SUPPLEMENTAL VISUAL PRESENTATION 152 HISTORIC REFERENCE: SANDBORN MAP: 1898 135 W. FRANCIS STREET, ASPEN CO HISTORIC REFERENCE 135W. FRANCIS 153 EXISTING: YEAR: 2021 HISTORIC REFERENCE 135 W. FRANCIS STREET, ASPEN CO 154 HISTORIC REFERENCE EXISTING: YEAR 2021 WEST SIDE 135 W. FRANCIS STREET, ASPEN CO 155 HISTORIC REFERENCE EXISTING: YEAR 2021 WEST SIDE PARTIAL VIEW (ADDITION) 135 W. FRANCIS STREET, ASPEN CO 156 HISTORIC REFERENCE EXISTING: YEAR 2021 SOUTH SIDE VIEW (ADDITION) 135 W. FRANCIS STREET, ASPEN CO 157 Scale: AS NOTED ISSUE SCHEMATIC DESIGN HPC CONCEPTUALDI PAOLA RESIDENCE135 W. FRANCIS ST.ASPEN, COLORADO 816111" ACTUAL IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE P R E C E D E N C E O V E R S C A L E D DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE . ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. A.1.01 8/27/21 EXISTING: SITE PLAN DATE 01/21/21 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-225202/12/21123456 BBCCEEDDAAE1E17'-2"14'-4"1°PROPERTY LINEGRAVEL PARKINGEDGE OF PAVEMENTNORTH 1ST STREET 75.45 ROW EDGE OF PAVEMENT 5' SETBACK LINE10' SETBACK LINEN SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" SITE PLAN: EXISTING 135 W. FRANCIS STREET, ASPEN CO EXISTING LILAC EXISTING LILAC EXISTING LILAC EXISTING COTTONWOOD EXISTING COTTONWOOD EXISTING EVERGREEN 158 EXISTING: DEMO CALCULATIONS 135 W. FRANCIS STREET, ASPEN CO RG FRGF WDR1 2 3 4 5 6 B B C C E E D D A A E1 E1 GAS METER PROPERTY LINE5' SETBACK LINE 10' SETBACK LINE 1,745 sq ft 1 2 3 4 5 6 B B C C E E D D A A E1 E1 MASTER BEDROOM BEDROOM HALL BATH OPEN TO BELOW LOFT 5' SETBACK LINE 10' SETBACK LINE 871 sq ft RG FRGF WDR1 2 3 4 5 6 B B C C E E D D A A E1 E1 GAS METER PROPERTY LINE5' SETBACK LINE 10' SETBACK LINE 610 sq ft 1 2 3 4 5 6 B B C C E E D D A A E1 E1 MASTER BEDROOM BEDROOM HALL BATH OPEN TO BELOW LOFT 5' SETBACK LINE 10' SETBACK LINE 130 sq ft SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"1 MAIN LEVEL-EXISTING SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"2 UPPER LEVEL-EXISTING SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"1 MAIN LEVEL-DEMO SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"2 UPPER LEVEL-DEMO EXISTING AREA CALCULATIONS: EXISTING: - MAIN LEVEL: 1,745.00 SQ FT - UPPER LEVEL: 871.00 SQ FT TOTAL: 2,616.00 SQ FT DEMO AREA CALCULATIONS: EXISTING TO DEMO: - MAIN LEVEL: 610.00 SQ FT - UPPER LEVEL: 130.00 SQ FT TOTAL: 740.00 SQ FT PERCENTAGE OF DEMO AREA: (740 X 100)/2,616.00 = 28.29 % 159 Scale: AS NOTED ISSUE SCHEMATIC DESIGN HPC CONCEPTUALDI PAOLA RESIDENCE135 W. FRANCIS ST.ASPEN, COLORADO 816111" ACTUAL IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE P R E C E D E N C E O V E R S C A L E D DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE . ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. A.1.02 8/27/21 PROPOSED: SITE PLAN DATE 01/21/21 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-225202/12/2112345 BBCCEEDDFFGG07HHAA6II0.52A 3.12A 3.12A 3.12A 3.45'-2 3/4"4'-11 1/2"18'-4 1/4"10'-0"47'-1 1/2"4'-4"10'-0" 2'-5 1/2"5'-0"1'-10"31'-0"2'-2"5'-0"14'-4"7'-2"DOWNSPOUT DOWNSPOUT DOWNSPOUT DOWNSPOUTDOWNSPOUT PROPERTY LINE5' SETBACK LINE10' SETBACK LINEGRAVEL PARKINGEDGE OF PAVEMENTEDGE OF PAVEMENT788678877888788710' SETBACK LINEPROPERTY LINE3.5DOWNSPOUT FENCE NN SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" SITE PLAN: PROPOSED 135 W. FRANCIS STREET, ASPEN CO EXISTING LILAC EXISTING LILAC 160 PROPOSED: LOWER LEVEL 135 W. FRANCIS STREET, ASPEN CO Scale: AS NOTED ISSUE SCHEMATIC DESIGN HPC CONCEPTUALDI PAOLA RESIDENCE135 W. FRANCIS ST.ASPEN, COLORADO 816111" ACTUAL IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE P R E C E D E N C E O V E R S C A L E D DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE . ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. A.2.05 9/2/21 PROPOSED LOWER LEVEL PLAN DATE 01/21/21 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-225202/12/21 5A 5.35A 5.3W/DW/D12345BBCCEEDDFFGG07HHAA6II0.511 1/2"14'-11"5 1/2"13'-8 1/2"11 1/2"11 1/2" 15'-7 1/4" 5 1/2" 10'-0"3 1/2"6'-0"5 1/2"12'-1"5 1/2"5'-11"6'-0"11 1/2"3 1/2"24'-2"11 1/2"34'-6 1/2"84'-7 1/4"3 1/2"9'-11 1/2"7'-3 3/4"5 1/2"1'-9 3/4"12'-9 1/2"6'-10"31'-0"7'-2"3'-0"4'-0"12'-3"5'-9"6'-0"11 1/2"1'-3 1/4"13'-11 1/2"3 1/2"5'-9"3 1/2"13'-3"5 1/2"9'-1 1/4"3 1/2" 12'-5" 3 1/2"12'-6 3/4"3 1/2"5'-5 1/2"5 1/2"9'-0"11 1/2"2"2 3/4"11 1/2"14'-1 3/8"3 1/2"5'-3 5/8"5 1/2"12'-5 1/2"11 1/2"2 3/4"5 1/2"3'-9"6'-1 3/4"3 1/2"6'-0 1/4"8'-11"3 1/2"3'-6 3/4"3 1/2"8'-10"5 1/2"1'-4 3/4"5'-2" 3 1/2" 10'-1 3/4" 6'-0" 3 1/2"3 1/2"2'-0"4'-10 1/4"3 1/2"10'-4 1/4"6'-0 1/2"3 1/2"8'-7"5 1/2"3'-5 1/2"10" 3'-0"10"8'-8 1/8"8'-5"10"3'-0"10" 5'-7 5/8"10"3'-0" 10"1'-11 1/4" 10"3'-0" 10"10"3'-0"3'-3 1/2"1'-11 1/4"16'-11"17'-7 1/2"5'-2 3/4"5'-0" 2'-4"2A 3.12A 3.12A 3.1GUEST MASTER BATHGUEST MASTERBEDROOMGUEST MASTERCLOSETGYMLAUNDRYKID'S PLAY ROOMMECHANICALWETBARUPTHEATREBATH 2CLOSET 2BATH 3BATH 4BEDROOM 2BEDROOM 3BEDROOM 4(BUNK ROOMELECTRICALCLOSET / THEATEREQUIPMENTTVCLOSET 4CLOSET 3LINENPOWDEROWNER'SCLOSETBENCHBENCH1A 5.31A 5.32A 5.32A 5.33A 5.33A 5.36A 5.36A 5.37A 5.37A 5.38A 5.38A 5.32A 3.43.54A 5.34A 5.3NSCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 161 PROPOSED: MAIN LEVEL 135 W. FRANCIS STREET, ASPEN CO Scale: AS NOTED ISSUE SCHEMATIC DESIGN HPC CONCEPTUALDI PAOLA RESIDENCE135 W. FRANCIS ST.ASPEN, COLORADO 816111" ACTUAL IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE P R E C E D E N C E O V E R S C A L E D DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE . ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. A.2.06 8/31/21 PROPOSED MAIN LEVEL PLAN DATE 01/21/21 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-225202/12/21 5A 5.35A 5.3F12345BBCCEEDDFFGG07HHAA6II0.52A 3.12A 3.12A 3.15 1/2" 5 1/2"10'-0"4'-0"3'-9 1/4"5 1/2"11'-4"5 1/2"5'-3 1/2"5 1/2"5'-6 1/2"5 1/2"14'-2 1/4"2'-0"3'-2"3'-0"3'-6 7/8"13'-6 1/8"2'-6"2'-0" 18'-0 1/8"6 1/8"5'-2 7/8"7'-11 1/8"6'-1"3'-8 5/8"9'-10 3/4"11'-8 3/8"3'-0"3'-0"4'-0" 5'-5 1/2" 17'-5 1/4"5 1/2" 6'-11 1/2"17'-10 3/4" 8'-8 5/8" 2'-0 5/8" 16'-0 1/8" 5 1/2"5 1/2"2'-6 1/2"5 1/2"3'-6 1/2"2'-9 1/4"2'-5 1/2"4'-11 1/2"18'-4 1/4"10'-0"25'-10 1/2"10'-0 1/2"5'-11 5/8"5'-3"4'-4"10'-0"8'-4 1/2"5 1/2"17'-8 1/2"5 1/2"1'-0"5 1/2"21'-1 1/2"3 1/2"4'-0"5 1/2"9'-7"5 1/2"5'-6 1/8"5 1/2"3'-3 1/2"1'-11 1/4"1'-10"3'-0"4'-0"12'-3"5'-9"6'-0"2'-2"5'-0"5'-0"17'-7 1/2"5'-2 3/4"16'-11"1'-0"2'-4"1'-0"5'-0"5 1/2"9'-4 1/8"5 1/2"5'-7 7/8"5 1/2"5 1/2"6'-5 1/2" 20'-9 1/2"5 1/2"13'-10 7/8"3 1/2"2'-3 1/8"5 1/2"16'-8 1/2"5 1/2"T.O.PLY100'-0"T.O.PLY 99'-4 1/2"-9 3/4"T.O.FF: 7887.51' (100'-2 1/4"T.O.PLY:7887.32' (100'-0")T.O.PLY 99'-4 1/2"1A 5.31A 5.32A 5.32A 5.33A 5.33A 5.36A 5.36A 5.37A 5.37A 5.38A 5.38A 5.32A 3.4GAS METERPANTRYUPDNENTRYENTRYPORCHKITCHENOVENSWARMINGDWR & MWSINKRANGESINKHISTORICPORCH TO BEREBUILTPROPERTY LINE5' SETBACK LINE10' SETBACK LINEPATIOCLOSETSTEP"SCREEN"LIVINGROOMDININGROOMBEDROOM 1BATH 1GARAGECLOSETDRESSERUPPANTRYBENCHSTEPELECT. METERTELEPHONECATVMUD ROOMPOWDERROOMCLOSETSAND CUBBIESFIREPLACEWINE CABINETTV10' SETBACK LINEPROPERTY LINE3.55 1/2"4A 5.34A 5.3NSCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"162 PROPOSED: UPPER LEVEL 135 W. FRANCIS STREET, ASPEN CO Scale: AS NOTED ISSUE SCHEMATIC DESIGN HPC CONCEPTUALDI PAOLA RESIDENCE135 W. FRANCIS ST.ASPEN, COLORADO 816111" ACTUAL IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE P R E C E D E N C E O V E R S C A L E D DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE . ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. A.2.07 8/31/21 PROPOSED UPPER LEVEL PLAN DATE 01/21/21 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-225202/12/21 5A 5.35A 5.312345BBCCEEDDFFGG07HHAA6II0.51A 5.31A 5.32A 5.32A 5.33A 5.33A 5.36A 5.36A 5.37A 5.37A 5.38A 5.38A 5.35 1/2"21'-7 3/4"5'-5 1/4"5 1/2"3'-9 1/4"5 1/2"12'-11 3/8" 5 1/2" 2'-1 1/4" 5 1/2" 5 1/2"9'-6 1/8"5'-1 1/2" 4'-9 1/8"5 1/2"3'-8 5/8"6 1/8"9'-7 1/2"5 1/2"6'-8 7/8"5 1/2"5'-2 3/4"16'-11"4'-11 3/4" 5 1/2" 10'-6 1/4" 5 1/2"9'-5 3/4"3 1/2"7'-8"5 1/2"5 1/2"32'-7 1/2"5 1/2"1'-2 1/4"12'-10 3/8"10'-0"11 1/2"5 1/2" 6'-5 1/2" 5 1/2"1'-0"15'-0"5 1/2"3'-10 1/4"5 1/2"12'-10 1/4"5 1/2"17'-7 1/2"5'-2 3/4"5 1/2"5 1/2"3'-9 1/4"5 1/2"12'-4 3/4"5 1/2"10'-0"5 1/2"5 1/2"16'-5 1/2"3 1/2"3'-6 3/4"5 1/2"12'-10 1/4"5'-0"1'-10"3'-0"4'-0"12'-3"5'-9"6'-0"2'-2"5'-0"2'-9 1/4"2'-5 1/2"4'-11 1/2"18'-4 1/4"10'-0"25'-10 1/2"10'-0 1/2"5'-11 5/8"5'-3"4'-4"10'-0" 8" 8" 2'-4"5'-0"GUEST MASTER BEDROOMGUEST MASTER BATHFIREPLACE AND TV IN CABINETRYCLOSETWCDNSTEAMSHOWERDECKCONNECTINGGLASS LINK BELOWMASTERBEDROOMMASTERBATHDNUP(INTO BEDROOM)WCSTEAMSHOWERMASTERCLOSETLINENBENCH5' SETBACK LINE10' SETBACK LINE10' SETBACK LINEPROPERTY LINE3.54A 5.34A 5.3NSCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 163 PROPOSED: ROOFTOP LEVEL 135 W. FRANCIS STREET, ASPEN CO Scale: AS NOTED ISSUE SCHEMATIC DESIGN HPC CONCEPTUALDI PAOLA RESIDENCE135 W. FRANCIS ST.ASPEN, COLORADO 816111" ACTUAL IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE P R E C E D E N C E O V E R S C A L E D DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE . ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. A.2.08 8/31/21 PROPOSED: ROOFTOP DECK DATE 01/21/21 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-225202/12/21 5A 5.35A 5.312345BBCCEEDDFFGG07HHAA6II0.51A 5.31A 5.32A 5.32A 5.33A 5.33A 5.36A 5.36A 5.37A 5.37A 5.38A 5.38A 5.35'-2 3/4"16'-11"1'-10"7'-5"18'-4 1/4" 1'-4 3/4"9'-2 7/8"7'-2 5/8"6 1/8"7'-4"17'-7 1/2"10'-8 3/4"6'-4"7'-4 1/8"6'-9 1/4"15'-5 5/8"2'-3"4'-6 3/8"5'-4 1/8"5'-4 1/8"2'-10 3/4"5'-9 7/8"5'-9 7/8"6'-11 1/8"4'-4 1/8"4'-4 1/8"17'-7 1/2"5'-2 3/4"DNROOF TOPDECK5' SETBACK LINE10' SETBACK LINE10' SETBACK LINEPROPERTY LINE3.54A 5.34A 5.3NSCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 164 PROPOSED: ELEVATION NORTH + EAST 135 W. FRANCIS STREET, ASPEN CO Scale: AS NOTED ISSUE SCHEMATIC DESIGN HPC CONCEPTUALDI PAOLA RESIDENCE135 W. FRANCIS ST.ASPEN, COLORADO 816111" ACTUAL IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE P R E C E D E N C E O V E R S C A L E D DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE . ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. 3.02 8/27/21 ELEVATIONS DATE 01/21/21 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-225202/12/21PROPERTY LINE5' SETBACKPROPERTY LINE5' SETBACKHISTORIC RESOURCELOCATION6"6"ELECT. METERTELEPHONECATVPROPERTY LINE5' SETBACK10' SETBACKPROPERTY LINE10' SETBACKHISTORIC RESOURCELOCATIONNORTH ELEVATION EAST ELEVATION 165 135 W. FRANCIS STREET, ASPEN CO PROPOSED: ELEVATION SOUTH + WEST6"6"PROPERTY LINE5' SETBACKPROPERTY LINE5' SETBACKHISTORIC RESOURCELOCATIONPROPERTY LINE5' SETBACKPROPERTY LINE5' SETBACKWEST ELEVATION SOUTH ELEVATION 166 PROPOSED: LONGITUDINAL SECTION 135 W. FRANCIS STREET, ASPEN CO Scale: AS NOTED ISSUE SCHEMATIC DESIGN HPC CONCEPTUALDI PAOLA RESIDENCE135 W. FRANCIS ST.ASPEN, COLORADO 816111" ACTUAL IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTSAND PLANS INDICATED BY THESEDRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARETHE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIMRAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. ANDSHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHERWORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHERPERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVERWITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION.WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKEP R E C E D E N C E O V E R S C A L E DDIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED ATTHE SITE . ANY DIMENSIONALDISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TOTHE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECTPRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. A.4.06 9/2/21 PROPOSED BUILDING SECTIONS DATE 01/21/21 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-225202/12/21 H G F E D C B AI 7 1/2"15'-0"25'-0"T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 100' - 0" T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 109' - 4 1/2"T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 108' - 11 1/2" T.O.PLY DECK LEVEL 118' - 8" T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 99' - 4 1/2" T.O.PLY SLAB LOWER LEVEL 88' - 0" MASTER BATHROOM GARAGE MUD ROOM LIVING ROOM GUEST MASTER BATH GUEST MASTER BATH GUEST MASTER BEDROOM GUEST MASTER CLOSETLAUNDRY MECHANICALBATH 4 BEDROOM 4 (BUNK ROOM T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 99' - 0" T.O.PLY SLAB LOWER LEVEL 88' - 0"PROPERTY LINE5' SETBACK10' SETBACKPROPERTY LINE10' SETBACKHISTORIC RESOURCELOCATION0 1 2 3 3.5 4 5 760.5 15'-0"25'-0"8'-8"T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL99' - 0"T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL108' -11 1/2"T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL100' - 0"T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL108' - 11 1/2"T.O.PLY DECK LEVEL118' - 8"T.O.PLY DECK LEVEL118' - 8" T.O.SLAB LOWER LEVEL 88' - 0" T.O.SLAB LOWER LEVEL 88' - 0" CLOSET 3BEDROOM 3 BEDROOM 4 (BUNK ROOM BEDROOM 1 GARAGEMASTERBEDROOMMASTERBATHROOMROOFTOPDECKT.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL99' - 4 1/2" SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"6 BUILDING SECTION 6 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"5 BUILDING SECTION 5 167 PROPOSED: LONGITUDINAL SECTION 135 W. FRANCIS STREET, ASPEN CO Scale: AS NOTED ISSUE SCHEMATIC DESIGN HPC CONCEPTUALDI PAOLA RESIDENCE135 W. FRANCIS ST.ASPEN, COLORADO 816111" ACTUAL IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTSAND PLANS INDICATED BY THESEDRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARETHE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIMRAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. ANDSHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHERWORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHERPERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVERWITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION.WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKEP R E C E D E N C E O V E R S C A L E DDIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED ATTHE SITE . ANY DIMENSIONALDISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TOTHE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECTPRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. A.4.07 8/27/21 PROPOSED BUILDING SECTIONS DATE 01/21/21 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-225202/12/21 A B C D E G HF I 15'-0"25'-0"9'-4"T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 99' - 4 1/2" T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 108' - 11 1/2" T.O.PLY DECK LEVEL 118' - 8" T.O.SLAB LOWER LEVEL 88' - 0" T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 100' - 0" T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 109' - 4 1/2" T.O.SLAB LOWER LEVEL 85' - 6" BATH 2 BEDROOM 2 BEDROOM 3POWDEROWNER'S CLOSET BEDROOM 1BATH 1 MASTER BEDROOM BATH 3 MASTER CLOSET DINING ROOM THEATER PROPERTY LINE5' SETBACK10' SETBACKPROPERTY LINE10' SETBACKHISTORIC RESOURCELOCATIONA B C D E F G H I 15'-0"9'-6 7/8"T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL99' - 4 1/2"T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL108' - 11 1/2"T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL118' - 8" T.O.PLY SLAB LOWER LEVEL 88' - 0" T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL100' - 0"T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL109' - 4 1/2" T.O.SLAB LOWER LEVEL 85' - 6" MASTERBEDROOM CLOSETBEDROOM 1KITCHEN THEATER FAMILY ROOM LINEN BEDROOM 3BATH 2 BATH 3 MASTERCLOSETBEDROOM 2 T.O.SPRING POINT118' - 5 1/2"LIVING ROOMGUEST MASTERBEDROOM SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"8 BUILDING SECTION 8 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"7 BUILDING SECTION 7 168 VIEW: NORTH 135 W. FRANCIS STREET, ASPEN CO 169 VIEW: SOUTH 135 W. FRANCIS STREET, ASPEN CO 170 VIEW: WEST 135 W. FRANCIS STREET, ASPEN CO 171 VIEW: WEST 135 W. FRANCIS STREET, ASPEN CO 172 VIEW: EAST 135 W. FRANCIS STREET, ASPEN CO 173 WEST ELEVATIONS: PROPOSED ROOF 135 W. FRANCIS STREET, ASPEN CO135 W. FRANCIS STREET, ASPEN CO WEST ELEVATION: PROPOSED A B C D E H I 11 5/8"10'-0" 2'-4" 10'-0"4'-4" T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 100' - 0" T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 109' - 4 1/2" T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 119' - 8" T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 100' - 0" = 7889.31' T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 109' - 4 1/2"PROPERTY LINE5' SETBACKPROPERTY LINE5' SETBACKHISTORIC RESOURCELOCATIONF G WEST ELEVATION: PROPOSED 082621 174 SHRUBSCODEBOTANICAL / COMMON NAMECONTWATER USEBK BERBERIS THUNBERGII 'KOREN' / SUNJOY CITRUS JAPANESE BARBERRY5 GAL LCH CORNUS ALBA 'BAILHALO' TM / IVORY HALO DOGWOOD10 GAL MCB CORNUS ALBA 'BUD'S YELLOW' / BUD'S YELLOW DOGWOOD10 GAL MRX ROSA X 'CHEWHOCAN' / OSO EASY LEMON ZEST ROSE1 GAL LSX SYRINGA X 'PINK PERFUME' / BLOOMERANG PINK PERFUME LILAC10 GAL LPLANT SCHEDULEPERENNIALSCODEBOTANICAL / COMMON NAMECONTWATER USEQTYAS ACHILLEA MILLEFOLIUM 'SUMMER BERRIES' / SUMMER BERRIES MIX COMMON YARROW FLAT L126AC AJUGA REPTANS 'CATLIN'S GIANT' / CATLIN'S GIANT CARPET BUGLEFLAT M83HM HOSTA (VARIOUS) / HOSTA3 GAL M25HO HYLOTELEPHIUM TELEPHIUM 'LAJOS' TM / AUTUMN CHARM STONECROPFLAT L19NL NEPETA RACEMOSA 'LITTLE TITCH' / LITTLE TITCH CATMINT1 GAL L21NR NEPETA RACEMOSA 'WALKER'S LOW' / WALKER'S LOW CATMINT1 GAL L22NB NEPETA X FAASSENII 'BLUE WONDER' / BLUE WONDER CATMINT1 GAL VL40RG RUDBECKIA FULGIDA SULLIVANTII 'GOLDSTURM' / GOLDSTURM CONEFLOWER1 GAL L9SOD/SEEDCODEBOTANICAL / COMMON NAMECONTWATER USESPACINGQTYHPC REVIEW PLANL.1.000'5'10'SCALE: 1"=5'NORTHISSUE & REVISION DATESPlot Date: 09/01/21 Project #: 443Drawn By: ST Checked By:HPC REVIEW PLANHPC REVIEW PLANHPC REVIEW PLAN06/23/202107/27/202109/01/2021135 W FRANCIS ASPEN, CO0,0,0LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE ▪ LAND PLANNING 350 MARKET STREET | SUITE 307 | BASALT | CO | 81621 WWW.CONNECTONEDESIGN.COM | 970.355.5457PROPERTY BOUNDARYALLEYW FRANCIS STN 1ST STPROPERTY BOUNDARYPROPERTY BOUNDARYPROPERTY BOUNDARYSETBACKSETBACKSUBSURFACE LIMIT OF STRUCTURESUBSURFACE LIMIT OF STRUCTUREEXISTING TREES TO REMAIN (TYP)NEW CURB AND GUTTER - SEE CIVILPORCH - SEE ARCHPORCH - SEE ARCH3' WIDE CONCRETESIDEWALK. GRAY, SANDFINISHNEIGHBOR'S EXISTING FENCETO REMAININTEGRAL COLORCONCRETE GARAGEAPRON. SANDFINISH.CONCRETE-SETSTONE PAVERSCONCRETE-SETSTONE PAVERSDIMENSIONAL STONEPAVERS AS STEPPERSPROPOSED FENCEAPPROXIMATE LOCATION OF EXISTINGLILAC TO REMAIN175 © 2021 Microsoft Corporation © 2021 TomTom SHEET NO.SHEET TITLENO.NAME YARNELL CONSULTING &CIVIL DESIGN, LLCP.O. BOX 3901, EAGLE, COLORADO 81631(970) 323-7008 ISSUE / REVISION DATE: DATE THE DESIGNS SHOWN HEREIN INCLUDING ALL TECHNICAL DRAWINGS, GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION & MODELS THEREOF, ARE PROPRIETARY & CAN NOT BE COPIED, DUPLICATED, OR COMMERCIALLY EXPLOITED IN WHOLE OR IN PART WITHOUT THE SOLE AND EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION FROM YARNELL CONSULTING & CIVIL DESIGN, LLC. DESIGN BY: DRAWN BY: REVIEWED BY: PROJECT NO.: SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE 135 WEST FRANCIS STREET LOT A & WEST 1/2 OF LOT B, BLOCK 56 ASPEN, COLORADO J. YARNELL J. YARNELL J. YARNELL 21.007 9/2/2021COVER SHEETC1SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE135 WEST FRANCIS STREET // PARCEL NUMBER 273512421001LOT A AND WEST 12 OF LOT B, BLOCK 56, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO811#176 SHEET NO.SHEET TITLENO.NAME YARNELL CONSULTING &CIVIL DESIGN, LLCP.O. BOX 3901, EAGLE, COLORADO 81631(970) 323-7008 ISSUE / REVISION DATE: DATE THE DESIGNS SHOWN HEREIN INCLUDING ALL TECHNICAL DRAWINGS, GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION & MODELS THEREOF, ARE PROPRIETARY & CAN NOT BE COPIED, DUPLICATED, OR COMMERCIALLY EXPLOITED IN WHOLE OR IN PART WITHOUT THE SOLE AND EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION FROM YARNELL CONSULTING & CIVIL DESIGN, LLC. DESIGN BY: DRAWN BY: REVIEWED BY: PROJECT NO.: SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE 135 WEST FRANCIS STREET LOT A & WEST 1/2 OF LOT B, BLOCK 56 ASPEN, COLORADO J. YARNELL J. YARNELL J. YARNELL 21.007 9/2/2021GENERAL NOTES&ABBREVIATIONSC1.1“”··········177 SHEET NO.SHEET TITLENO.NAME YARNELL CONSULTING &CIVIL DESIGN, LLCP.O. BOX 3901, EAGLE, COLORADO 81631(970) 323-7008 ISSUE / REVISION DATE: DATE THE DESIGNS SHOWN HEREIN INCLUDING ALL TECHNICAL DRAWINGS, GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION & MODELS THEREOF, ARE PROPRIETARY & CAN NOT BE COPIED, DUPLICATED, OR COMMERCIALLY EXPLOITED IN WHOLE OR IN PART WITHOUT THE SOLE AND EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION FROM YARNELL CONSULTING & CIVIL DESIGN, LLC. DESIGN BY: DRAWN BY: REVIEWED BY: PROJECT NO.: SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE 135 WEST FRANCIS STREET LOT A & WEST 1/2 OF LOT B, BLOCK 56 ASPEN, COLORADO J. YARNELL J. YARNELL J. YARNELL 21.007 9/2/2021EXISTINGCONDITIONS &DEMO PLANC2811178 SHEET NO.SHEET TITLENO.NAME YARNELL CONSULTING &CIVIL DESIGN, LLCP.O. BOX 3901, EAGLE, COLORADO 81631(970) 323-7008 ISSUE / REVISION DATE: DATE THE DESIGNS SHOWN HEREIN INCLUDINGALL TECHNICAL DRAWINGS, GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION & MODELS THEREOF, AREPROPRIETARY & CAN NOT BE COPIED, DUPLICATED, OR COMMERCIALLY EXPLOITEDIN WHOLE OR IN PART WITHOUT THE SOLE AND EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION FROMYARNELL CONSULTING & CIVIL DESIGN, LLC. DESIGN BY: DRAWN BY: REVIEWED BY: PROJECT NO.: SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE 135 WEST FRANCIS STREET LOT A & WEST 1/2 OF LOT B, BLOCK 56 ASPEN, COLORADO J. YARNELL J. YARNELL J. YARNELL 21.007 9/2/2021SITE PLANC3811179 SHEET NO.SHEET TITLENO.NAME YARNELL CONSULTING &CIVIL DESIGN, LLCP.O. BOX 3901, EAGLE, COLORADO 81631(970) 323-7008 ISSUE / REVISION DATE: DATE THE DESIGNS SHOWN HEREIN INCLUDINGALL TECHNICAL DRAWINGS, GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION & MODELS THEREOF, ARE PROPRIETARY & CAN NOT BE COPIED, DUPLICATED, OR COMMERCIALLY EXPLOITED IN WHOLE OR IN PART WITHOUT THE SOLE AND EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION FROM YARNELL CONSULTING & CIVIL DESIGN, LLC. DESIGN BY: DRAWN BY: REVIEWED BY: PROJECT NO.: SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE 135 WEST FRANCIS STREET LOT A & WEST 1/2 OF LOT B, BLOCK 56 ASPEN, COLORADO J. YARNELL J. YARNELL J. YARNELL 21.007 9/2/2021STORMWATERMGMT. NOTES &LEGENDC4.0“”180 SHEET NO.SHEET TITLENO.NAME YARNELL CONSULTING &CIVIL DESIGN, LLCP.O. BOX 3901, EAGLE, COLORADO 81631(970) 323-7008 ISSUE / REVISION DATE: DATE THE DESIGNS SHOWN HEREIN INCLUDING ALL TECHNICAL DRAWINGS, GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION & MODELS THEREOF, ARE PROPRIETARY & CAN NOT BE COPIED, DUPLICATED, OR COMMERCIALLY EXPLOITED IN WHOLE OR IN PART WITHOUT THE SOLE AND EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION FROM YARNELL CONSULTING & CIVIL DESIGN, LLC. DESIGN BY: DRAWN BY: REVIEWED BY: PROJECT NO.: SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE 135 WEST FRANCIS STREET LOT A & WEST 1/2 OF LOT B, BLOCK 56 ASPEN, COLORADO J. YARNELL J. YARNELL J. YARNELL 21.007 9/2/2021STORMWATERMGMT. PLANC4.1811181 SHEET NO.SHEET TITLENO.NAME YARNELL CONSULTING &CIVIL DESIGN, LLCP.O. BOX 3901, EAGLE, COLORADO 81631(970) 323-7008 ISSUE / REVISION DATE: DATE THE DESIGNS SHOWN HEREIN INCLUDINGALL TECHNICAL DRAWINGS, GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION & MODELS THEREOF, AREPROPRIETARY & CAN NOT BE COPIED, DUPLICATED, OR COMMERCIALLY EXPLOITEDIN WHOLE OR IN PART WITHOUT THE SOLE AND EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION FROMYARNELL CONSULTING & CIVIL DESIGN, LLC. DESIGN BY: DRAWN BY: REVIEWED BY: PROJECT NO.: SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE 135 WEST FRANCIS STREET LOT A & WEST 1/2 OF LOT B, BLOCK 56 ASPEN, COLORADO J. YARNELL J. YARNELL J. YARNELL 21.007 9/2/2021GRADING PLANC5811182 SHEET NO.SHEET TITLENO.NAME YARNELL CONSULTING &CIVIL DESIGN, LLCP.O. BOX 3901, EAGLE, COLORADO 81631(970) 323-7008 ISSUE / REVISION DATE: DATE THE DESIGNS SHOWN HEREIN INCLUDINGALL TECHNICAL DRAWINGS, GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION & MODELS THEREOF, ARE PROPRIETARY & CAN NOT BE COPIED, DUPLICATED, OR COMMERCIALLY EXPLOITED IN WHOLE OR IN PART WITHOUT THE SOLE AND EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION FROM YARNELL CONSULTING & CIVIL DESIGN, LLC. DESIGN BY: DRAWN BY: REVIEWED BY: PROJECT NO.: SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE 135 WEST FRANCIS STREET LOT A & WEST 1/2 OF LOT B, BLOCK 56 ASPEN, COLORADO J. YARNELL J. YARNELL J. YARNELL 21.007 9/2/2021UTILITY PLANC6.1811183 SHEET NO.SHEET TITLENO.NAME YARNELL CONSULTING &CIVIL DESIGN, LLCP.O. BOX 3901, EAGLE, COLORADO 81631(970) 323-7008 ISSUE / REVISION DATE: DATE THE DESIGNS SHOWN HEREIN INCLUDINGALL TECHNICAL DRAWINGS, GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION & MODELS THEREOF, ARE PROPRIETARY & CAN NOT BE COPIED, DUPLICATED, OR COMMERCIALLY EXPLOITED IN WHOLE OR IN PART WITHOUT THE SOLE AND EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION FROM YARNELL CONSULTING & CIVIL DESIGN, LLC. DESIGN BY: DRAWN BY: REVIEWED BY: PROJECT NO.: SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE 135 WEST FRANCIS STREET LOT A & WEST 1/2 OF LOT B, BLOCK 56 ASPEN, COLORADO J. YARNELL J. YARNELL J. YARNELL 21.007 9/2/2021UTILITY PLANC6.2811184 SHEET NO.SHEET TITLENO.NAME YARNELL CONSULTING &CIVIL DESIGN, LLCP.O. BOX 3901, EAGLE, COLORADO 81631(970) 323-7008 ISSUE / REVISION DATE: DATE THE DESIGNS SHOWN HEREIN INCLUDING ALL TECHNICAL DRAWINGS, GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION & MODELS THEREOF, ARE PROPRIETARY & CAN NOT BE COPIED, DUPLICATED, OR COMMERCIALLY EXPLOITEDIN WHOLE OR IN PART WITHOUT THE SOLE AND EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION FROMYARNELL CONSULTING & CIVIL DESIGN, LLC. DESIGN BY: DRAWN BY: REVIEWED BY: PROJECT NO.: SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE 135 WEST FRANCIS STREET LOT A & WEST 1/2 OF LOT B, BLOCK 56 ASPEN, COLORADO J. YARNELL J. YARNELL J. YARNELL 21.007 9/2/2021FOUNDATIONDRAIN PLANC6.3811185 SHEET NO.SHEET TITLENO.NAME YARNELL CONSULTING &CIVIL DESIGN, LLCP.O. BOX 3901, EAGLE, COLORADO 81631(970) 323-7008 ISSUE / REVISION DATE: DATE THE DESIGNS SHOWN HEREIN INCLUDINGALL TECHNICAL DRAWINGS, GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION & MODELS THEREOF, AREPROPRIETARY & CAN NOT BE COPIED, DUPLICATED, OR COMMERCIALLY EXPLOITEDIN WHOLE OR IN PART WITHOUT THE SOLE AND EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION FROMYARNELL CONSULTING & CIVIL DESIGN, LLC. DESIGN BY: DRAWN BY: REVIEWED BY: PROJECT NO.: SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE 135 WEST FRANCIS STREET LOT A & WEST 1/2 OF LOT B, BLOCK 56 ASPEN, COLORADO J. YARNELL J. YARNELL J. YARNELL 21.007 9/2/2021HORIZONTALCONTROL PLANC7811186 SHEET NO.SHEET TITLENO.NAME YARNELL CONSULTING &CIVIL DESIGN, LLCP.O. BOX 3901, EAGLE, COLORADO 81631(970) 323-7008 ISSUE / REVISION DATE: DATE THE DESIGNS SHOWN HEREIN INCLUDING ALL TECHNICAL DRAWINGS, GRAPHICREPRESENTATION & MODELS THEREOF, ARE PROPRIETARY & CAN NOT BE COPIED,DUPLICATED, OR COMMERCIALLY EXPLOITED IN WHOLE OR IN PART WITHOUT THE SOLE AND EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION FROM YARNELL CONSULTING & CIVIL DESIGN, LLC. DESIGN BY: DRAWN BY: REVIEWED BY: PROJECT NO.: SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE 135 WEST FRANCIS STREET LOT A & WEST 1/2 OF LOT B, BLOCK 56 ASPEN, COLORADO J. YARNELL J. YARNELL J. YARNELL 21.007 9/2/2021DETAILSC8.1187 SHEET NO.SHEET TITLENO.NAME YARNELL CONSULTING &CIVIL DESIGN, LLCP.O. BOX 3901, EAGLE, COLORADO 81631(970) 323-7008 ISSUE / REVISION DATE: DATE THE DESIGNS SHOWN HEREIN INCLUDING ALL TECHNICAL DRAWINGS, GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION & MODELS THEREOF, AREPROPRIETARY & CAN NOT BE COPIED, DUPLICATED, OR COMMERCIALLY EXPLOITEDIN WHOLE OR IN PART WITHOUT THE SOLE AND EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION FROMYARNELL CONSULTING & CIVIL DESIGN, LLC. DESIGN BY: DRAWN BY: REVIEWED BY: PROJECT NO.: SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE 135 WEST FRANCIS STREET LOT A & WEST 1/2 OF LOT B, BLOCK 56 ASPEN, COLORADO J. YARNELL J. YARNELL J. YARNELL 21.007 9/2/2021DETAILS - CITYOF ASPENC8.2188 SHEET NO.SHEET TITLENO.NAME YARNELL CONSULTING &CIVIL DESIGN, LLCP.O. BOX 3901, EAGLE, COLORADO 81631(970) 323-7008 ISSUE / REVISION DATE: DATE THE DESIGNS SHOWN HEREIN INCLUDING ALL TECHNICAL DRAWINGS, GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION & MODELS THEREOF, AREPROPRIETARY & CAN NOT BE COPIED, DUPLICATED, OR COMMERCIALLY EXPLOITEDIN WHOLE OR IN PART WITHOUT THE SOLE AND EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION FROMYARNELL CONSULTING & CIVIL DESIGN, LLC. DESIGN BY: DRAWN BY: REVIEWED BY: PROJECT NO.: SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE 135 WEST FRANCIS STREET LOT A & WEST 1/2 OF LOT B, BLOCK 56 ASPEN, COLORADO J. YARNELL J. YARNELL J. YARNELL 21.007 9/2/2021DETAILS -SANITARYSEWERC8.3189 SHEET NO.SHEET TITLENO.NAME YARNELL CONSULTING &CIVIL DESIGN, LLCP.O. BOX 3901, EAGLE, COLORADO 81631(970) 323-7008 ISSUE / REVISION DATE: DATE THE DESIGNS SHOWN HEREIN INCLUDING ALL TECHNICAL DRAWINGS, GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION & MODELS THEREOF, AREPROPRIETARY & CAN NOT BE COPIED, DUPLICATED, OR COMMERCIALLY EXPLOITEDIN WHOLE OR IN PART WITHOUT THE SOLE AND EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION FROMYARNELL CONSULTING & CIVIL DESIGN, LLC. DESIGN BY: DRAWN BY: REVIEWED BY: PROJECT NO.: SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE 135 WEST FRANCIS STREET LOT A & WEST 1/2 OF LOT B, BLOCK 56 ASPEN, COLORADO J. YARNELL J. YARNELL J. YARNELL 21.007 9/2/2021DETAILS -WATERC8.4190 SHEET NO.SHEET TITLENO.NAME YARNELL CONSULTING &CIVIL DESIGN, LLCP.O. BOX 3901, EAGLE, COLORADO 81631(970) 323-7008 ISSUE / REVISION DATE: DATE THE DESIGNS SHOWN HEREIN INCLUDING ALL TECHNICAL DRAWINGS, GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION & MODELS THEREOF, AREPROPRIETARY & CAN NOT BE COPIED, DUPLICATED, OR COMMERCIALLY EXPLOITEDIN WHOLE OR IN PART WITHOUT THE SOLE AND EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION FROMYARNELL CONSULTING & CIVIL DESIGN, LLC. DESIGN BY: DRAWN BY: REVIEWED BY: PROJECT NO.: SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE 135 WEST FRANCIS STREET LOT A & WEST 1/2 OF LOT B, BLOCK 56 ASPEN, COLORADO J. YARNELL J. YARNELL J. YARNELL 21.007 9/2/2021DETAILS -STORMWATERMGMT.C9.1191 SHEET NO.SHEET TITLENO.NAME YARNELL CONSULTING &CIVIL DESIGN, LLCP.O. BOX 3901, EAGLE, COLORADO 81631(970) 323-7008 ISSUE / REVISION DATE: DATE THE DESIGNS SHOWN HEREIN INCLUDING ALL TECHNICAL DRAWINGS, GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION & MODELS THEREOF, AREPROPRIETARY & CAN NOT BE COPIED, DUPLICATED, OR COMMERCIALLY EXPLOITEDIN WHOLE OR IN PART WITHOUT THE SOLE AND EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION FROMYARNELL CONSULTING & CIVIL DESIGN, LLC. DESIGN BY: DRAWN BY: REVIEWED BY: PROJECT NO.: SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE 135 WEST FRANCIS STREET LOT A & WEST 1/2 OF LOT B, BLOCK 56 ASPEN, COLORADO J. YARNELL J. YARNELL J. YARNELL 21.007 9/2/2021DETAILS -STORMWATERMGMT.C9.2192 SHEET NO.SHEET TITLENO.NAME YARNELL CONSULTING &CIVIL DESIGN, LLCP.O. BOX 3901, EAGLE, COLORADO 81631(970) 323-7008 ISSUE / REVISION DATE: DATE THE DESIGNS SHOWN HEREIN INCLUDINGALL TECHNICAL DRAWINGS, GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION & MODELS THEREOF, AREPROPRIETARY & CAN NOT BE COPIED, DUPLICATED, OR COMMERCIALLY EXPLOITEDIN WHOLE OR IN PART WITHOUT THE SOLE AND EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION FROMYARNELL CONSULTING & CIVIL DESIGN, LLC. DESIGN BY: DRAWN BY: REVIEWED BY: PROJECT NO.: SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE 135 WEST FRANCIS STREET LOT A & WEST 1/2 OF LOT B, BLOCK 56 ASPEN, COLORADO J. YARNELL J. YARNELL J. YARNELL 21.007 9/2/2021DRAINAGE PLAN(PROPOSED)D18111193 REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 22, 2021 Vice Chair Halferty opened the meeting at 4:30pm Commissioners in attendance: Jeffery Halferty, Roger Moyer, Jodi Surfas, Peter Fornell. Absent were Kara Thompson and Sheri Sanzone. Staff present: Amy Simon, Planning Director Sarah Yoon, Historic Preservation Planner Natalie Feinburg Lopez, Historic Preservation Officer Kate Johnson, Assistant City Attorney Nicole Henning, City Clerk Mike Sear, Deputy City Clerk MINUTES: Mr. Fornell motioned to approve three sets of minutes from 6/23/21, 7/14/21, and 8/11/21; Mr. Moyer seconded. Roll call vote: Mr. Fornell, yes; Mr. Halferty, yes; Ms. Surfas, yes; Mr. Moyer, yes; 4-0, motion carried. PUBLIC COMMENT: None. COMMISSIONER MEMBER COMMENTS: Mr. Halferty said he’s been watching the Boomerang deteriorate all summer and feels it is unprotected and open to the elements with winter coming. He would like an update. Ms. Lopez said she went over there with a representative from the Building Department, and the roof and foundation are in great shape. The worst is in the alleyway because of the trash that is being dumped. We are being proactive and working with Mark Hunt on this. Mr. Moyer asked about Main St. Bakery. Ms. Lopez said she isn’t sure where we are with it. Ms. Yoon said there have been communications with the applicant team trying to get their approvals in line for permit submittal. Mr. Halferty reiterated that he just wants to make sure the Boomerang resource is protected throughout this winter. DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICTS: None. PROJECT MONITORING: Ms. Yoon has been reaching out to board members for project monitoring meetings. She said she appreciates everyone’s patience. STAFF COMMENTS: Ms. Lopez introduced Mr. Sear, the new Deputy City Clerk, to the commission. She said the meeting on October 13th is canceled so they will reconvene on the 27th. CERTIFICATES OF NO NEGATIVE EFFECT: Ms. Yoon said there were a few applications in review, but nothing to report. CALL UP REPORTS: None. PUBLIC NOTICE: Ms. Johnson said yes, these were submitted with the original applications. OLD BUSINESS: 135 W. Francis Street – Conceptual Major Development, Relocation, Setback Variations, and Floor Area Bonuses – Continued 194 REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 22, 2021 Ms. Yoon asked Ms. Johnson to go over the vote for tonight. Ms. Johnson said there are four commissioners tonight, which is sufficient for a quorum. At least three members will have to vote consistently in order to take action. APPLICANT PRESENTATION: Kim Raymond and Patricia Weber of Kim Raymond Architecture + Interiors Ms. Raymond showed the site plan on screen and pointed out the non-historic addition that they will be removing. She said they will be lifting the house straight up about 7 inches to fix drainage which is allowed by historic preservation codes. They will be setting the resource down straight back onto the lot and are not changing the historic location at all. They have shortened the link to 10 ft wide from the previous 14ft. to meet the needs of the family and after working with HPC. They made it a slightly wider from east to west, yet it still leaves almost 8ft. of the historic building showing on the west side and 2ft. on the east corner. They will be adding a one car garage and stated that they are not demolishing more that 40% of the building, so are not triggering the need for two parking spaces. She shared some slides of the historic aspects that will be restored, including the chimney and historic side porch. The front porch will be cleaned up, which is still in great shape. The new addition is on the backside of the home and is not even 12 inches taller than the historic building. She pointed out that the gables on the new addition are compatible with the historic building. The fence starts at the connector and wraps around the addition without touching the historic resource. They are planning to save the cottonwood trees and will work around the evergreens. She showed the storm water management plan which they will continue to work with the engineering department on. She showed the demo calculations. Mr. Fornell asked Ms. Raymond to go over the requests for setback variances. Ms. Raymond said that they moved the garage back into the rear yard setback to be able to fit a car in. They are asking for a 2ft 8in. rear yard setback for the garage and below grade space. They are also asking for a 1 ft. side yard setback on the west side to accommodate the wing wall feature on the gable. STAFF PRESENTATION: Sarah Yoon, Historic Preservation Planner Ms. Yoon said the applicant is requesting conceptual major development, relocation, setback variations and floor area bonus. This was before us once before and now back with some changes to location and the connecting element. She stated that after several discussions about the site planning, the applicant has returned with a revised application that maintains the historic location, in line with Chapter 9 of the historic guidelines. Staff is in support of a portion of the new addition encroaching into the rear yard setback. She stated that staff will be working closely with the applicant on the preservation plan to ensure restoration work will comply with guidelines. She showed the revised north and west elevations on screen and said they are more compatible with the historic resource which maintains its visual dominance. She had two things she wanted to open up for HPC discussion. First, the roof configuration of the new addition including the gable forms and flat roof portion. Second, the wing walls on the new addition that require a side yead setback variation of 1ft. They are requesting a rear yard setback and a side yard setback which staff is in support of. They are also requesting a 60 sq. ft. bonus, and they do meet these criteria. Staff recommends approval with the following conditions: 1. Continue to work with city departments on stormwater mitigation and drainage plans. 2. Provide detailed roof plan. 195 REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 22, 2021 3. Lightwell curb heights to be 6” or less in height. Provide curb height information for lightwell adjacent to historic resource and appropriate screening will be required. 4. Provide a detailed preservation plan. Special attention is required for the front entry porch as part of this plan. 5. A 60 sq. ft. floor area bonus is granted for the approved design. 6. The following setback variation for the proposed addition is granted: • 2’-8” rear yard setback reduction for the proposed garage, as represented in the approved application • 7’-4” rear yard setback reduction for the living spaces on the upper level and below grade, as represented in the approved application. • 1’-0” west side yard setback reduction for extruded architectural features on the west elevation of the new addition. • 1’-0” combined side yard setback reduction Ms. Raymond clarified that the upper-level deck space is only a 5 ft variance. Only the below grade space is looking for the 7’-4” variance. Mr. Fornell clarified that staff is recommending approval and not continuation since there was a mistake shown on the slide. Mr. Halferty asked for clarification on the parking spaces allowed. Ms. Yoon said because of the existing non-conformity that this site has; the parking requirement is triggered when demolition is triggered by 40%. The applicant demonstrated that they are not triggering 40% demo. They are allowing for one car and bettering the situation. Ms. Surfas was looking at attachment 3 – page 64 of packet. The attachment shows the proposed amount of demo is 40%. It also shows “on-site parking” as “Existing: 2 Required: 2 Proposed: 2”. She asked if this needs to be updated. Ms. Yoon mentioned that the information in the packet regarding these numbers is correct and that the form has not been updated. Ms. Raymond said that they would update that information and get it back to Ms. Yoon. Mr. Halferty asked staff to clarify comments regarding the wing walls and related setbacks. Ms. Yoon said that in terms of the criteria, staff does not see it creates a direct impact to the historic resource but wanted HPC to discuss this further. PUBLIC COMMENT: None. Mr. Fornell complemented Ms. Raymond and her team for work done and changes made to satisfy guidelines. He stated support for their floor area bonus and overall project. Ms. Surfas mentioned how the roofline and elevations will be perceived from the street. This is her only issue. 196 REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 22, 2021 Mr. Moyer said they’ve done a good job at removing a cumbersome addition. He has no problem with either setback or granting the 60 sf bonus. He concurs with staff recommendations and conditions and will vote for approval. Mr. Halferty commended the applicant for coming back with changes that are within the guidelines. Excellent presentation and very clear and thorough. He’s ok with setback variances including the southside variance which helps create better distance from the historic resource and the gable trim wingwalls setbacks. It’s definitely a product of its own time. He’d like to discuss the glass meeting the sloped gable and wants it to be well thought out. The landscape plan is significant. He appreciates the resource staying in the same location. He’s ok with the conditions. He would move to approve, like his fellow commissioners. Ms. Surfas said the flat roof meeting the connector is different than the flat roof meeting the gable on the new addition and said they are talking about two different things. Mr. Halferty said we can discuss both of these with the project monitor. Mr. Fornell commented on the gable to the west of the flat roof on the new addition. He thought it shows to be well thought out for privacy and negative visibility from the public. MOTION: Mr. Fornell motioned to approve Resolution #13 along with conditions from staff; Mr. Moyer seconded. Roll call vote: Ms. Surfas, yes; Mr. Moyer, yes; Mr. Halferty, yes; Mr. Fornell, yes; 4-0, motion carried. Mr. Fornell brought up the $30,000 financial assurances for the relocation of historic assets. He said the amount hasn’t changed in about 15 years and doesn’t sound like a deterrent to doing the right thing anymore. Ms. Johnson said this would be a discussion for council. Ms. Simon said the number is not specified in the municipal code and other penalties exist. It’s mainly a gesture for any repairs that may be needed. Escalating that number isn’t helpful in being a partner to the contractor. Mr. Fornell asked that it’s not the limits of their liability. Ms. Simon said that is correct – it’s been at 30,000 for the past 30 years or so. MOTION: Mr. Moyer motioned to adjourn; Mr. Halferty seconded. Roll call vote: All in favor. Motion carried. Ms. Simon reminded commissioners that the next meeting will be cancelled. ___________________ Mike Sear, Deputy City Clerk 197 HPC Resolution #13, Series of 2021 Page 1 of 3 RESOLUTION #13, SERIES OF 2021 A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION (HPC) GRANTING CONCEPTUAL MAJOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW, RELOCATION, SETBACK VARIATIONS AND A FLOOR AREA BONUS FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 135 WEST FRANCIS STREET, LOT A AND THE WEST ONE-HALF OF LOT B, BLOCK 56, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO PARCEL ID: 2735-124-21-001 WHEREAS, the applicant, Francis Street Holdings LLC, represented by Kim Raymond Architects + Interiors, has requested HPC approval for Conceptual Major Development, Relocation, Setback Variations and a Floor Area Bonus for the property located at 135 W. Francis Street, Lot A and the West One-Half of Lot B, Block 56, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado; and WHEREAS, Section 26.415.070 of the Municipal Code states that “no building or structure shall be erected, constructed, enlarged, altered, repaired, relocated or improved involving a designated historic property or district until plans or sufficient information have been submitted to the Community Development Director and approved in accordance with the procedures established for their review;” and WHEREAS, for Conceptual Major Development Review, the HPC must review the application, a staff analysis report and the evidence presented at a hearing to determine the project’s conformance with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines per Section 26.415.070.D.3.b.2 and 3 of the Municipal Code and other applicable Code Sections. As a historic landmark, the site is exempt from Residential Design Standards review. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny; and WHEREAS, for approval of Relocation, the application shall meet the requirements of Aspen Municipal Code Section 26.415.090, Relocation; and WHEREAS, for approval of Setback Variations, the application shall meet the requirements of Aspen Municipal Code Section 26.415.110.C, Setback Variations; and WHEREAS, for approval of Floor Area Bonus, the application shall meet the requirements of Aspen Municipal Code Section 26.415.110.F, Floor Area Bonus; and WHEREAS, Community Development Department staff reviewed the application for compliance with applicable review standards and recommends approval with conditions; and WHEREAS, HPC reviewed the project on June 23, 2021, July 28, 2021 and September 22, 2021. HPC considered the application, the staff memo and public comment, and found the proposal consistent with the review standards and granted approval with conditions by a vote of 4 - 0. 198 HPC Resolution #13, Series of 2021 Page 2 of 3 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That HPC hereby approves Conceptual Major Development, Relocation, Setback Variations and Floor Area Bonus for 135 W. Francis Street, Lot A and the West One-Half of Lot B, Block 56, City and Townsite of Aspen, CO as follows: Section 1: Conceptual Major Development, Relocation, Setback Variations and a Floor Area Bonus. HPC hereby approves Conceptual Major Development, Relocation, Setback Variations and Floor Area Bonus as proposed with the following conditions: 1. Continue to work with the relevant City Departments regarding the preliminary stormwater mitigation and drainage plans for the site and clarify the anticipated visual impacts for the plan for Final Review. Minimize visible impacts of stormwater features in the foreground of the historic resource. 2. Provide detailed roof plan showing the location of gutters, downspouts, snow clips and vents, for Final Review. 3. Lightwell curb heights to be 6” or less in height. Provide curb height information for lightwell adjacent to the historic resource and appropriate screening will be required. 4. Provide a detailed Preservation Plan including existing conditions documenting investigation of historic framing and proposed treatment, to be reviewed by staff and monitor prior to building permit submission. Special attention is required for the front entry porch as part of this plan. 5. A 60 s.f. floor area bonus is granted for the approved design. All calculations will be confirmed during building permit review. Bonus floor area not used for this project will be forfeited and must be earned through a future request. 6. The following setback variation for the proposed addition is granted: • 2’-8” rear yard setback reduction for the proposed garage, as represented in the approved application • 7’-4” rear yard setback reduction for the living spaces on the upper level and below grade, as represented in the approved application • 1’-0” west side yard setback reduction for extruded architectural features on the west elevation of the new addition • 1’-0” combined side yard setback reduction 7. Provide financial assurances of $30,000 for the relocation of the historic home onto a new basement foundation, to be provided prior to building permit submission. 8. A development application for a Final Development Plan shall be submitted within one (1) year of the date of approval of a Conceptual Development Plan. Failure to file such an application within this time period shall render null and void the approval of the Conceptual Development Plan. The Historic Preservation Commission may, at its sole discretion and for good cause shown, grant a one-time extension of the expiration date for a Conceptual Development Plan approval for up to six (6) months provided a written request for extension is received no less than thirty (30) days prior to the expiration date. Section 2: Material Representations All material representations and commitments made by the Applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Community Development Department, the Historic Preservation 199 HPC Resolution #13, Series of 2021 Page 3 of 3 Commission, or the Aspen City Council are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by other specific conditions or an authorized authority. Section 3: Existing Litigation This Resolution shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 4: Severability If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 22nd day of September, 2021. Approved as to Form: Approved as to Content: ________________________________ ________________________________ Katharine Johnson, Assistant City Attorney Jeffrey Halferty, Vice Chair ATTEST: ________________________________ Nicole Henning, City Clerk 200 MEMORANDUM TO:Mayor and City Council FROM:Tara Nelson, Senior Paralegal Ron LeBlanc, Special Projects Manager THROUGH:Sara Ott, City Manager MEMO DATE:October 18, 2021 MEETING DATE: October 26, 2021 RE:2021 State-wide Ballot Questions REQUEST OF COUNCIL: This is an informational memo to the City Council explaining details of three state-wide ballot questions for the voters to decide during the November election. No decision is recommended. SUMMARY AND BACKGROUND: The State of Colorado has a long tradition of using the referendum and initiative process to bring decisions to the voters. This November the tradition continues with three state-wide measures to be decided. There are 24 states that allow citizens to initiate legislation through the petition process. Each proposed measure must follow the single-subject rule which is closely tied to the title of the ballot measure. Any approved measure that encompasses some subject not clearly expressed in its title cannot be implemented or enforced. The subject matter of initiated measures is not restricted. Ballot initiatives are not required to specify a funding source for mandated expenditures. The Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights (TABOR) limits measures proposing new taxes, tax increases, extension of taxes, tax policy changes resulting in net tax revenue gain, changes to revenue or fiscal obligations, delays in voting on ballot issues, and approval for the state to retain and spend state revenues that otherwise would be refunded for exceeding an estimate to elections in odd years. TABOR was approved as an amendment to the Colorado Constitution in 1992. According to the Secretary of State’s website, “a referendum petition is a petition circulated to gather the signatures of registered Colorado voters in an attempt to have a bill that was passed by the legislature placed on the ballot as a statewide ballot issue. The Colorado Constitution (Article V, Section 1) creates the right of referendum. The referendum petition must gather signatures equal to 5% of the total votes cast in the previous secretary of state election contest. 201 DISCUSSION: There are three initiated ballot questions appearing on the November 2 election. Only one of these, Proposition 120, will have a direct impact on municipal finances and operations. Each ballot measure is summarized below, followed by the actual ballot language. Amendment 78: Legislative authority over “custodial fund.”” This measure would shift spending authority from the governor and the attorney general to the general assembly for certain federal dollars (e.g. relief funds, block grants, etc.) as well as money derived from state lawsuits. Amendment 78: Legislative authority over “custodial funds” Shall there be an amendment to the Colorado Constitution and a change to the Colorado Revised Statutes concerning money that the state receives, and, in connection therewith, requiring all money received by the state, including money provided to the state for a particular purpose, known as custodial money, to be subject to appropriation by the general assembly after a public hearing; repealing the authority to disburse money from the state treasury by any other means; requiring all custodial money to be deposited into the newly created custodial funds transparency fund and the earnings on those deposits to be transferred to the general fund; and allowing the state to retain and spend all custodial money and earnings and revenue on that custodial money as a voter-approved revenue change? Proposition 119: Marijuana tax increase for learning opportunities. This measure would raise the special state sales tax rate on retail marijuana from 15% to 20%, with the new revenue dedicated to a new state program designed to enhance out-of-school learning opportunities, and with the money designed to be self-directed by individual parents. Proposition 119: Marijuana tax increase for learning opportunities SHALL STATE TAXES BE INCREASED $137,600,000 ANNUALLY ON RETAIL MARIJUANA SALES BY A CHANGE TO THE COLORADO REVISED STATUTES CONCERNING THE CREATION OF A PROGRAM TO PROVIDE OUT-OF-SCHOOL LEARNING OPPORTUNITIES FOR COLORADO CHILDREN AGED 5 TO 17, AND, IN CONNECTION THEREWITH, CREATING AN INDEPENDENT STATE AGENCY TO ADMINISTER THE PROGRAM FOR OUT-OF-SCHOOL LEARNING OPPORTUNITIES CHOSEN BY PARENTS; FUNDING THE PROGRAM BY INCREASING THE RETAIL MARIJUANA SALES TAX BY 5% BY 2024 AND REALLOCATING A PORTION OF THE PUBLIC SCHOOL LANDS INCOME; AUTHORIZING TRANSFERS AND REVENUE FOR PROGRAM FUNDING AS A VOTER-APPROVED REVENUE CHANGE; SPECIFYING THAT LEARNING OPPORTUNITIES INCLUDE TUTORING AND EXTRA INSTRUCTION IN SUBJECTS INCLUDING READING, MATH, SCIENCE, WRITING, MUSIC, AND ART, TARGETED SUPPORT FOR CHILDREN WITH SPECIAL NEEDS AND LEARNING DISABILITIES, CAREER AND TECHNICAL EDUCATION TRAINING, AND OTHER ACADEMIC OR ENRICHMENT OPPORTUNITIES; AND PRIORITIZING PROGRAM FINANCIAL AID FOR LOW-INCOME STUDENTS? Proposition 120: Reduction in property tax assessment rates. This measure will reduce the property tax revenue for some local governments statewide by forcing a decline in the “assessment rate” for both residential and non-residential property. Any reduced assessment rate caused by Prop 120 could not be increased again without voter approval, per TABOR. As originally designed by its proponents, Prop 120 was intended to reduce the assessment rate on 202 virtually all residential and non-residential property, resulting in a statewide decline in property tax revenue for local governments of over $1 billion. However, after title setting for the measure, the General Assembly amended the underlying property tax statutes to significantly undercut the impact of Prop 120. Now, if the measure is adopted by the voters, the assessment rate reductions will apply only to certain multi-family residential property and to lodging property. Thus the long term fiscal impact of the measure will be felt most in jurisdictions that have a high percentage of these two kinds of property. The proponents of Prop 120 have already threatened litigation if the measure passes and the state refuses to implement the full $1 billion tax decrease originally intended by the measure. The ultimate fate of such a lawsuit is unknowable. Proposition 120: Reduction in property tax assessment rates Shall there be a change to the Colorado Revised Statutes concerning property tax reductions, and, in connection therewith, reducing property tax revenue by an estimated $1.03 billion in 2023 and by comparable amounts thereafter by reducing the residential property tax assessment rate from 7.15% to 6.5% and reducing the property tax assessment rate for all other property, excluding producing mines and lands or leaseholds producing oil or gas, from 29% to 26.4% and allowing the state to annually retain and spend up to $25 million of excess state revenue, if any, for state fiscal years 2022-23 through 2026-27 as a voter-approved revenue change to offset lost revenue resulting from the property tax rate reductions and to reimburse local governments for revenue lost due to the homestead exemptions for qualifying seniors and disabled veterans? RECOMMENDATIONS: This memo is for information sharing purposes. Analysis on the ballot measures was researched by CML. No further action is requested. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: 203 NOTICE OF ELECTION TO INCREASE TAXES ON A CITIZEN PETITION 2021 State Ballot Information Booklet STATEWIDE ELECTION DAY is Tuesday, November 2, 2021 Voter service and polling centers are open 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. on Election Day. Ballots are mailed to all registered voters between October 8 and October 15, 2021. Legislative Council of the Colorado General Assembly Research Publication No. 759-1 204 This publication and additional statewide ballot information are available at: https://leg.colorado.gov/bluebook A “yes/for” vote on any ballot issue is a vote in favor of changing current law or existing circumstances, and a “no/against” vote on any ballot issue is a vote against changing current law or existing circumstances. Este folleto informativo de la balota estatal está disponible en español por internet en: https://leg.colorado.gov/2021folletoinformativo A full fiscal impact statement for each measure can be found at: https://leg.colorado.gov/2021bluebookfiscalnotes An audio version of the book is available through the Colorado Talking Book Library at: https://myctbl.cde.state.co.us/legislative-blue-book Local election offices can provide voter information, including where to vote, how to register to vote, and what is on your ballot. Find contact information for local election offices on the inside back cover of this book or online at: https://www.coloradosos.gov/pubs/elections/Resources/ CountyElectionOffices.html 205 COLORADO GENERAL ASSEMBLY LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ROOM 029 STATE CAPITOL EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE DENVER, COLORADO 80202-1784 COMMITTEE Sen. Leroy Garcia, Chair E-mail: lcs.ga@state.co.us Rep. Adrienne Benavidez Rep. Alec Garnett, Vice-Chair Phone: 303-866-4799 Sen. James Coleman Rep. Daneya Esgar Sen. John Cooke Sen. Stephen Fenberg Sen. Kerry Donovan Sen. Chris Holbert Rep. Tim Geitner Rep. Hugh McKean Rep. Dominique Jackson Rep. Chris Kennedy Sen. Paul LundeenSTAFF Sen. Dominick MorenoNatalie Mullis, Director Rep. Kyle MullicaCathy Eslinger, Research Manager Rep. Rod Pelton Sen. Jim Smallwood September 10, 2021 This booklet provides information on the three statewide measures on the November 2, 2021, ballot. Following a quick ballot reference guide, the information is presented in three sections. Section One — Analyses. Each statewide measure receives an analysis that includes a description of the measure and major arguments for and against. Careful consideration has been given to the arguments in an effort to fairly represent both sides of the issue. Each analysis also includes an estimate of the fiscal impact of the measure. More information on the fiscal impact of measures can be found at leg.colorado.gov/bluebook. The state constitution requires that the nonpartisan research staff of the General Assembly prepare these analyses and distribute them in a ballot information booklet to registered voter households. Section Two — Titles and Text. For each measure, this section includes the title that appears on the ballot and the legal language of each measure, with new laws in capitalized letters and laws that are being eliminated in strikeout type. Section Three — Information on Local Election Officials. The booklet concludes with addresses and telephone numbers of local election officials. Your local election official can provide you with information on voter service and polling centers, absentee ballots, and early voting. Statewide Measures on the 2021 Ballot Table 1 lists the measures on the 2021 ballot. Of the three measures on the ballot, two propose changes to the state statutes, and one proposes changes to both the state constitution and state statutes. All three measures were placed on the ballot by citizens through the signature-collection process. Amendments. A measure placed on the ballot through the signature-collection process that amends the state constitution is labeled an “Amendment,” followed by a number between 1 and 99. A measure placed on the ballot by the state legislature that amends the state constitution is labeled an “Amendment,” followed by a letter. Propositions. A measure placed on the ballot through the signature-collection process that amends the state statutes is labeled a “Proposition,” followed by a number between 100 and 206 199. A measure placed on the ballot by the state legislature that amends the state statutes or that is referred as a tax question is labeled a “Proposition,” followed by a double letter. Voter approval is required in the future to change any constitutional measure adopted by the voters, although the legislature may adopt statutes that clarify or implement these constitutional measures as long as they do not conflict with the constitution. The state legislature, with the approval of the Governor, may change any statutory measure in the future without voter approval. Under provisions in the state constitution, passage of a constitutional amendment requires at least 55 percent of the votes cast, except that when a constitutional amendment is limited to a repeal, it requires a simple majority vote. In 2021, Amendment 78 requires 55 percent of the vote to pass. Propositions 119 and 120 require a simple majority vote to pass. Table 1 Statewide Measures on the 2021 Ballot Amending the Constitution and State Statutes Amendment 78 Legislative Authority for Spending State Money 55% Vote to Pass (Initiative 19) Amending State Statutes Proposition 119 (Initiative 25) Learning Enrichment and Academic Progress Program Simple Majority Vote to Pass Proposition 120 (Initiative 27) Property Tax Assessment Rate Reduction Simple Majority Vote to Pass 207 Quick Ballot Reference Guide .............................................. 1 Amendment 78: Legislative Authority for Spending State Money ........................................................................... 3 Summary and Analysis....................................................................................... 4 Argument For and Against ................................................................................. 6 Fiscal Impact ...................................................................................................... 6 Title and Text .................................................................................................... 21 Proposition 119: Learning Enrichment and Academic Progress Program ................................................................. 7 Summary and Analysis....................................................................................... 8 Arguments For and Against.............................................................................. 10 Fiscal Impact .................................................................................................... 10 State Spending and Tax Increases................................................................... 12 Title and Text .................................................................................................... 23 Proposition 120: Property Tax Assessment Rate Reduction ................................................................... 15 Summary and Analysis..................................................................................... 16 Argument For and Against ............................................................................... 19 Fiscal Impact .................................................................................................... 19 Title and Text .................................................................................................... 36 Contact Information for Local Election Offices .............................. Inside Back Cover 208 209 Amendment 78: Legislative Authority for Spending State Money Placed on the ballot by citizen initiative • Passes with 55 percent of the vote Ballot Title What Your Vote Means Shall there be an amendment to the Colorado Constitution and a change to the Colorado Revised Statutes concerning money that the state receives, and, in connection therewith, requiring all money received by the state, including money provided to the state for a particular purpose, known as custodial money, to be subject to appropriation by the general assembly after a public hearing; repealing the authority to disburse money from the state treasury by any other means; requiring all custodial money to be deposited into the newly created custodial funds transparency fund and the earnings on those deposits to be transferred to the general fund; and allowing the state to retain and spend all custodial money and earnings and revenue on that custodial money as a voter‑approved revenue change? YES A “yes” vote on Amendment 78 requires that all state spending be allocated by the state legislature and that custodial money be deposited in and spent from a new fund. N O A “no” vote on Amendment 78 allows state agencies to continue spending custodial money and certain other money without appropriation by the state legislature. Proposition 119: Learning Enrichment and Academic Progress Program Placed on the ballot by citizen initiative • Passes with a majority vote Ballot Title What Your Vote Means Shall state taxes be increased $137,600,000 annually on retail marijuana sales by a change to the colorado revised statutes concerning the creation of a program to provide out‑of‑school learning opportunities for colorado children aged 5 to 17, and, in connection therewith, creating an independent state agency to administer the program for out‑of‑school learning opportunities chosen by parents; funding the program by increasing the retail marijuana sales tax by 5% by 2024 and reallocating a portion of the public school lands income; authorizing transfers and revenue for program funding as a voter‑approved revenue change; specifying that learning opportunities include tutoring and extra instruction in subjects including reading, math, science, writing, music, and art, targeted support for children with special needs and learning disabilities, career and technical education training, and other academic or enrichment opportunities; and prioritizing program financial aid for low‑income students? YES A “yes” vote on Proposition 119 funds financial aid for tutoring and other out-of-school enrichment and instruction through an increase in retail marijuana taxes and transfers from existing state funds. N O A “no” vote on Proposition 119 means the program will not be created and funded. 1 210 Proposition 120: Property Tax Assessment Rate Reduction Placed on the ballot by citizen initiative • Passes with a majority vote Ballot Title What Your Vote Means Shall there be a change to the Colorado Revised Statutes concerning property tax reductions, and, in connection therewith, reducing property tax revenue by an estimated $1.03 billion in 2023 and by comparable amounts thereafter by reducing the residential property tax assessment rate from 7.15% to 6.5% and reducing the property tax assessment rate for all other property, excluding producing mines and lands or leaseholds producing oil or gas, from 29% to 26.4% and allowing the state to annually retain and spend up to $25 million of excess state revenue, if any, for state fiscal years 2022-23 through 2026-27 as a voter-approved revenue change to offset lost revenue resulting from the property tax rate reductions and to reimburse local governments for revenue lost due to the homestead exemptions for qualifying seniors and disabled veterans? IMPORTANT NOTE: The description of Proposition 120 in this voter information guide differs from the language in the ballot question because a law that changed the effect of the measure was passed by the state legislature after the ballot question was written. YES A “yes” vote on Proposition 120 lowers property tax assessment rates for multifamily housing and lodging properties. It does not impact assessment rates for other types of residential and nonresidential property. N O A “no” vote on Proposition 120 retains the assessment rates for lodging and multifamily housing properties that are in current law. 2 211 Legislative Authority for Spending State Money Placed on the ballot by citizen initiative • Passes with 55 percent of the vote Amendment 78 proposes amending the Colorado Constitution and the Colorado statutes to: y prohibit state agencies from spending money received for a particular purpose (custodial money) without direct allocation by the state legislature; y require that custodial money be deposited into a newly created fund and that interest earned on money in the fund be transferred to the state’s General Fund; and y require that the state legislature allocate any spending from the new fund each year following a public hearing. What Your Vote Means YES A “yes” vote on Amendment 78 NO A “no” vote on Amendment 78 requires that all state spending allows state agencies to continue be allocated by the state legislature and spending custodial money and certain other that custodial money be deposited in and money without appropriation by the state spent from a new fund. legislature. 3 212 Summary and Analysis for Amendment 78 What does this measure do? The measure requires all state spending to be directly allocated, or “appropriated,” by the state legislature. In state government, an appropriation is the primary way the legislature directly allocates money to be spent for state programs. By requiring appropriations for all spending, the measure disallows other currently legal ways for state agencies, public colleges and universities, and elected officials, such as the Governor or the Attorney General, to spend money without a direct allocation by the state legislature. In addition, the measure deposits custodial money in a new fund, called the Custodial Funds Transparency Fund. It defines custodial money as money received by the state that must be used for a particular purpose. This includes money received from the federal government, as a legal settlement from a lawsuit, or as a donation from a private individual or organization. The word “custodial” is used to refer to the money because the state acts as the custodian of the money to ensure that it is spent on the intended purpose. Each year, the legislature must allocate spending from the new fund and hold a public hearing with an opportunity for public comment. Any interest earned on money in the new fund is placed in the state’s General Fund, where it may be used for any purpose. How is spending authorized now? Under the Colorado Constitution, the state legislature has the power to direct how money will be spent by the government through the annual budget process. Each year, the state legislature passes the annual budget bill, completing a process that includes time for public input and debate by legislators. This bill sets the amount of funding available for state programs, allowing state agencies to legally spend the money allocated to them. The budget does not typically determine the spending of custodial money, as these funds originate outside of state government, and the specific purpose for which they must be used is already determined. The legislature may also pass laws that authorize spending outside of the budget process. How would the measure change the process for spending custodial money? All state spending would require direct legislative allocation, including the spending of custodial money. The measure does not change the particular purpose for which custodial money must be spent. However, the state legislature may make different spending decisions than state agencies would to address that purpose, and the timing of when some moneys are spent may change. The state receives custodial money throughout the year, including when the legislature is typically out of session between May and December. Implementation of the measure could require the legislature to establish a new process to allow spending of custodial money outside of the regular legislative session, or to meet for a special session. These 44 213 changes may affect the timing of certain spending decisions, potentially resulting in delayed or interrupted operations until spending is directly allocated. What are examples of money that the measure would affect? The state legislature would have to directly allocate the spending of all funds, including the following types of money that are not part of the current budget process. • Emergency relief funds. For example, in 2020, the state received $1.67 billion in federal relief funds through the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES Act), which was spent according to the Governor’s executive order. • Other money from the federal government. The federal government provides regular funding for many state programs each year including, but not limited to, health care and human services, transportation, and education programs. This money is custodial when federal law says how it should be spent. Only some of this spending is currently directly allocated by the legislature. • Legal settlements. The state receives funds from various legal settlements, such as prior and ongoing opioid-related settlements. These funds are spent by state agencies according to the applicable court orders. • Transportation funding. Under an existing law, nearly all funding for state transportation projects is allocated by an independent commission rather than by the state legislature. • Grants. State agencies may receive competitive grant awards from the federal government or from private organizations, which may be spent on the specific programs or purposes for which the grant was awarded. • Gifts and donations. State agencies, colleges, and universities may receive and spend gifts or donations. What are other impacts of this measure? State revenue limit. Under current law, most and maybe all custodial money and the interest earned on it are exempt from the state’s constitutional revenue limit. Under the measure, all custodial money and the interest earned on it are exempt. Interest revenue. Currently, interest earned on custodial money remains available for the same purpose as the custodial money. This measure would move interest earned on the Custodial Fund Transparency Fund into the General Fund, where it could be spent by the legislature for any purpose. For information on those issue committees that support or oppose the measures on the ballot at the November 2, 2021, election, go to the Colorado Secretary of State’s elections center web site hyperlink for ballot and initiative information: https://www.sos.state.co.us/pubs/elections/Initiatives/InitiativesHome.html 5 214 Argument For Amendment 78 1) The measure increases transparency and accountability in state government. The Governor, the Attorney General, and unelected administrators in state agencies currently spend large amounts of custodial money, often without public input or accessible public records. By requiring that all state spending be directly allocated by the state legislature, the measure allows for public participation and provides transparency in how funds are spent. Argument Against Amendment 78 1) The measure adds unnecessary and expensive bureaucracy and risks significant unintended consequences. A longer allocation process could delay or interrupt state services, including emergency responses to public health or wildfire disasters. Further, making grant funding subject to additional steps could jeopardize Colorado’s competitiveness for grant awards, resulting in the state receiving less money. Finally, the measure shifts decision-making from program experts and independent commissions to a political process in the state legislature. Fiscal Impact for Amendment 78 Amendment 78 increases state spending on the budgeting process, may change how custodial money is spent, and may affect state revenue, as discussed below. State spending. The measure increases spending by at least $1.0 million annually to add new staff in state agency budget offices and the legislative budget committee. The additional staff are needed because the measure requires state agencies to submit proposed spending of custodial money for allocation by the state legislature. Other state spending could be affected if the state legislature makes different spending decisions than would be made by state agencies. While the purpose of the spending is not altered, the state legislature could fund different programs to implement that purpose. State revenue. The overall impact of the measure on state revenue is unknown and depends on how the measure is implemented. Because custodial funds must be placed in the new fund before being spent, the measure could move interest earnings to the General Fund rather than funds controlled by state agencies. However, whether interest earnings increase or decrease depends on many factors, including the different rates of return of the two funds and the amount of time the money remains in the new fund. 6 215 7 Learning Enrichment and Academic Progress Program Placed on the ballot by citizen initiative • Passes with a majority vote Proposition 119 proposes amending the Colorado statutes to: y create the Colorado Learning Enrichment and Academic Progress program to help certain Colorado youth access and pay for out-of-school learning opportunities like tutoring; and y pay for the program by raising retail marijuana taxes and using other existing state funds. What Your Vote Means YES A “yes” vote on Proposition 119 NO A “no” vote on Proposition 119 funds financial aid for tutoring means the program will not be and other out-of-school enrichment and created and funded. instruction through an increase in retail marijuana taxes and transfers from existing state funds. 216 Summary and Analysis for Proposition 119 What does the measure do? The measure creates the Learning Enrichment and Academic Progress program (program) to provide financial aid and support to eligible Colorado youth to access out-of-school learning and enrichment opportunities like tutoring. Children between the ages of 5 and 17 who live in Colorado will be eligible to apply for the program. The program will be funded using revenue raised from increasing retail marijuana taxes by 5 percent over three years, plus an estimated $20 million annually from the General Fund. Additionally, the measure diverts approximately $20 million annually from the State Land Trust, which helps fund public schools, to the State Public School Fund. What are out-of-school learning and enrichment opportunities? The measure defines out‑of‑school learning and enrichment opportunities as any program, service, system, activity, materials, or purchase that provides additional educational or developmental support to youth outside of the regular school day. These opportunities can include, but are not limited to, tutoring, targeted assistance for youth with special needs, second language training, additional academic learning support materials, career and technical educational training programs, social emotional learning, and mental health services. The financial aid provided by the program cannot be used for school tuition or for instruction or materials that are part of the student’s regular school curriculum. How will the program work? Colorado Learning Authority and board of directors. The measure establishes a new state agency called the Colorado Learning Authority (authority), which is independent from oversight by the State Board of Education and the Colorado Department of Education. The authority will be overseen by a nine-member board of directors (board), appointed by the Governor. The authority and its board will be responsible for: • creating and administering the program; • assisting and supporting providers in administering services to eligible youth; • establishing how funds will be distributed; • distributing financial aid to programs selected by eligible youth; • implementing an evaluation system to measure the impacts of the program and the quality of the providers; and • working with selected parents and providers in determining the day-to-day operations of the program. Program providers. Under the measure, the authority is required to develop criteria for the selection and certification of learning opportunity providers. School districts 8 217 and other local education agencies will be pre‑certified as providers, and teachers will receive priority approval as qualified providers. Other interested providers must submit an application and be certified by the authority as an approved provider. A list of authority-approved local and statewide providers will be made available to program participants. Financial aid distribution. The program will pay providers chosen by parents on behalf of eligible youth. In 2023, the measure requires that eligible youth in families with incomes at or below the federal poverty level be given first priority for financial aid, followed by youth in families with incomes up to twice the federal poverty level. In 2021, the federal poverty level is $26,600 for a family of four. After prioritizing these groups, the authority will distribute any remaining aid to other participating students. Beginning in 2024, the measure allows the authority to determine financial aid award amounts, timing, and distribution methods. The authority is still required to prioritize low-income youth. How will the program be funded? The measure funds the program in two ways. First, the measure implements a phased sales tax increase on retail marijuana and marijuana products from the current 15 percent rate to 18 percent in 2022, 19 percent in 2023, and 20 percent in 2024 and each year thereafter. The proposed marijuana sales tax increase is shown in Figure 1. Second, the measure shifts money from existing state funds, including the State Land Trust and the General Fund. For further information on how the program will be funded, refer to the fiscal impact section at the end of the analysis. Figure 1 Phased Sales Tax Rate Increase on Marijuana Under the Measure 9 218 For information on those issue committees that support or oppose the measures on the ballot at the November 2, 2021, election, go to the Colorado Secretary of State’s elections center web site hyperlink for ballot and initiative information: https://www.sos.state.co.us/pubs/elections/Initiatives/InitiativesHome.html Arguments For Proposition 119 1) Proposition 119 increases the sales tax on retail marijuana to fund financial aid for tutoring and other out-of-school learning opportunities for Colorado students. Even before the pandemic, tutoring and out-of-school instructional support were badly needed by the significant number of students who are not proficient in reading, writing, or math. School closures caused by COVID have urgently increased the need for outside instructional support, especially among low-income students who cannot afford the cost of tutoring or enrichment services. 2) Proposition 119 supports the academic and developmental needs of all students, and low‑income students will be prioritized for financial aid. The measure empowers an independent, bipartisan board to certify that tutoring and enrichment providers are qualified and accountable. Once financial aid is awarded, families and students will have the choice about which certified tutors or other instructional providers best meet the specific needs of their student. Arguments Against Proposition 119 1) Proposition 119 allows public money to be directed to private out-of-school service providers instead of invested directly in public schools. Public dollars set aside for education are needed to support the public education system. If voters want to increase retail marijuana taxes for education, the revenue would be better used to expand the capacity of public schools in every community, keeping the money under local control and allowing school districts to reinstate programs they have had to cut and to provide additional learning and enrichment opportunities for children. 2) Increasing the sales tax on marijuana will further increase the gap in prices between legal marijuana and black-market marijuana, pushing more individuals into the black market and hurting legitimate retail marijuana businesses. Additionally, the retail sales tax on marijuana already places a greater financial burden on low‑income individuals; increasing the tax rate will only make this worse. Fiscal Impact for Proposition 119 On net, Proposition 119 will increase state revenue and spending. It also transfers money between various state funds. These impacts, as well as the estimated impact on taxpayers, are discussed below. The state budget year runs from July 1 through June 30. 10 219 State revenue. Proposition 119 will increase state revenue by an estimated $34.8 million in state budget year 2021‑22 and by $87.1 million beginning in budget year 2022-23 by increasing the tax on retail marijuana. The amount for state budget year 2021-22 is a half-year impact. This revenue is not subject to state constitutional spending limits. In addition, the measure reduces investment earnings in the Permanent Fund by about $48.2 million over a ten‑year period, including $30.7 million in interest earnings that would otherwise be used as funding for the K-12 education system and $17.5 million in forgone capital growth in the balance of the Permanent Fund over ten years. State spending. Proposition 119 will increase state expenditures from the newly created Learning Enrichment and Academic Progress Fund by an estimated $55.8 million in budget year 2021‑22 and $109.1 million in budget year 2022‑23 and in future years. The amount for state budget year 2021-22 is a half-year impact. Expenditures will include administration of the Learning Enrichment and Academic Progress Program and the financial aid award amounts distributed to parents. The change in state spending will equal the change in state revenue and transfers. Transfers of state funds. Proposition 119 will divert $21.0 million in budget year 2021‑22 and $22.0 million beginning in budget year 2022‑23 in State Land Trust revenue from the Permanent Fund to the State Public School Fund. The measure then transfers a corresponding amount of revenue each year from the General Fund to the newly created Learning Enrichment and Academic Progress Fund. The money transferred is not subject to state constitutional spending limits. Taxpayer impacts. Proposition 119 will increase the amount of sales taxes paid by Coloradans who purchase marijuana products. State law requires Legislative Council Staff to estimate the potential tax burden on affected taxpayers within specified income categories. However, state law prohibits the collection of personal data on retail marijuana purchasers. Therefore, Legislative Council Staff used data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention concerning the usage of and spending on tobacco products by income group to produce the estimates in Table 1 below. The table estimates the following information: • the estimated number of taxpayers by income category; • the total change in tax burden for each income category; and • the average change in tax burden for individuals in each income category. 11 220 Table 1 Estimated Impact on Retail Marijuana Consumers by Income Category in State Budget Year 2024-25 Estimated Number Total Change Average Change Income Category1 of Taxpayers in Tax Burden in Tax Burden $14,999 or less 280,184 $15.0 million $54 $15,000 to $29,999 253,933 $19.9 million $78 $30,000 to $39,999 145,639 $14.3 million $98 $40,000 to $49,999 98,995 $12.5 million $127 $50,000 to $69,999 146,190 $21.4 million $146 $70,000 to $99,999 110,694 $25.4 million $230 $100,000 to $149,999 75,914 $19.0 million $250 $150,000 to $199,999 37,703 $5.4 million $143 $200,000 to $249,999 22,462 $2.1 million $92 $250,000 to $499,999 14,873 $1.2 million $83 $500,000 to $999,999 5,481 $0.8 million $151 $1,000,000 or more 2,601 $0.6 million $238 Total 1,194,668 $137.6 million 1Federal adjusted gross income State Spending and Tax Increases Article X, Section 20, of the Colorado Constitution requires that the following fiscal information be provided when a tax increase question is on the ballot: • estimates or actual amounts of state fiscal year spending for the current year and each of the past four years with the overall percentage and dollar change; and • for the first full year of the proposed tax increase, estimates of the maximum dollar amount of the tax increase and of state fiscal year spending without the increase. “Fiscal year spending” is a legal term in the Colorado Constitution. It equals the amount of revenue subject to the constitutional spending limit that the state or a district is permitted to keep and either spend or save for a single year. Table 2 shows state fiscal year spending for the current year and each of the past four years. 12 221 Table 2 State Fiscal Year Spending Actual FY 2017-18 Actual FY 2018-19 Actual FY 2019-20 Actual FY 2020-21 Estimated FY 2021-22 Fiscal Year Spending $13.70 billion $14.36 billion $14.87 billion $15.64 billion $15.99 billion Four‑Year Dollar Change in State Spending: $2.29 billion Four‑Year Percent Change in State Spending: 16.7 percent Table 3 shows the revenue expected from the tax increase on retail sales of marijuana for FY 2022‑23, the first full fiscal year for which the tax increase would be in place, and an estimate of state fiscal year spending without the tax increase. The estimate in Table 3 differs from the amount in the ballot question for Proposition 119 because it reflects a different fiscal year, FY 2022‑23 rather than FY 2024‑25. Table 3 Estimated State Fiscal Year Spending and the Proposed Tax Increase on Retail Sales of Marijuana FY 2022-23 Estimate Fiscal Year Spending Without the Tax Increase $19.23 billion Revenue from the Tax Increase on Retail Sales Marijuana $87.1 million 13 222 223 Property Tax Assessment Rate Reduction Placed on the ballot by citizen initiative • Passes with a majority vote Proposition 120 proposes amending the Colorado statutes to: y lower the property tax assessment rates for multifamily housing and lodging properties; and y allow the state to retain money above constitutional spending limits if it is used to fund existing property tax exemptions. IMPORTANT NOTE: The description of the measure in this voter information guide differs from the language in the ballot question because a law that changed the effect of the measure was passed by the state legislature after the ballot question was written. What Your Vote Means YES A “yes” vote on Proposition 120 lowers property tax assessment rates for multifamily housing and lodging properties. It does not impact assessment rates for other types of residential and nonresidential property. NO A “no” vote on Proposition 120 retains the assessment rates for lodging and multifamily housing properties that are in current law. 15 224 Summary and Analysis for Proposition 120 Why is this description of Proposition 120 different from the ballot question and text of the measure? The effect of Proposition 120 changed due to a law passed by the state legislature during the 2021 session, after the ballot question was set. Specifically: • Proposition 120 was initially written to permanently lower the assessment rates for all residential property and most nonresidential property. • Senate Bill 21-293, enacted in June, established new categories of property so that the lower residential assessment rate in Proposition 120 (6.5 percent) applies only to multifamily housing properties, and the lower nonresidential assessment rate (26.4 percent) applies only to lodging properties. Senate Bill 21-293 also temporarily lowers assessment rates for residential properties, agricultural properties, and renewable energy properties for 2022 and 2023, after which the rates return to 2021 levels. What does this voter information guide describe? This voter information guide discusses the impact of Proposition 120 compared with existing law. Existing law includes the changes enacted in Senate Bill 21-293. What happens if Proposition 120 passes? Proposition 120 will lower property tax assessment rates for multifamily housing and lodging properties, as shown in Table 1. Through state budget year 2026-27, the measure also allows the state to retain $25.0 million per year in revenue above the constitutional limit if it is used to fund existing reimbursements to local governments for property tax exemptions for seniors and veterans with a service-related disability. Table 1 Assessment Rate Changes Under Proposition 120 Without Proposition 120 With Proposition 120 Type of Property 2021 2022 and 2023 2024 Starting in 2022 Multifamily Properties 7.15% 6.8% 7.15% 6.5% Lodging Properties 29% 29% 29% 26.4% The following classes of property are not impacted by the measure: • other residential properties, including single‑family homes; • agricultural land; • mines and oil and gas properties; and 16 225 • other nonresidential properties, such as commercial property, industrial property, natural resources, and vacant land. What are property taxes? Residential and nonresidential property owners pay property taxes on a portion of their property’s value. Nonresidential property includes commercial, industrial, agricultural, and oil and gas property, vacant land, natural resources, and mines. Cities, counties, school districts, and special districts impose and collect the tax annually, and use the revenue to fund public schools and local services such as road and street maintenance, police departments, fire protection, water and sewer infrastructure, parks, and libraries. How are property taxes calculated? Figure 1 illustrates how property taxes are calculated. Property taxes are paid on a portion of a property’s actual value. This portion is known as the taxable value, or assessed value, and is calculated by multiplying the actual value by the assessment rate. The actual value of a property is determined by the county assessor or state property tax administrator; the assessment rate is a percentage set in state law. The taxable value is then multiplied by the local tax rate (known as a mill levy) to determine the taxes due. One mill equals $1 for every $1,000 of taxable value. Figure 1 Property Tax Calculation Example: Property value of $300,000, taxed at 100 mills, using 2021 assessment rates. Taxable value = Property value × Assessment rate Residential $300,000 × 7.15% = $21,450 taxable value Nonresidential $300,000 × 29% = $87,000 taxable value Property taxes = Taxable value × Tax rate (Mills/1000) Residential $21,450 × 0.100 = $2,145 owed Nonresidential $87,000 × 0.100 = $8,700 owed How does Proposition 120 impact property taxpayers? Compared to what would be owed without the measure, Proposition 120 reduces property taxes for most owners of the following types of property: • Multifamily housing properties, which include those with more than one housing unit such as duplexes, triplexes, or properties with four or more units, but do not include condominiums; and • Lodging properties, which include hotels, motels, and bed and breakfasts. 17 226 The actual impact on an individual property owner will depend on several factors, including the local jurisdictions in which their property is located, actual future mill levies, and the actual value of their property. The taxpayer impact section below includes the estimated property tax decrease for several examples at different property values, assuming the statewide average mill levy for the 2020 tax year. How does Proposition 120 impact local governments? Proposition 120 reduces property tax revenue to most local governments, compared to what would be collected without the measure, and may impact local services such as education, fire protection, police, transportation, and libraries. The impact on each individual local government’s revenue and services will vary across the state, depending on: • Mix of properties – areas with a higher portion of multifamily housing and lodging properties will be more heavily impacted. • Mill levies – actual mill levies are determined at the local level. Local governments could choose to ask voters to raise future mill levies. Some local governments already have permission from their voters to adjust the tax rate to make up for reductions in assessment rates, and thus may not experience any revenue impacts. Property values are growing at different rates around the state. In areas where property values are growing quickly, the reduction in assessment rates in Proposition 120 will cause property tax revenue overall to grow at a slower rate. In areas where values are not growing quickly, this reduction could cause overall property tax revenue to decrease from one year to the next. How does Proposition 120 impact school funding? Public schools are funded through a combination of state and local government revenue. The state pays the difference between an amount of school district funding required by a formula in state law, and the amount of local tax revenue generated. A reduction in property tax revenue to school districts increases the amount that the state must pay to make up the difference, although actual funding is determined by the state legislature. Property tax reductions from Proposition 120 that are not offset by additional state funding will result in lower school funding for some districts. The impact will vary by district. What is the homestead property tax exemption? The homestead property tax exemption allows eligible veterans with service-related disabilities and seniors to exempt 50 percent of the first $200,000 of residential property value from property taxes. The average exemption was $584 in 2020. In years the exemption is available, the state reimburses local governments for the revenue reduction resulting from the property tax exemption. The state spent $157.9 million on local government reimbursements in state budget year 2020-21. In some 18 227 years, the state legislature has made the exemption temporarily unavailable as a budget balancing decision. The last year the exemption was not available was 2011. Does Proposition 120 change the homestead property tax exemption? No. The measure does not change the homestead property tax exemption. Rather, the measure allows the state to retain $25.0 million above constitutional spending limits per year through the 2026-27 state budget year if that amount is spent on homestead exemptions. For information on those issue committees that support or oppose the measures on the ballot at the November 2, 2021, election, go to the Colorado Secretary of State’s elections center web site hyperlink for ballot and initiative information: https://www.sos.state.co.us/pubs/elections/Initiatives/InitiativesHome.html Argument For Proposition 120 1) The measure provides targeted tax relief for important sectors of Colorado’s economy. Reducing property taxes for most multifamily properties may ease pressure on rents and encourage investment to address Colorado’s housing shortage. In addition, lodging owners may hire and retain more employees and potentially reduce lodging rates, attracting additional visitors. Argument Against Proposition 120 1) Permanently reducing property tax revenue to local governments may result in cuts to important government services. Proposition 120 will pose challenges for special districts, cities, or counties that rely on property tax revenue from multifamily homes or lodging properties to maintain services, such as water, transportation, education, and emergency services. In particular, critical fire protection needs are increasing rapidly, and not all areas of the state are able to generate the funding needed to support these local services. Fiscal Impact for Proposition 120 This measure decreases local government property tax revenue and increases state spending requirements as described below. Local government impact. Proposition 120 is expected to decrease property tax revenue to local governments statewide by an estimated $45.9 million in 2022, and $50.3 million in 2023. The revenue decrease is expected to be larger in later years, due to a scheduled increase in the assessment rate for multifamily housing in 2024 under current law. Prior to the passage of Senate Bill 21-293, the measure was expected to 19 228 decrease property tax revenue to local governments by an estimated $1.03 billion, which is why this number appears in the ballot question. The impact will vary among local governments across the state, and the specific impact on each city, county, special district, or school district will depend on several factors, including mill levies and the composition of properties in each jurisdiction. State spending. The measure increases state spending to backfill lost property tax revenue to school districts. If the measure passes, the state share of school finance is estimated to increase by at least $12.8 million in state budget year 2022‑23, and $14.1 million in state budget year 2023‑24 and subsequent years compared to what would have happened under current law. Additionally, the measure will decrease state spending for the senior and disabled veteran homestead exemption by a minimal amount, and increase workload for the Division of Property Taxation to update forms and training materials and respond to inquiries regarding the changes. For up to five budget years, the measure allows the state to retain $25.0 million in revenue above constitutional spending limits, for the purpose of offsetting lost local government revenue and funding state reimbursements through the homestead exemption. In years when the state collects revenue above its constitutional limit, this provision of the measure effectively has no net impact on state spending or the availability of the homestead exemption. The state’s budget year runs from July 1 through June 30. Taxpayer impacts. The measure lowers property taxes paid by owners of multifamily housing and lodging properties. Table 2 shows the estimated property tax decrease for example property values, assuming the statewide average mill levy (83.537 mills) for the 2020 tax year. The actual impact on an individual property owner will depend on several factors, including the local jurisdictions in which their property is located, actual future mill levies, and the actual value of the property. Table 2 Example Taxpayer Impacts – Proposition 120 Tax Year 2022 Estimated Change in Property Taxes Example Property Value Multifamily Property Lodging Property $500,000 ($125) ($1,086) $1,000,000 ($251) ($2,172) $10,000,000 ($2,506) ($21,720) $50,000,000 ($12,531) ($108,598) $100,000,000 ($25,061) ($217,196) 20 229 Amendment 78 Legislative Authority for Spending State Money The ballot title below is a summary drafted by the professional staff of the offices of the secretary of state, the attorney general, and the legal staff for the general assembly for ballot purposes only. The ballot title will not appear in the Colorado Constitution or Colorado Revised Statutes. The text of the measure that will appear in the Colorado Constitution and Colorado Revised Statutes below was drafted by the proponents of the initiative. The initiated measure is included on the ballot as a proposed change to current law because the proponents gathered the required amount of petition signatures. Ballot Title: Shall there be an amendment to the Colorado Constitution and a change to the Colorado Revised Statutes concerning money that the state receives, and, in connection therewith, requiring all money received by the state, including money provided to the state for a particular purpose, known as custodial money, to be subject to appropriation by the general assembly after a public hearing; repealing the authority to disburse money from the state treasury by any other means; requiring all custodial money to be deposited into the newly created custodial funds transparency fund and the earnings on those deposits to be transferred to the general fund; and allowing the state to retain and spend all custodial money and earnings and revenue on that custodial money as a voter-approved revenue change? Text of Measure: Be it enacted by the People of the State of Colorado: SECTION 1. In the constitution of the state of Colorado, section 33 of article V, amend section 33 as follows: No moneys in the state treasury, nor custodial moneys, shall be disbursed therefrom by the treasurer except upon appropriations made by law, or otherwise authorized by law, and any amount disbursed shall be substantiated by vouchers signed and approved in the manner prescribed by law. SECTION 2. In Colorado Revised Statutes, 24-31-108, amend (5) as follows: (5) If all or a portion of any money received by the attorney general and paid to the department of the treasury pursuant to subsection (2) of this section is custodial money, the attorney general shall direct the state treasurer in writing to place such custodial money in a separate account. Any custodial money placed in a separate account pursuant to this subsection (5) is not subject to annual appropriation by the general assembly. A copy of the written direction to the state treasurer must be delivered to the joint budget committee. Such written direction must set forth the basis for the attorney general’s determination that the money is custodial money and must specify the manner in which the money will be expended. Such written direction must be given to the state treasurer within thirty days after the date the money is paid to the department of the treasury. Any custodial money placed in a separate account pursuant to this subsection (5) must be expended only for the purposes for which the money has been provided. The department shall provide with its annual budget request an accounting of how custodial money has been or will be expended. For informational purposes, the expenditure of such money may be indicated in the annual general appropriation act. 21 230 SECTION 3. In Colorado Revised Statutes, 24-75-201, add 3(d)(e)(f) and (g) as follows: (3)(d) As used in this section, unless the context otherwise requires, “custodial money” or “custodial funds” means money received by the state: (I) That originated from a source other than the state of Colorado; (II) That is awarded or otherwise provided to the state for a particular purpose; (III) For which the state is acting as a custodian or trustee to carry out the particular purpose for which the money has been provided. (e) Custodial fund transparency fund created. (I) There is hereby created in the department of treasury a custodial funds transparency fund. The custodial funds transparency fund shall receive all revenue collected by the state as custodial moneys. Earnings and Revenue from the custodial funds transparency fund shall revert to the general fund. All other money remaining in the custodial funds transparency fund at the end of the fiscal year shall remain in the fund and shall not revert to the general fund. (II) In state fiscal year 2022‑2023, and each fiscal year thereafter, the general assembly shall annually appropriate the custodial funds transparency fund for such purposes as specified by law. (III) moneys from the custodial funds transparency fund shall be appropriated in a public hearing with opportunity for public comment. (f) Revenue collected as custodial funds, as authorized by the voters at the statewide election in the November 2021, together with earnings and revenue, shall be retained and spent by the state as a voter‑approved revenue change and shall be exempt from all revenue, spending, and other limitations under section 20 of article X of the state constitution or any other law. SECTION 4. Effective Date. All provisions of all sections shall take effect on July 1, 2022. 22 231 Proposition 119Learning Enrichment and Academic Progress Program The ballot title below is a summary drafted by the professional staff of the offices of the secretary of state, the attorney general, and the legal staff for the general assembly for ballot purposes only. The ballot title will not appear in the Colorado Revised Statutes. The text of the measure that will appear in the Colorado Revised Statutes below was drafted by the proponents of the initiative. The initiated measure is included on the ballot as a proposed change to current law because the proponents gathered the required amount of petition signatures. Ballot Title: SHALL STATE TAXES BE INCREASED $137,600,000 ANNUALLY ON RETAIL MARIJUANA SALES BY A CHANGE TO THE COLORADO REVISED STATUTES CONCERNING THE CREATION OF A PROGRAM TO PROVIDE OUT-OF-SCHOOL LEARNING OPPORTUNITIES FOR COLORADO CHILDREN AGED 5 TO 17, AND, IN CONNECTION THEREWITH, CREATING AN INDEPENDENT STATE AGENCY TO ADMINISTER THE PROGRAM FOR OUT‑OF‑SCHOOL LEARNING OPPORTUNITIES CHOSEN BY PARENTS; FUNDING THE PROGRAM BY INCREASING THE RETAIL MARIJUANA SALES TAX BY 5% BY 2024 AND REALLOCATING A PORTION OF THE PUBLIC SCHOOL LANDS INCOME; AUTHORIZING TRANSFERS AND REVENUE FOR PROGRAM FUNDING AS A VOTER‑APPROVED REVENUE CHANGE; SPECIFYING THAT LEARNING OPPORTUNITIES INCLUDE TUTORING AND EXTRA INSTRUCTION IN SUBJECTS INCLUDING READING, MATH, SCIENCE, WRITING, MUSIC, AND ART, TARGETED SUPPORT FOR CHILDREN WITH SPECIAL NEEDS AND LEARNING DISABILITIES, CAREER AND TECHNICAL EDUCATION TRAINING, AND OTHER ACADEMIC OR ENRICHMENT OPPORTUNITIES; AND PRIORITIZING PROGRAM FINANCIAL AID FOR LOW‑INCOME STUDENTS? Text of Measure: Be it Enacted by the People of the State of Colorado: SECTION 1. In Colorado Revised Statutes, add article 86.1 to title 22 as follows: ARTICLE 86.1 LEARNING ENRICHMENT AND ACADEMIC PROGRESS (LEAP) PROGRAM 22-86.1-101. Legislative declaration. The voters of the state of Colorado find and declare that: (1) Out‑of‑school learning opportunities are critical for all Colorado children and youth. These learning opportunities, during periods and timeframes outside of their regular school schedules, provide essential academic and life skills for children and youth to thrive in school and life. These learning opportunities are critical to maintaining and enhancing academic performance and mental, physical, and emotional health for all children. (2) The intent of the voters in enacting this article 86.1 is to create a statewide learning program that will provide consistent and reliable access to learning opportunities for all of Colorado’s children and youth outside of their regular school schedules. It is further intended that such program will allow for: tutoring and supplemental academic instruction in core subject areas, including reading, mathematics, science, and writing; targeted support for children and youth with special needs and learning disabilities; access to mental, physical, and emotional health counseling and services; English 23 232 language and foreign language acquisition; access to additional learning supplies and materials, especially for rural students; and other programs that provide academic or enrichment opportunities no longer offered in many schools, including, but not limited to: music, dance, arts, and career and technical education training. (3) Creating the learning enrichment and academic progress program will ensure that these learning experiences are equally available to all Colorado children and youth and that families will have the authority and responsibility to choose programs, experiences, and activities that they believe to be the best fit for their child or youth. (4) All children have unique strengths, needs, and learning styles. Encouraging innovation in the creation and provision of new and expanded learning opportunities statewide will benefit Colorado’s children and youth and reinforce the learning that takes place in many school environments. (5) Implementation of the learning enrichment and academic progress program will provide benefits to Colorado communities by providing: supplemental support to students that will accrue to the benefit of students, their families, and their in‑school educators; additional employment opportunities for individual educators and providers; and increased economic stability for students and families. (6) Providing additional money to the state public school fund ensures that the ongoing financial costs of the learning enrichment and academic progress program has minimal financial impact on the state general fund. (7) By applying a state sales tax to retail marijuana and transferring a portion of revenues earned on Colorado’s school trust lands to the state public school fund, the state will be able to fund the learning enrichment and academic progress program for Colorado children and youth. 22-86.1-102. Definitions. As used in this article 86.1, unless the context otherwise requires: (1) “Authority” means the Colorado learning authority created by section 22‑86.1‑103. (2) “Board” means the Colorado learning authority board of directors created by section 22-86.1-105. (3) “Eligible child or youth” means a child or youth who is five years of age or older in a qualifying year but who is under eighteen years of age and who resides in Colorado and is, or will be, eligible for admission to public school within the state. (4) “Learning enrichment and academic progress program” or “LEAP program” or “program” means the learning program created in this article 86.1. (5) “Learning opportunities fund” or “fund” means the learning enrichment and academic progress fund created by section 22‑86.1‑106. (6) “Local education provider” means a school district, a board of cooperative services, a district charter school, or an institute charter school. (7)(a) “Out‑of‑school learning opportunity” or “Learning opportunity” means a program, service, system, activity, materials, or other pursuit or purchase that provides 24 233 supplemental educational or developmental support to eligible children or youth outside of normal school operations. (b) “Learning opportunity” includes, but is not limited to: tutoring and supplemental academic instruction in core subject areas, including reading, mathematics, science, and writing; targeted support for children and youth with special needs and learning disabilities; English language and foreign language acquisition; career and technical education training; other programs that provide academic or enrichment opportunities; and reasonable and necessary materials and supplies to complete or participate in a learning opportunity. (c) “Learning opportunity” also includes emotional and physical therapy, mental health services, social emotional learning, mentoring, and other services that support students in their pursuit of a holistic and meaningful education. (d) “Learning opportunity” does not include in‑school instruction, services, materials, curricula, or programs provided as part of a normal course of study conducted in accordance with a student’s compulsory attendance requirements under section 22-33-104. “Learning opportunity” does not include credit recovery programs regardless of the time of day or day of the week they are offered. “Learning opportunity” does not include payment of school tuition. (8) “Parent” means a parent or legal guardian of an eligible child or youth or an individual who stands in loco parentis of an eligible child or youth. 22-86.1-103. The learning enrichment and academic progress program and authority -establishment - purposes - powers. (1) There is hereby established an independent agency within the department of education, the Colorado learning authority. The authority shall exercise its powers and perform its duties and functions as if it were transferred to the department by a type 1 transfer under the provisions of the “Administrative Organization Act of 1968,” article 1 of title 24. In addition to any other statutory powers, duties, and functions of the authority, the authority may perform all budgeting, purchasing, planning, and related management functions independently of the department, the state board of education, and the commissioner of education. (2) There is hereby created the learning enrichment and academic progress program for the distribution of financial aid on behalf of eligible children or youth in Colorado to be used for learning opportunities. (3) The authority shall: (a) Seek to increase access to learning opportunities for every eligible child or youth, ensure a broad diversity of learning opportunities and providers, and help parents choose resources for their child or youth. (b) Create and develop criteria for the provision and selection of learning opportunities for distribution of funds, consistent with and in furtherance of the goals and purposes stated in section 22‑86.1‑101, to be provided within the state of Colorado for eligible children or youth. An allowable use of financial aid includes reasonable expenses for transportation of an eligible child or youth to and from learning opportunities. It is the intent of the people that the financial aid distributed will be new dollars to spend on new services and must not supplant existing public or charitable funding for programs available to eligible children or youth. 25 234 (c) Create and develop criteria for publication, solicitation, receipt, and evaluation of applications from potential providers of learning opportunities under the program. Such criteria must maximize the number and diversity of providers that parents and eligible children or youth can choose, must enable parents to evaluate the provider once services have been received, and must also ensure that small community‑based providers are eligible and able to participate in the program. (d) Create and develop criteria to certify providers of learning opportunities under the program. In the interest of facilitating academic interventions for students who are behind their grade level, the authority shall pre‑certify local school districts, boards of cooperative services, and other local education providers and create a process to ensure priority approval of educators as qualified providers. The authority is not eligible for certification as a provider. Minimum requirements to be an eligible provider must include being authorized to do business in Colorado and carrying sufficient liability insurance as determined by the authority. The authority may provide reasonable support to providers to ensure a broad representation of providers can meet the requirements of this subsection (3). Immediate family members are not eligible to be qualified providers in the provision of services to their child or youth. The authority shall determine under what circumstances a qualified provider loses their certification and may ban providers who have engaged in fraud or other specious financial activities, within the scope of this program, from providing services to eligible children or youth. (e) Create and develop criteria to establish procedures to ensure child or youth safety, including the provision of recent background checks provided through the Colorado bureau of investigation or similar federal agency for providers who come in contact with children or youth. (f) Create and develop criteria to establish and manage financial aid on behalf of parents and to compensate approved providers of learning opportunities for eligible uses specifically and independently chosen by parents and provided to an eligible child or youth. The financial aid funds must be provided and administered with the method of distribution to be determined by the authority and subject to the maximum financial aid amount per eligible child or youth as determined by the authority as follows: (I) In determining the method of distribution, the authority shall prioritize low‑income families with children or youth who could not otherwise afford learning opportunities. Within the prioritized income category of children and youth, the authority may place an additional priority on those eligible children or youth who are not proficient at grade level in reading, math, or other core academic areas, or who have special educational, physical, or emotional needs or disabilities. (II) In calendar year 2022, the authority shall, to the maximum extent practicable, distribute financial aid for eligible children or youth. (III) In calendar year 2023, the authority shall ensure that the total annual financial aid distribution for each prioritized eligible child or youth participating in the program is at least one thousand five hundred dollars, and may provide financial aid awards to non‑prioritized eligible children or youth in amounts less than one thousand five hundred dollars as determined by the authority. The authority may choose to have one application and financial aid disbursal period or more than one. For each disbursal period, the authority shall award financial aid as follows: 26 235 (A) Financial aid must be distributed first to eligible children or youth who reside in households that are at or below one hundred percent of the federal poverty level. (B) After all eligible children or youth residing in households at or below one hundred percent of the federal poverty level who have chosen to participate in the program have received financial aid, the authority shall distribute financial aid to eligible children or youth who reside in households that are greater than one hundred and less than two hundred percent of the federal poverty level. (C) After all eligible children or youth residing in households that are greater than one hundred and less than two hundred percent of the federal poverty level who have chosen to participate in the program have received financial aid, the authority shall distribute financial aid to eligible children or youth who reside in households that are at or above two hundred percent of the federal poverty level. (IV) In calendar year 2024 and in subsequent calendar years, the authority shall determine the financial aid award amounts to be provided to eligible children or youth and the method and timing of distribution. (V) In determining the manner in which families qualify for the program, the authority should ensure simple and easily understandable application forms and processes. The authority has control over when and how financial aid is distributed to approved providers that the parents choose, subject to administrative rules adopted by the board. Such financial aid must further be provided and administered in a manner that does not discriminate against any eligible child or youth, eligible child or youth’s family, provider, or learning opportunity on the basis of race, ethnicity, color, native language, religious affiliation, national origin, gender, military status, sexual orientation, gender variance, marital status, or physical or mental disability. (g) Create multiple‑year financial aid as practicable for low‑income eligible children or youth residing in households that are less than two hundred percent of the federal poverty level to ensure those eligible children or youth have the assurance of funding for a minimum of a three‑year period regardless of changes to the family’s income level and to provide stability for those children or youth. (h) Create and develop criteria and protocols for rollover of unused funds for each financial aid recipient, for use by the recipient in additional learning opportunities under the program. Any financial aid of a child or youth who no longer qualifies as an eligible child or youth must revert back to the learning enrichment and academic progress fund. Financial aid funds may accumulate for three years, but upon the start of the fourth year of funding, the entirety of the funds, excepting the newly awarded fourth‑year funds, revert back to the learning enrichment and academic progress fund. At the time an eligible child or youth reaches the age of eighteen, any remaining financial aid for that child or youth must revert back to the learning enrichment and academic progress fund. (i) Cause to be conducted, and make publicly available, annual independent financial audits of the authority. Such audits must be conducted by certified public accountants and must be filed with the board no later than July 1 of each year for the previous calendar year. As a component of the audits, the auditor shall select a representative sample of providers and evaluate whether the funds were used for the purposes outlined in this section. Additionally, the authority may contract with a third‑party evaluator to evaluate the efficacy of providers. The authority shall redact all names of taxpayers and social security numbers or tax identification numbers before publicly releasing any audit or other financial report. 27 236 (j) To the maximum extent practicable, create and implement an evaluation system by January 1, 2024, to measure the impacts of learning opportunities provided to eligible students and to ensure that learning providers are rated by quantitative and qualitative results. This system must also incorporate parent and youth feedback and ratings and must be publicly and easily available for use by eligible children or youth and their families. At a minimum, these metrics and data must be collected, analyzed, and made publicly available annually. In designing the evaluation system, the authority shall prioritize: (I) The development of a range of impact metrics that may encompass qualitative, quantitative, short‑term, and longitudinal data; (II) The integration of authority‑developed data systems with data systems in school districts or other public entities to assess for short‑term academic impact and long‑term life outcomes; and (III) The protection of student and family personal identifying information. (4) In addition to the duties specified in subsection (3) of this section, the Colorado learning authority has the following duties, some or all of which may be delegated by contract: (a) Administer, in accordance with criteria established under subsection (3)(c) of this section, the publication, solicitation, receipt, evaluation, and selection of applications from potential providers of learning opportunities under the program to which parents may direct financial aid; (b) Enter into agreements and contracts as necessary with approved providers of learning opportunities under the program; (c) Develop, establish, and manage a system for receipt, processing, and evaluation of applications from eligible children or youth; (d) Assist eligible children or youth, parents, and their families in navigating and selecting among available learning opportunities; (e) Provide technical, programmatic, and capacity building expertise and funding to increase the number and quality of providers; (f) Establish, manage, and distribute financial aid for eligible children or youth funded by the learning opportunities fund to pay approved providers of approved learning opportunities; and (g) Provide technology services, subject to criteria established and determined by the authority, for purposes of monitoring and tracking the use of financial aid by eligible children or youth and approved provider performance and payments. (5) No more than ten percent of money from the learning enrichment and academic progress fund may be spent on administrative expenses in any fiscal year after the end of fiscal year 2025. The authority shall annually review the percentage of money from the learning enrichment and academic progress fund that can be spent on administrative expenses and reduce the percentage as possible. 28 237 (6) The authority is subject to all the applicable requirements of the “Colorado Open Records Act”, part 2 of article 72 of title 24, C.R.S., and the “Colorado Open Meetings Law”, part 4 of article 6 of title 24, C.R.S. (7)(a) The authority shall ensure that the learning program is administered in a manner that: (I) Provides assistance to benefit eligible children or youth on behalf of parents who have specifically and independently chosen a learning opportunity, not any particular qualified provider; (II) Does not discriminate against any eligible child or youth, eligible child or youth’s family, or provider’s religious affiliation; (III) Ensures that the program does not require any courses in religion or theology; and (IV) Does not deny any eligible child or youth the program’s benefits based on the religious character of the provider. (b) Nothing in this subsection (7) gives any person a private cause of action. 22-86.1-104. Additional powers of the Colorado learning authority. (1) In addition to any other powers granted to the authority in this article 86.1, the authority has the following powers: (a) To adopt, have, and use a seal and to alter the same at its pleasure; (b) To enter into any contract or agreement not inconsistent with this article 86.1 or the laws of this state and to authorize the executive director to enter into contracts, execute all instruments, and do all things necessary or convenient in the exercise of the powers granted in this article 86.1; (c) To purchase, lease, trade, exchange, or otherwise acquire, maintain, hold, improve, mortgage, lease, sell, and dispose of personal property, whether tangible or intangible, or any interest therein; and to purchase, lease, trade, exchange, or otherwise acquire real property or any interest therein and to maintain, hold, improve, mortgage, lease, or otherwise transfer such real property, so long as such transactions do not interfere with the mission of the authority as specified in section 22‑86.1‑103; (d) To acquire space, equipment, services, supplies, and insurance necessary to carry out the purposes of this article 86.1; (e) To contract for and to accept any gifts, grants, or loans of funds, property, or any other aid in any form from the federal government, the state, any state agency, or any other source, or any combination thereof, and to comply, subject to the provisions of this article 86.1, with the terms and conditions thereof; (f) To fix the time and place or places at which its regular and special meetings are to be held; (g) To adopt and from time to time amend or repeal bylaws and rules and regulations consistent with the provisions of this article 86.1; 29 238 (h) To appoint a treasurer of the board and such other officers as the board of directors may determine and provide for their duties and terms of office; (i) To appoint an executive director and such agents, employees, and professional and business advisers as may from time to time be necessary in its judgment to accomplish the purposes of this article 86.1, to fix the compensation of such executive director, employees, agents, and advisers, and to establish the powers and duties of all such agents, employees, and other persons contracting with the authority; (j) To make and execute agreements, contracts, or other instruments necessary or convenient to the exercise of the powers and functions of the authority under this article 86.1, including but not limited to, contracts with any person, firm, corporation, state agency, local government, or other entity; and (k) To have and exercise all rights and powers necessary or incidental to or implied from the specific powers granted in this article 86.1, which specific powers must not be considered as a limitation upon any power necessary or appropriate to carry out the purposes and intent of this article 86.1. 22-86.1-105. Colorado learning authority - board of directors - powers and duties. (1) The authority consists of a board of directors, appointed pursuant to subsection (2) of this section, and any staff or contract employees hired by the authority as authorized by law. Any staff hired by the authority are employees subject to the state personnel system of this state as defined in section 13 of article XII of the state constitution and article 50 of title 24; except that, all positions classified by the authority as professional officers and professional staff of the authority are declared to be educational in nature and exempt from the state personnel system. (2) The board consists of nine members, no more than five of whom are members of the same political party. Members must be appointed by the governor, with the consent of the senate. (a) Members of the initial board must be appointed by January 15, 2022. In making the appointments, the governor shall seek board members who have significant experience in start‑up enterprises and delivering educational services to low‑income children, including, for example, expertise in: (I) E‑commerce or payment systems; (II) Cybersecurity; (III) Organizational start‑up and structure; (IV) Nonprofit experience with services for low‑income families and communities; (V) Experience in kindergarten through 12th grade education, including but not limited, to educators and administrators; (VI) Consumer technology that connects providers with consumers; (VII) Overseeing user‑directed accounts; and (VIII) Database creation or management. 30 239 (b) At least one member of the initial board must be a parent of a child who would qualify as a prioritized eligible child or youth for the program. (c) Members of the initial board shall serve a single term of three years. (d) The term of any member appointed prior to January 1, 2025 expires on December 31, 2024. The governor shall make new appointments to the board for terms beginning on or after January 1, 2025 by selecting new board members from a list of recommended candidates generated by the initial board through a process open to applications from the public. The governor shall appoint all subsequent new board members from a list of recommended candidates generated by the then‑existing board through a process open to applications from the public. Each list must provide a minimum of three recommended candidates for each position to be appointed, or such lesser number as there are applications. After January 1, 2025, the board shall consist of one resident of each congressional district of the state and one or two at‑large members, depending on the number of congressional districts in the state at the time of appointment to ensure an odd number of board members. After January 1, 2025, members of the board shall be as follows: (I) At least four members who are a parent or legal guardian of a child who is five years of age or older but who is under seventeen years of age; (II) Two representatives of a nonprofit organization that has a focus on services for low‑income families and communities; and (III) At least three members who have experience working with children who are five years of age or older but who are under eighteen years of age, including but not limited to, educators and administrators. (e) Members of the board appointed on or after January 1, 2025 serve for three‑year terms; except that, members appointed from an odd‑numbered congressional district serve an initial term of two years. After January 1, 2025, members of the board may serve up to three consecutive terms, and members are subject to removal as provided in article IV, section 6 of the Colorado Constitution. (3) As soon as reasonably practicable, the initial board of directors shall establish a learning opportunities parent advisory council and a learning opportunities provider advisory council to: (a) Provide input to the board concerning the program, eligibility of children and youth, criteria for qualifications of learning providers, financial aid distribution, and all other matters of implementing the learning program; and (b) Provide recommendations to the appointing authority for parent representation on the board. (4) Members of the ongoing board may not during their terms of service be employed by or contract with persons that provide or offer to provide learning opportunities under the program. (5) Members of the initial and ongoing boards may receive a per diem of up to two hundred dollars for attendance at regularly scheduled meetings of the board at the discretion of the chair based on financial hardship and are reimbursed for actual and necessary 31 240 expenses incurred while performing official duties, together with mileage at the rate at which members of the general assembly are reimbursed pursuant to section 2‑2‑317. A member of the board who is a state officer or employee shall not claim per diem compensation, but must be reimbursed for actual and necessary expenses incurred while performing official duties, together with mileage at the rate at which members of the general assembly are reimbursed pursuant to section 2‑2‑317. (6)(a) The initial and ongoing boards must also consist of four nonvoting members, three of whom are appointed by the board chair and one by the executive director of the Colorado commission of Indian affairs. (b) The nonvoting members must: (I) Be fourteen years of age or older but under nineteen years of age; and (II) Be enrolled in and attending a tribal or Colorado junior high, middle, or high school, including an online or charter school or approved facility school as defined in section 22‑2‑402; be participating in a nonpublic, home‑based educational program; be participating in a high school equivalency examination program; or have obtained a high school diploma through successful completion of a high school equivalency examination, as defined in section 22‑33‑102 (8.5). (c) The initial appointments for nonvoting members of the board of directors must be completed by June 1, 2022. Nonvoting members serve for two‑year terms, except that, as determined by the board chair, two nonvoting members initially appointed to the board will serve for one year. Nonvoting members of the board may serve up to two consecutive terms. Nonvoting members of the board may receive a per diem of up to two hundred dollars for attendance at regularly scheduled meetings of the board at the discretion of the chair based on financial hardship and are reimbursed for actual and necessary expenses incurred while performing official duties, together with mileage at the rate at which members of the general assembly are reimbursed pursuant to section 2-2-317. (7) The board has the following powers and duties: (a) To hire an executive director; (b) To establish and oversee the program created by this article 86.1, assuring that as much funding as practicable is dedicated to the provision of financial aid and assistance to eligible children or youth and their families in finding and selecting available learning opportunities; (c) To obtain the services of expert consultants as necessary and appropriate for the performance of its duties and responsibilities; (d) To elect one director as chair of the board and another director as chairman pro tem of the board; and (e) To perform all such actions as may be necessary and appropriate to carry out the duties and responsibilities specified in this article 86.1. 22-86.1-106. Learning enrichment and academic progress fund - creation - crediting of money to fund - use of fund. (1) The learning enrichment and academic progress fund is hereby 32 241 created in the state treasury. The fund is administered by the authority and consists of all money transferred or credited to the fund pursuant to subsections (2), (3), and (4) of this section and section 39‑28.8‑203(1)(c). All interest and income earned on the deposit and investment of money in the fund must be credited to the fund and must not be transferred to the general fund or any other state fund at the end of any state fiscal year. (2) The authority may seek, accept, and expend any gifts, grants, donations, loans of funds, property, or any other revenue or aid in any form from the federal government, the state, any state agency, any other public source, any private source, or any combination thereof, and any such monetary receipts must be credited to the fund and any such in‑kind receipts must be applied for the benefit of the fund. (3) At the end of the third and fourth quarters of state fiscal year 2021‑22, the state treasurer shall transfer from the general fund to the learning enrichment and academic progress fund the same amount of money transferred to the state public school fund pursuant to section 36‑1‑116(1)(d). For that state fiscal year, an amount of state general fund revenue equal to the total amount of such transfers shall be exempt from all revenue, spending, and other limitations under section 20 of article X of the state constitution and any other law. (4) At the end of each state fiscal year, beginning with the fiscal year commencing July 1, 2022, the state treasurer shall transfer from the general fund to the learning enrichment and academic progress fund the same amount of money transferred to the state public school fund pursuant to section 36‑1‑116(1)(d). For each state fiscal year an amount of state general fund revenue equal to the amount of such transfer shall be exempt from all revenue, spending, and other limitations under section 20 of article X of the state constitution and any other law. (5) The money transferred or credited to the fund, including any income and interest derived from the deposit and investment of such money, is exempt from any restriction on spending, revenue, or appropriations, including the restrictions of section 20 of Article X of the state constitution or any other law. (6) The money in the fund is continuously appropriated to the authority for the direct and indirect costs of carrying out the provisions of this article 86.1. SECTION 2. In Colorado Revised Statutes, section 36-1-116, amend (1)(a)(II)(A) and (1)(b)(I); and add (1)(d) as follows: 36-1-116. Disposition of rentals, royalties, and timber sale proceeds. (1)(a)(II)(A) Except as provided in subsections (1)(a)(II)(B), and (1)(a)(II)(C), and (1)(d), for the 2010‑11 state fiscal year and each state fiscal year thereafter, the proceeds received by the state for the sale of timber on public school lands, lease payments and rental payments for said lands, rental payments for the use and occupation of the surface of said lands, and rentals or lease payments for sand, gravel, clay, stone, coal, oil, gas, geothermal resources, gold, silver, or other minerals on said lands other than proceeds, rentals, and payments allocated to the state land board trust administration fund pursuant to section 36-1-145(3) or credited to the public school capital construction assistance fund created in section 22-43.7-104(1),C.R.S., pursuant to section 22-43.7-104(2)(b)(I), C.R.S., shall be credited to the permanent school fund and shall become part of the principal of the permanent school fund. (b)(I) Except for royalties and other payments allocated to the state land board trust administration fund pursuant to section 36-1-145(3) or credited to the public school capital construction assistance 33 242 fund created in section 22-43.7-104(1), C.R.S., pursuant to section 22-43.7-104(2)(b)(I), C.R.S., except as provided in subparagraph (II) of this paragraph (b), and except as provided in paragraph paragraphs (c) and (d) of this subsection (1), royalties and other payments for the depletion or extraction of a natural resource on said lands shall be credited to the permanent school fund. (d) (I) for the third and fourth quarters of state fiscal year 2021‑22, any amounts to be credited or transferred to the permanent school fund pursuant to subsections (1)(a) (II)(A) and (1)(b)(I) of this section shall instead be transferred to the state public school fund created in section 22‑54‑114. (II) Beginning with the state fiscal year commencing July 1, 2022, any amounts to be credited or transferred to the permanent school fund pursuant to subsections (1)(a) (II)(A) and (1)(b)(I) of this section in excess of twenty million dollars shall instead be transferred to the state public school fund created in section 22‑54‑114. SECTION 3. In Colorado Revised Statutes, 39-28.8-202, amend (1)(a)(I) and (1)(b) as follows: 39-28.8-202. Retail marijuana sales tax. (1)(a)(I)(A) In addition to the tax imposed pursuant to part 1 of article 26 of this title 39 and the sales tax imposed by a local government pursuant to title 29, 30, 31, or 32, but except as otherwise set forth in subsections (1)(a)(II) and (1)(a)(III) of this section, there is imposed upon all sales of retail marijuana and retail marijuana products by a retailer a tax at rates specified in this subsection (1)(a)(I). (B) Beginning January 1, 2014, and through June 30, 2017, there is imposed upon all sales of retail marijuana and retail marijuana products by a retailer a tax at the rate of ten percent of the amount of the sale. (C) Beginning July 1, 2017, there is imposed upon all sales of retail marijuana and retail marijuana products by a retailer a tax at the rate of fifteen percent of the amount of the sale. (D) Beginning January 1, 2022, there is imposed upon all sales of retail marijuana and retail marijuana products by a retailer, in addition to the fifteen percent tax imposed by subsection (1)(a)(I)(C) of this section, a tax of three percent of the amount of the sale through December 31, 2022, a tax of four percent of the amount of the sale beginning January 1, 2023 and through December 31, 2023, and a tax of five percent of the amount of the sale beginning January 1, 2024. (E) The tax imposed by this section is computed in accordance with schedules or forms prescribed by the executive director of the department; except that a retail marijuana store is not allowed to retain any portion of the retail marijuana sales tax collected pursuant to this part 2 to cover the expenses of collecting and remitting the tax. The executive director may promulgate rules to implement this section. (b) The maximum tax rate that may be imposed pursuant to this section is fifteen percent plus the applicable tax rate specified in subsection (1)(a)(I)(D) of this section. At any time on or after January 1, 2014 January 1, 2022, the general assembly may, by a bill enacted by the general assembly and that becomes law: (I) Establish a tax rate to be imposed pursuant to this subsection (1) that is lower than fifteen percent of the sale of retail marijuana or retail marijuana products such maximum tax rate; or (II) After establishing a tax rate that is lower than fifteen percent pursuant to subparagraph (I) of this paragraph (b) lowering the tax rate pursuant to subsection (1)(b)(I) of this section, increase 34 243 the tax rate to be imposed pursuant to this subsection (1); except that, in no event shall the general assembly increase the tax rate above fifteen percent of the sale of retail marijuana or retail marijuana products the maximum tax rate specified in this subsection (1)(b). Notwithstanding any other provision of law, an increase in the tax rate pursuant to this subparagraph (II) shall not require voter approval subsequent to the voter approval required pursuant to part 4 of this article. SECTION 4. In Colorado Revised Statutes, 39-28.8-203, amend (1)(a)(I) and (1)(b)(I.5) introductory portion and add (1)(c) as follows: 39-28.8-203. Disposition of collections – definitions. (1) The proceeds of all money collected from the retail marijuana sales tax are initially credited to the old age pension fund created in section 1 of article XXIV of the state constitution in accordance with paragraphs (a) and (f) of section 2 of article XXIV of the state constitution and thereafter are transferred to the general fund in accordance with section 7 of article XXIV of the state constitution. For each fiscal year in which a tax is collected pursuant to this part 2, an amount shall be appropriated or distributed from the general fund as follows: (a)(I) Before July 1, 2017, an amount equal to fifteen percent of the gross retail marijuana sales tax revenue collected by the department is apportioned to local governments. On and after July 1, 2017, an amount equal to ten percent of the gross retail marijuana sales tax revenue collected by the department, excluding revenue attributable to the additional tax imposed by section 39-28.8-202(1)(a)(I)(D), is apportioned to local governments. The city or town share is apportioned according to the percentage that retail marijuana sales tax revenue collected by the department within the boundaries of the city or town bear to the total retail marijuana sales tax revenue collected by the department. The county share is apportioned according to the percentage that retail marijuana sales tax revenue collected by the department in the unincorporated area of the county bear to total retail marijuana sales tax revenue collected by the department. (b)(I.5) On and after July 1, 2018, of the ninety percent of the gross retail marijuana sales tax revenue in the general fund remaining after the allocation to local governments required by subsection (1)(a) (I) of this section is made, and excluding revenue attributable to the additional tax imposed by section 39‑28.8‑202(1)(a)(I)(D), the state treasurer shall retain fifteen and fifty‑six one‑hundredths percent in the general fund for use for any lawful purpose and shall transfer from the general fund: (c) On and after January 1, 2022, the state treasurer shall transfer monthly from the general fund to the learning enrichment and academic progress fund created by section 22‑86.1‑106 all revenue collected by the department attributable to the additional tax imposed by section 39‑28.8‑202(1)(a)(I)(D). SECTION 5. In Colorado Revised Statutes, amend 39-28.8-204 as follows: 39-28.8-204. Revenue and spending limitations. (1) Notwithstanding any limitations on revenue, spending, or appropriations contained in section 20 of article X of the state constitution or any other provision of law, any revenues generated by the retail marijuana sales tax imposed pursuant to this part 2 as approved by the voters at the statewide election in November 2013, may be collected and spent as voter-approved revenue changes and shall not require voter approval subsequent to the voter approval required pursuant to part 4 of this article. (2) Notwithstanding any limitations on revenue, spending, or appropriations contained in section 20 of article X of the state constitution or any other provision of law, any revenues generated by the additional retail marijuana sales tax imposed by section 39-28.8-202(1)(a)(I)(D), as approved by the voters at the statewide election in November 2021, may be collected and spent as a voter‑approved revenue change. 35 244 Proposition 120Property Tax Assessment Rate Reduction The ballot title below is a summary drafted by the professional staff of the offices of the secretary of state, the attorney general, and the legal staff for the general assembly for ballot purposes only. The ballot title will not appear in the Colorado Revised Statutes. The text of the measure that will appear in the Colorado Revised Statutes below was drafted by the proponents of the initiative. The initiated measure is included on the ballot as a proposed change to current law because the proponents gathered the required amount of petition signatures. Ballot Title: Shall there be a change to the Colorado Revised Statutes concerning property tax reductions, and, in connection therewith, reducing property tax revenue by an estimated $1.03 billion in 2023 and by comparable amounts thereafter by reducing the residential property tax assessment rate from 7.15% to 6.5% and reducing the property tax assessment rate for all other property, excluding producing mines and lands or leaseholds producing oil or gas, from 29% to 26.4% and allowing the state to annually retain and spend up to $25 million of excess state revenue, if any, for state fiscal years 2022‑23 through 2026‑27 as a voter‑approved revenue change to offset lost revenue resulting from the property tax rate reductions and to reimburse local governments for revenue lost due to the homestead exemptions for qualifying seniors and disabled veterans? Text of Measure: Be it Enacted by the People of the State of Colorado: SECTION 1. In Colorado Revised Statutes, 39-1-104 amend (1) as follows: (1) Through December 31, 2021 the valuation for assessment of all taxable property in the state shall be twenty-nine percent, and beginning on January 1, 2022 the valuation for assessment of all taxable property in the state shall be twenty‑six and four‑tenths percent of the actual value thereof as determined by the assessor and the administrator in the manner prescribed by law, and such percentage shall be uniformly applied, without exception, to the actual value, so determined, of the various classes and subclasses of real and personal property located within the territorial limits of the authority levying a property tax, and all property taxes shall be levied against the aggregate valuation for assessment resulting from the application of such percentage. This subsection (1) shall not apply to residential real property, producing mines, and lands or leaseholds producing oil or gas. SECTION 2. In Colorado Revised Statutes, 39-1-104.2 amend (3)(q) as follows: 39-1-104.2. Adjustment of residential rate - legislative declaration - definitions. (3) (q) The ratio of valuation for assessment for residential real property is 7.15 percent of actual value for property tax years commencing on or after January 1, 2019 and 6.5 percent of the actual value for property tax commencing January 1, 2022, until the next property tax year that the general assembly adjusts the ratio of valuation for assessment for residential real property. SECTION 3. In Colorado Revised Statutes, 39-3-207 add (6) as follows: 39-3-207. Reporting of exemptions—reimbursement to local governmental entities. 36 245 (6) for the purpose of off‑setting lost revenue resulting from a reduction in property tax and to fund state reimbursements to local government entities for the application of the homestead exemption, in fiscal year commencing on July 1, 2022 through fiscal year ending July 1, 2027, the state shall be authorized to retain and spend up to 25 million per year in revenue for warrants otherwise authorized under this section. 37 246 Adams 4430 S. Adams County Parkway, Suite E-3102, Brighton, CO 80601 (720) 523-6500 Alamosa 8999 Independence Way, Suite 101, Alamosa, CO 81101 (719) 589-6681 Arapahoe 5334 S. Prince St., Littleton, CO 80120 (303) 795-4511 Archuleta 449 San Juan St., Pagosa Springs, CO 81147 (970) 264-8331 Baca 741 Main St., Suite 3, Springfield, CO 81073 (719) 523-4372 Bent 725 Bent Ave., Las Animas, CO 81054 (719) 456-2009 Boulder 1750 33rd St., Suite 200, Boulder, CO 80301 (303) 413-7740 Broomfield 1 DesCombes Dr., Broomfield, CO 80020 (303) 464-5857 Chaffee 104 Crestone Ave., Salida, CO 81201 (719) 539-4004 Cheyenne 51 S. 1st St. , Cheyenne Wells, CO 80810 (719) 767-5685 Clear Creek 405 Argentine St., Georgetown, CO 80444 (303) 679-2339 Conejos 6683 County Rd. 13, Conejos, CO 81129 (719) 376-5422 Costilla 400 Gasper St., Suite 101, San Luis, CO 81152 (719) 937-7671 Crowley 631 Main St., Suite 102, Ordway, CO 81063 (719) 267-5225 Custer 205 S. 6th St., Westcliffe, CO 81252 (719) 783-2441 Delta 501 Palmer St., Suite 211, Delta, CO 81416 (970) 874-5903 Denver 200 W. 14th Ave., Suite 100, Denver, CO 80204 (303) 653-9668 Dolores 409 N. Main St., Dove Creek, CO 81324 (970) 677-2381 Douglas 125 Stephanie Pl., Castle Rock, CO 80109 (303) 660-7444 Eagle 500 Broadway, Suite 101, Eagle, CO 81631 (970) 328-8715 Elbert 440 Comanche St., Kiowa, CO 80117 (303) 621-3127 El Paso 1675 W. Garden of the Gods Rd., Suite 2201 Colorado Springs, CO 80907 (719) 575-8683 Fremont 615 Macon Ave., Room 102, Cañon City, CO 81212 (719) 276-7340 Garfield 109 8th St., Suite 200, Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 (970) 384-3700, option 2 Gilpin 203 Eureka St., Central City, CO 80427 (303) 582-5321 Grand 308 Byers Ave., Hot Sulphur Springs, CO 80451 (970) 725-3065 Gunnison 221 N. Wisconsin St., Suite C, Gunnison, CO 81230 (970) 641-7927 Hinsdale 317 N. Henson St., Lake City, CO 81235 (970) 944-2228, ext. 2 Huerfano 401 Main St., Suite 204, Walsenburg, CO 81089 (719) 738-2380 Jackson 396 La Fever St., Walden, CO 80480 (970) 723-4334 Jefferson 3500 Illinois St., Suite 1100, Golden, CO 80401 (303) 271-8111 Kiowa 1305 Goff St., Eads, CO 81036 (719) 438-5421 Kit Carson 1650 Donelan Ave., Suite 203, Burlington, CO 80807 (719) 346-8638 Lake 505 Harrison Ave., Leadville, CO 80461 (719) 486-1410 La Plata 679 Turner Drive, Suite C, Durango, CO 81303 (970) 382-6296 Larimer 200 W. Oak St., Fort Collins, CO 80521 (970) 498-7820 Las Animas 200 E. First St., Room 205, Trinidad, CO 81082 (719) 846-3314 Lincoln 103 3rd Ave., Hugo, CO 80821 (719) 743-2444 Logan 315 Main St., Suite 3, Sterling, CO 80751 (970) 522-1544 Mesa 200 S. Spruce St., Grand Junction, CO 81501 (970) 244-1662 Mineral 1201 N. Main St., Creede, CO 81130 (719) 658-2440 Moffat 221 W. Victory Way, Suite 200, Craig, CO 81625 (970) 824-9120 Montezuma 140 W. Main St., Suite 1, Cortez, CO 81321 (970) 565-3728 Montrose 320 S. 1st St., Room 103, Montrose, CO 81401 (970) 249-3362, ext. 3 Morgan 231 Ensign St., Fort Morgan, CO 80701 (970) 542-3521 Otero 13 W. 3rd St., Room 210, La Junta, CO 81050 (719) 383-3020 Ouray 541 4th St., Ouray, CO 81427 (970) 325-4961 Park 856 Castello Ave., Fairplay, CO 80440 (719) 836-4333 Phillips 221 S. Interocean Ave., Holyoke, CO 80734 (970) 854-3131 Pitkin 530 E. Main St., Suite 104, Aspen, CO 81611 (970) 920-5180, ext. 5 Prowers 301 S. Main St., Suite 210, Lamar, CO 81052 (719) 336-8011 Pueblo 210 W. 10th St., Pueblo, CO 81003 (719) 583-6620 Rio Blanco 555 Main St., Meeker, CO 81641 (970) 878-9460 Rio Grande 965 6th St., Del Norte, CO 81132 (719) 657-3334 Routt 522 Lincoln Ave., Suite 21, Steamboat Springs, CO 80487 (970) 870-5556 Saguache 501 4th St., Saguache, CO 81149 (719) 655-2512 San Juan 1557 Greene St., Silverton, CO 81433 (970) 387-5671 San Miguel 305 W. Colorado Ave., Telluride, CO 81435 (970) 728-3954 Sedgwick 315 Cedar St., Suite 220, Julesburg, CO 80737 (970) 474-3346 Summit 208 E. Lincoln Ave., Breckenridge, CO 80424 (970) 453-3479 Teller 101 W. Bennett Ave., Cripple Creek, CO 80813 (719) 689-2951, option 2 Washington 150 Ash St., Akron, CO 80720 (970) 345-6565 Weld 1250 H St., Greeley, CO 80631 (970) 304-6525, ext. 3070 Yuma 310 Ash St., Suite F, Wray, CO 80758 (970) 332-5809 247 PRESORTED STANDARD US POSTAGE PAID DENVER CO PERMIT #5377 State of Colorado Legislative Council Colorado General Assembly State Capitol Building Room 029 200 East Colfax Avenue Denver CO 80203-1748 248 Elected Officials Transportation Committee (EOTC) Thursday, October 28, 2021 - 4:00pm Location – City of Aspen Council Chambers; Host and Chair – City of Aspen EOTC Background, Documents, and Packet Materials may be found here: https://pitkincounty.com/1322/Elected-Officials-Transportation-Committ EOTC Vision: We envision the Roaring Fork Valley as the embodiment of a sustainable transportation system emphasizing mass transit and mobility that contributes to the happiness and wellbeing of residents and visitors. EOTC Mission: Work collectively to reduce and manage the volume of vehicles on the road and parking system and continue to develop and support a comprehensive multimodal, long-range strategy that will insure a convenient, equitable and efficient transportation system for the Roaring Fork Valley. Summary of State Statute and Ballot Requirements: The 0.5% County Transit Sales and Use Tax shall be used for the purpose of financing, constructing, operating and managing a public, fixed route mass transportation system within the Roaring Fork Valley. Public Comment Instructions: This hybrid virtual / in person EOTC meeting will be broadcast on grassroots TV and available for viewing at www.cityofaspen.com. Please use the login information below to participate virtually or you may participate in person at 130 S Galena Street, Aspen. TO JOIN ONLINE: Go to www.webex.com and click on "Join a Meeting" Enter Meeting Number: 2557 966 1236 Enter Password: 81611 Click "Join Meeting" -- OR -- JOIN BY PHONE Call: 1-720-650-7664 Enter Meeting Number: 2557 966 1236 Enter Password: 81611 1 249 I. 4:00 – 4:05 CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL (Conducted by Meeting Host Chair, Roll Call by Jurisdiction) II. 4:05 – 4:10 APPROVAL OF JULY 29, 2021 ACTION MINUTES (Motion, Second, and Roll Call Vote by Jurisdiction) III. 4:10 - 4:20 PUBLIC COMMENT FOR ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA (Comments limited to three minutes per person) IV. 4:20 - 4:30 EOTC COMMITTEE MEMBER UPDATES V. 4:30 – 5:30 PUBLIC HEARING: 2022 EOTC PROPOSED BUDGET David Pesnichak, Transportation Administrator Decision Needed: Approval of 2022 Budget (Motion, Second, and Roll Call Vote by Jurisdiction) VI. 5:30 – 6:00 PUBLIC HEARING: 2022 EOTC PROPOSED WORK PLAN David Pesnichak, Transportation Administrator Decision Needed: Approval of 2022 Work Plan (Motion, Second, and Roll Call Vote by Jurisdiction) VII. 6:00 – 6:15 INFORMATION ONLY: UPDATES (Q&A) A.Near Term Transit Improvement Program – Progress Update B.Town of Snowmass Village Transit Center – Progress Update (Provided by David Peckler, Transportation Director, Town of Snowmass Village) VIII. ADJOURN MEETING *Next meeting is March 24, 2022 – Pitkin County to Host & Chair (TBD) 2 Page 3 Page 10 Page 33 Page 46 250 ELECTED OFFICIALS TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE (EOTC) AGREEMENTS & DECISIONS REACHED REGULAR MEETING JULY 29, 2021 Location (In Person and Virtual) – Pitkin County Pitkin County - Host & Chair The agenda items contained in these minutes are written in an action only format. For a video production of this meeting, go to: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IUpz0V4wmWQ To access the Elected Officials Transportation Committee meeting packet material, go to: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1kPdv-lUJ4z8o9qM7BNVZzknWhqS73Abh (or https://www.pitkincounty.com/1322/Elected-Officials-Transportation-Committ, then ‘EOTC Archived Packets’) Elected Officials in Attendance: Aspen – 5 Pitkin County - 5 Snowmass - 5 Torre Kelly McNicholas Kury Bill Madsen Ward Hauenstein Steve Child Tom Goode Skippy Mesirow Francie Jacober Tom Fridstein John Doyle Greg Poschman Alyssa Shenk Rachael Richards Patti Clapper Bob Sirkus Absent: None ______________________________________________________________________________ Agreements & Decisions Reached CALL TO ORDER Chair Kelly McNicholas Kury called the meeting of the Elected Officials Transportation Committee (EOTC) to order at 4.10 p.m. PUBLIC COMMENT Andrea Bryan and Diane Moore called in to discuss the traffic backups that are occurring with the City of Aspen’s west end neighborhoods. 3 251 COMMITTEE MEMBER UPDATES Kelly McNicholas Kury requested information on RFTA ridership and We-Cycle usage as well as analysis on whether the current trends are expected to be short term or long term. Rachael Richards requested information on how the projections within the 1998 Entrance to Aspen Record of Decision (ROD) compare to what is occurring now. The EOTC had general discussion regarding completion of the Entrance to Aspen as identified in the 1998 Federal Highways Administration (FHWA) Record of Decision (ROD) and the desire to find agreement on the next steps, if any, for this infrastructure project. PUBLIC HEARINGS 2021 EOTC Near Term Transit Improvement Program David Pesnichak - Transportation Administrator Mr. Pesnichak explained that in 2020 and 2021 the EOTC with support from RFTA and CDOT, commissioned two studies: the Integrated Mobility System (IMS) study and the Upper Valley Transit Enhancement (UVTE) study. While these two studies were conducted independently and with separate consulting teams, the IMS can be viewed as the umbrella study. The UVTE, which focusses on infrastructure improvements to increase access to and efficiency of transit, is a first step in progressing BRT Enhancements, which is one of the five strategies of the IMS. Based on the results of these two studies, Staff has developed an EOTC Near Term Transit Improvement Program that prioritizes the most productive and feasible efforts identified in these two studies into three priority tiers. The efforts identified in the first and second tiers are those projects that are most in need, feasible in the near term, and/or are necessary to progress later efforts. If approved, Staff will utilize the direction provided from EOTC 2021 Near Term Transit Improvement Program as guidance to help develop the coming EOTC Budgets and Work Plans starting with 2022. As a result, Staff is looking for Administrative Direction to proceed with the EOTC 2021 Near Term Transit Improvement Program as proposed. Mr. Pesnichak reviewed the broad outcomes from the IMS and UVTE and how they fit into the staff recommended 2021 EOTC Near Term Transit Improvement Program. In addition, Mr. Pesnichak provided an overview of each of the projects listed within the Near Term Transit Improvement Program. Staff recommended that the EOTC accept the 2021 EOTC Near Term Transit Improvement Program as Administrative Direction. Mr. Pesnichak noted that the proposed Program does not directly allocate any funding or predetermine any annual work plans. Rather, the Program is intended to provide staff direction when developing annual work plans, budgets, and for procurement of grants and other assistance. 4 252 The EOTC discussed the merits of several of the proposed projects, including the Buttermilk bicycle and pedestrian underpass, the Maroon Creek Roundabout channelization, HOV lane enforcement, traffic counters, and the Owl Creek Road to Truscott shared use path. It was noted that the cost of a bicycle and pedestrian underpass at Buttermilk would be high and there were questions as to whether the usage of this crossing warrants this degree of expense. Mr. Pesnichak explained that the project includes more than just the bicycle and pedestrian underpass since the underpass would also facilitate the ability to install transit bypass lanes at Owl Creek Road and Harmony Road as well as eliminating the pedestrian signal wait time for general traffic and transit on Highway 82. It was also noted that increased funding may be becoming available through State and Federal sources and that the bulk of the cost of this project would need to be covered by these sources. Dan Blankenship, RFTA CEO, also offered comments of support to keep this project moving forward. Several EOTC members expressed concern that the Maroon Creek Roundabout channelization could impact the planned Roundabout reconstruction in 2022. Mr. Pesnichak noted that the channelization as proposed in the Near Term Transit Improvement Program is a separate and distinct project from the 2022 CDOT reconstruction. In addition, no changes to the proposed concrete or curb lines throughout the Roundabout are proposed because of the channelization. Due to the reconstruction of the Roundabout in 2022, Mr. Pesnichak also noted that the earliest the channelization could be piloted is in 2023. It was noted that speeding might be a bigger concern on Highway 82 than HOV lane compliance. In addition, there were noted concerns for the general motoring public should the HOV lanes be enforced. Mr. Pesnichak noted that HOV lane enforcement may need to be implemented in phases to both ensure that safety is not compromised and to analyze performance of the enforcement method before rolling it out over the whole HOV lane corridor. Other members noted that automated enforcement could have political and legal hurdles and that due to personnel constraints within the Pitkin County Sheriff’s Office, the EOTC may need to fund an enforcement position in order to maintain consistency of effort. The EOTC showed stronger support for an increased number of traffic counters throughout the upper valley, noting that they provide important baseline information on the effectiveness of programs. It was noted that there might be some engineering and alignment considerations at certain points of the Owl Creek Road to Truscott shared use path. However, the EOTC generally expressed support for this connection. Mr. Pesnichak noted that the alignment and ultimate extents of the shared use path have not yet been determined. 5 253 Cristal Logan, Vice President of the Aspen Institute for Aspen Community Programs and Engagement, and Maria Morrow, member of the 2016 and 2017 Community Task Force on Transportation and Mobility, provided context for the IMS study that was used to inform the staff recommendation. Ms. Logan and Ms. Morrow provided input as a part of public comment for this hearing. The EOTC discussed amending the staff recommended 2021 EOTC Near Term Transit Improvement Program by moving automated traffic counters from Tier 2 to Tier 1. This proposal was made to the Committee before a motion was made. The vote for the 2021 Near Term Transit Improvement Program with the amendment that the automated traffic counters be moved from Tier 2 to Tier 1 was conducted by jurisdiction. The motion, second and roll call vote was as follows: Pitkin County: Patti Clapper made the motion. Francie Jacober seconded the motion. The votes were: Kelly McNicholas Kury, yes; Steve Child, yes; Francie Jacober, yes; Greg Poschman, yes; Patti Clapper, yes; motion carried. Town of Snowmass Village: Alyssa Shenk made the motion. Tom Goode seconded the motion. The votes were: Bill Madsen, yes; Tom Goode, yes; Tom Fridstein, yes; Alyssa Shenk,yes; Bob Sirkus, absent at time of voting; motion carried. City of Aspen: Rachael Richards made the motion. Skippy Mesirow seconded the motion. The votes were: Torre, yes; Ward Hauenstein, yes; Skippy Mesirow, yes; John Doyle, yes; Rachael Richards, yes; motion carried. Maroon Creek Roundabout Reconstruction 2022 CDOT Funding Request David Pesnichak - Transportation Administrator Mr. Pesnichak explained that the EOTC has a request for funding in 2022 for $271,000 from the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT). This funding is for the planned reconstruction of the Maroon Creek Roundabout in 2022. In order to allow CDOT to go out to bid in a timely fashion for this project in the fall of 2021, CDOT has requested approval of these funds from the EOTC in advance of the normal EOTC budget meeting in October. And in order to obligate the funds in 2022, the EOTC will need to approve an amended 2021 budget. In 2022 CDOT will be repaving Highway 82 from the Aspen Airport Business Center to the Castle Creek Bridge. As part of this larger CDOT funded project CDOT will also be reconstructing the Maroon Creek roundabout in concrete pavement and simultaneously making some select safety and operation improvements to the roundabout. 6 254 The motivation for redoing the Maroon Creek Roundabout in concrete over asphalt is to prevent the kind of failures seen every few years that results in notable transit and traffic backups and delays. In addition, CDOT is looking to make some safety and operational improvements that will help the Roundabout operate more smoothly. Staff ensured that there is a rational nexus between the amount of funding requested from the EOTC and the anticipated impact / benefit to transit. This nexus analysis is important because funds from the 0.5% Transit Sales and Use Tax fund can only be utilized to support transit in the Roaring Fork Valley. Since the Roundabout is a mixed traffic facility for both transit and general vehicles, the transit nexus needed to be identified. Mr. Pesnichak noted that the $271,000 is necessary to make the project whole. In addition, he noted that there was an error in the packet where it was indicated that the CDOT contribution is $1.19 million. However, it was later identified that that contribution amount included additional design work as well. The actual CDOT contribution for construction only is $949,000. In addition, the construction cost estimate has increased from $2.53 million to $2.6 million. Staff recommended approving the 2022 Maroon Creek Roundabout funding contribution to CDOT in the amount of $271,000 noting that the EOTC has the funds available and that this improvement is anticipated to improve transit efficiency and reliability through this mixed traffic intersection. Staff provided draft resolutions of approval for the City of Aspen and the Town of Snowmass Village within the packet. If approved, the County approval would take place as a 3rd quarter supplemental budget and that final document from the Board of County Commissioners will serve as their approval document. Finally, Mr. Pesnichak noted that there was an error in the proposed amended EOTC budget and recommended that should this request be approved that the motion include a correction. Specifically, this line item had inadvertently been placed in the “ongoing/operational” category instead of the “projects” category within the EOTC Budget. The vote for the Maroon Creek Roundabout Reconstruction 2022 CDOT Funding Request with the amendment that the line item for this contribution request be moved from the “ongoing/operational” category to the “projects” category within the EOTC Budget was conducted by jurisdiction. The motion, second and roll call vote was as follows: Pitkin County: Francie Jacober made the motion. Patti Clapper seconded the motion. The votes were: Kelly McNicholas Kury, yes; Steve Child, yes; Francie Jacober, yes; Greg Poschman, yes; Patti Clapper, yes; motion carried. 7 255 Town of Snowmass Village: Alyssa Shenk made the motion. Bill Madsen seconded the motion. The votes were: Bill Madsen, yes; Tom Goode, absent at the time of voting; Tom Fridstein, yes; Alyssa Shenk, yes; Bob Sirkus, absent at time of voting; motion carried. City of Aspen: Torre made the motion. John Doyle seconded the motion. The votes were: Torre, yes; Ward Hauenstein, yes; Skippy Mesirow, yes; John Doyle, yes; Rachael Richards, yes; motion carried. ADJOURN REGULAR MEETING Patti Clapper moved to adjourn the regular meeting of the Elected Officials Transportation Committee at 7:25 p.m. Torre seconded the motion. Motion passed with 13 yea votes. City of Aspen _________________ Torre, Mayor City Council _________________ Nicole Henning City Clerk Town of Snowmass Village _________________ Bill Madsen, Mayor Town Council _________________ Rhonda B. Coxon, CMC Town Clerk Pitkin County ___________________ Kelly McNicholas Kury, Chair Board of County Commissioners ___________________ Jeanette Jones Clerk to the Board of County Commissioners 8 256 ___________________ David Pesnichak Regional Transportation Administrator 9 257 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY EOTC MEETING DATE: October 28, 2021 AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Proposed 2022 Budget STAFF RESPONSIBLE: David Pesnichak, Transportation Administrator ISSUE STATEMENT: Attached for review and approval is the Proposed 2022 Budget. A discussion of budget revenues, updates, project scoring and next steps are discussed below. BACKGROUND: As the EOTC is aware, 2019 through 2021 have been financially turbulent years. In 2019, the EOTC began to see the impacts of changes in state law from HB 19-1240 that affected how sales and use tax are collected. Then in 2020, COVID-19 caused a near economic shutdown in the spring followed by a national recession. Late 2020 and 2021 have seen an unexpected spike in tourist and building activity that has resulted in higher than anticipated revenues across the nation and the region. For orientation purposes, the sections in this memo include: - Change in Sales and Use Tax Background - 2020 Actual Revenues and 2021 Projected Revenues - EOTC Ability to Meet Current Obligations and New Requests - Transfer of No-Fare Service from EOTC to RFTA - EOTC Expenditure Scoring - Overview of Funding Renewals, Increases in Funding, and New Requests - Next Steps - Outline of Funding Uses - Ongoing / Operational - Projects - Recommended EOTC Action Change in Sales and Use Tax Background HB19-1240 - Sales and Use Tax Administration - came into effect on June 1, 2019. This new State law is the result of the Supreme Court South Dakota vs. Wayfair decision that requires all retailers, including out-of-state retailers that do not have a physical presence in Colorado, to collect state and local sales tax at the point of delivery. With retailers now collecting at the point of delivery, there has been less collection of use taxes and increased collections in sales taxes. While this new law has resulted in an overall increase in sales tax revenues at the jurisdictional level, it has implications to the EOTC budget and use tax appropriations. As a reminder, EOTC sales and use tax revenues have the following distribution: -EOTC retains 100% of funds generated by the Transit Use Tax -EOTC retains only 18.96% from the Transit Sales Tax – the remaining 81.04% is allocated to RFTA per the 2004 ballot measure 10 258 As a result of this distribution, the decline in use tax revenues will continue to be entirely shown in the EOTC budget while only a portion of the increase in sales tax revenues will be reflected. For the 2022 budget year, the effects of these sales and use tax collection changes are beginning to be reflected within the 2020 and 2021 budget years. However, due to complexities of the economic impacts from COVID-19 and the nature of sales tax reporting through the State, the extent of the specific impacts from HB19-1240 are difficult if not impossible to ascertain. 2020 Actual Revenues and 2021 Projected Revenues As HB 19-1240 went into effect June 1, 2019, staff has been monitoring sales and use tax data to determine the degree of sales tax increase and use tax decrease. As a reminder, below are the original EOTC revenue projection estimates from 2019 following passage of HB 19-1240. Summary of Original 2019 Projections (2018-2020): - Sales Tax: 12.7% increase - Use Tax: 63% decrease - EOTC Overall Revenue: 26% decrease or $711,000 With the delays in tax reporting from the State, full year 2020 sales and use tax information was first available in February 2021. 2020 is the first full year of data available following the passage of HB 19- 1240. For 2020, Sales Tax revenues were up more than expected at about 19.7% over 2018 due to the taxation of internet sales, an unexpectedly strong economy despite the pandemic, and use tax revenue shifting to sales tax. Use Tax also declined less than expected at 32.8% from 2018 to 2020 due primarily to revenues from prior years construction activity being realized in 2020 (see explanation below). Overall, the EOTC ended up seeing a decrease in revenues of $165,526, or 6% between 2018 and 2020 although this decrease is expected to become larger in the next couple of years as the full impacts of HB 19-1240 are recognized. Due to the mechanics of construction use tax collection, a portion of use tax revenues reflected in 2019 and 2020 will be refunded back to the developer in subsequent years. This process is to ensure that the developer pays the actual use taxes due by allowing them to apply for a refund for overpayment. Also, in order to smooth this revenue stream and prevent the expenditure of funds that may be requested as refunds in the future, some funds are withheld from being reported for several years following initial collection at the time of building permit issuance. This means that actual construction use tax revenues continue to decrease and normalize through 2021 because of HB 19-1240 which went into effect in June 2019. In 2020, approximately $600,000 of total EOTC use tax revenue was actually due to construction activity from prior years while about $345,000 was due to use tax revenue from motor vehicles registrations in 2020 (unlike construction use taxes, motor vehicle use taxes are realized in the year they are collected). No, or very little, future construction use tax revenue is projected after 2021 due to HB 19- 1240. As of the writing of this memo, the Pitkin County Finance Department in partnership with the County’s Financial Advisory Board has provided sales tax projections up 18% in 2021 over 2020. 2021 was an unexpectedly strong year for sales tax revenues and it is worth noting that this level of revenue is not projected to be the new normal. 11 259 Summary of 2020 Actuals (2018-2020): - Sales Tax: 19.7% increase - Use Tax: 32.8% decrease (2020 includes construction use tax revenues from previous years that will not be realized in the future) - EOTC Overall Revenue: 6% decrease or $165,526 When looking at 2021 EOTC revenues compared to 2018, which was arguably a more typical year than 2019 or 2020, annual EOTC revenues are expected to decrease by $690,574 in 2021, or 25.3%. Meanwhile, 2021 annual EOTC revenue projections over 2020, which was heavily affected by the COVID-19 pandemic and continued to see revenues from previous years construction use tax, are expected to decrease by $525,048, or 20.5%. Summary of 2021 Projections (2018 – 2021): - Sales Tax: 41.3% increase - Use Tax: 71.3% decrease - EOTC Overall Revenue 2018-2021: 25.3% decrease or $690,574 Summary of 2021 Projections (2020 – 2021): - Sales Tax: 18% increase - Use Tax: 57.3% decrease (2020 includes construction use tax revenues from previous years that will not be realized in the future) - EOTC Overall Revenue: 20.5% decrease or $525,048 Total overall EOTC revenues are expected to decrease from $2,725,220 in 2018, and $3,257,373 in 2019, to $2,559,694 in 2020 to $2,034,646 in 2021. In the years 2022 and beyond, sales tax revenues are projected to decrease by -4.2% in 2022 before rebounding, mostly due to inflation, at 4% annually from 2023 to 2026. Use taxes are expected to increase at an annual rate of about 2.1% annually from 2022 to 2026 to account for inflation in motor vehicle collections. It is worth noting that 2022 could see a small final bump over projections as construction use taxes collected in previous years continue to be realized. See the below graph (next page) and Attachment 3 for a comparison of annual revenues. 12 260 EOTC Ability to Meet Current Obligations and New Requests At this point, it appears that the EOTC will be able to meet annual ongoing and current project obligations, albeit with decreased revenue for currently unobligated projects, services, or to accommodate project cost increases. With these projections, the EOTC will have a balance of about $443,000 to $663,000 annually for projects once annual operating and ongoing costs are satisfied. For comparison purposes, the EOTC had a balance of about $1.6 million to $2 million annually for projects after satisfying ongoing operation costs between 2016 and 2019 (before HB 19-1240). When considering 2022 annual operating costs and all currently obligated project costs through 2026, the EOTC is expected to have about $1.86 million in total unobligated funds going into 2022. So, based on current projections, the EOTC’s unobligated fund balance should build at a rate of approximately $443,000 to $663,000 annually from this roughly $1.86 million starting point in 2022 under the staff recommended budget. Transfer of No-Fare Service from EOTC to RFTA As was initially reviewed at the October 17, 2019 EOTC meeting and again at the October 29, 2020 EOTC meeting, staff has been pursuing discussions with RFTA to consider transferring the Aspen- Snowmass-Woody Creek No-Fare service from the EOTC to RFTA. This transfer of the No-Fare service cost was initiated by the financial impacts caused by HB 19-1240. It was initially hoped that these discussions would have come to resolution in 2020, however due to COVID and the financial uncertainty it created these discussions were postponed until 2021. Now with more information on the pandemic and both the EOTC’s and RFTA’s financial situation, staff has resumed discussions to potentially transfer all or a portion of the cost of this service. 13 261 At these EOTC meetings in 2019 and 2020 staff presented to the Committee the anticipated impacts of Colorado HB 19-1240 Sales and Use Tax Administration (effective June 1, 2019). As a reminder (and as described above), this state law was the result of the U.S. Supreme Court decision, i.e. South Dakota vs. Wayfair, which requires all retailers, including out-of-state retailers that do not have a physical presence in Colorado, to collect state and local sales tax at the point of delivery. This tax law impacts the sales and use tax revenues that come to the EOTC via the 0.5% Transit Sales and Use Tax. As a result of this law, the EOTC is seeing an increase in local sales tax collections, however these increases are being more than offset by the decreases in use tax collections. The goal of transferring the cost of the No-Fare service from the EOTC to RFTA is simply to move this cost from the EOTC where revenues have decreased to RFTA where revenues have increased as a result of HB 19-1240. The purpose of the analyses conducted to date are to ensure that any transfer of cost to RFTA will be fully offset by increases in revenue solely from the Pitkin County 0.5% Transit Sales Tax and will not require any additional subsidization from any other RFTA revenue source. In addition, Staff is working so there will be no interruption of the No-Fare service noticeable to customers within Pitkin County because of this cost transfer. Based on staff’s initial findings of the period between 2018 through 2020, it appears that the 0.5% Pitkin County Use Tax revenues decreased by approximately $1.04 million and the 0.5% Pitkin County Sales Tax revenues increased by $1.1 million. However, the net impact to the EOTC over the two-year period was a decline in its dedicated share of 0.5% Pitkin County Use Tax revenues of approximately $831,517 while the net impact to RFTA was an increase of approximately $902,093. Refer to the chart below: The actual sales and use tax revenue trends are generally consistent with the initial expectations made in 2019. The increase in revenues to RFTA appear to be sufficient for RFTA to assume all or a portion of the No-Fare service fare offset. However, information is not available to identify the exact amount of sales tax revenues that are attributable to the tax law change on June 2019. In order to obtain a third party opinion on the financial impacts caused by HB 19-1240 during these financially complicated times, RFTA contracted with PFM to conduct an independent analysis of a full or partial assumption of the No-Fare service cost. Below is a graph produced by PFM of RFTA’s expected revenue increase as a result of HB-1240 compared to the predicted cost of the No-Fare service. 14 262 RFTA staff presented the PFM report to their Board on September 9 with more discussion expected throughout their budget process in October and November. The decision to accept all or a portion of this cost currently lies with the RFTA board. And it is worth noting that as the RFTA board is comprised of representatives from New Castle to Aspen, RFTA’s assumption of all or a portion of this cost does require consent by at least a certain number of those jurisdictions in addition to the EOTC member jurisdictions. As the No-Fare service is important to keeping vehicles off the road and progressing the EOTC’s Strategic Plan, Staff has maintained the expected cost in the EOTC’s budget through foreseeable future until discussions on the No-Fare service transfer are resolved. No decision is required at this time from the EOTC. Staff will continue to work with RFTA staff to come to an agreement on the next steps to potentially transfer all or a portion of the No-Fare Service cost to RFTA. Depending on the outcome of the discussions with the RFTA board this fall, it may be necessary to bring back the proposed agreement to the EOTC before implementation. EOTC Expenditure Scoring Starting in 2020, staff began scoring EOTC expenditures and work plan efforts against the identified Mission Statement, Vision Statement, Guiding Principles, and Key Strategies from the 2020 EOTC Strategic Plan as well as the Regional Priorities and Upper Valley Priorities identified within the updated 2020 CVTP. This scoring matrix, included as Attachment 2, represents an average scoring conducted by EOTC staff from the City of Aspen, Town of Snowmass Village, Pitkin County, RFTA and the EOTC Transportation Administrator. While the scoring is subjective, by averaging out the scoring from each staff member the chart can better represent a cohesive ranking of expenditures and work plan efforts that best meet the goals of the Strategic Plan and CVTP. The purpose of this ranking is to not only assist staff vetting projects that best meet the EOTC goals from the Strategic Plan and CVTP but to also provide the EOTC members a reference point when considering 15 263 the annual budget and work plan. This matrix is intended to show the comparative ability of a project to advance the EOTC Strategic Plan. As you will notice, the matrix has a scoring of the Strategic Plan Mission Statement, Vision Statement, Guiding Principles and Key Strategies. These are scored on a 1-5 scale where 1 ‘Does No Meet’ and 5 ‘Greatly Exceeds’ that specific criteria. Meanwhile, the CVTP Regional Priorities and Upper Valley Priorities are not ranked but instead identified as meeting an identified Priority or not. A cell marked with an ‘X’ indicates that that project can meet that Priority. It is important that each expenditure meet at least one of the Regional or Upper Valley Priorities in order to be considered for funding or inclusion in the Work Plan. Some projects are able to meet multiple CVTP Regional and/or Upper Valley Priorities which makes them stronger candidates for funding and staff time. Overview of Funding Renewals, Increases in Funding, and New Requests Below is an overview of requests for funding renewals, increases in funding, and new requests received for the 2022 budget cycle. Please note that more detailed descriptions of each of the staff recommended expenditures are included within the ‘Outline of Funding Uses’ section later in this memo. Name Type of Request Requested Allocation Year EOTC 2021 Budget Amount Requested Amount Staff Recommended 2022 EOTC Budget Amount Change in EOTC Budget Request Amount X-Games Transit Subsidy One Year Renewal 2022 $115,000 $115,000 $115,000 None We-Cycle Operational Support One Year Renewal 2022 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 None Bike / Ped Connection from BC P&R to Rio Grande / AABC - Feasibility New Request 2022 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 None Truscott to Owl Creek Trail - Feasibility, Planning, and Design New Request 2022 - $200,000 $200,000 N/A Buttermilk Underpass and Transit Signal Bypasses - Feasibility and Initial Design New Request 2022 - $200,000 $200,000 N/A Snowmass Direct Transit Service Improvement Analysis New Request 2022 - $50,000 $50,000 N/A Permanent Automated Vehicle Counters - Planning, Design, Permitting, Construct New Request 2022 - $200,000 $200,000 N/A 16 264 Next Steps Following the adoption of both the EOTC Strategic Plan and updated Comprehensive Valley Transportation Plan (CVTP) in 2020, staff is looking down the road to identify projects that best meet these identified objectives and direction while remaining cognizant of financial constraints and the changing socio-economic landscape. To this end, continuing to make progress on the improvements at the Brush Creek Park and Ride, development of the Snowmass Mall Transit Station, and ensuring No-Fare Aspen-Snowmass-Woody Creek bus service continues are at the top of the priority list for both staff time and funding. Meanwhile, work on the Brush Creek Park and Ride to the AABC trail is recommended to continue in 2022 along with work efforts identified in the 2021 EOTC Near Term Transit Improvement Program approved in July 2021 as listed below. - Truscott to Owl Creek Trail - Feasibility, Planning, and Initial Design; - Buttermilk Underpass and Transit Signal Bypasses - Feasibility and Initial Design; - Snowmass Direct Transit Service Improvement Analysis; - HOV Lane Enforcement Analysis (No Budget, Work Plan Only); - Permanent Automated Vehicle Counters - Planning, Design, Permitting, and Construction. In addition, based on feedback received from the EOTC at the April 2020 meeting, Staff is proposing to bring forth a recommendation to manage long-term parking at the Brush Creek Park and Ride at the May 2022 EOTC meeting. Please note: The funding sources, partnerships and description of each of these efforts are spelled out in more detail in the ‘Outline of Funding Uses’ section in this memo. Outline of Funding Uses Ongoing / Operational 1) Use tax collection costs and County overhead - $151,827 The proposed budget includes the county’s administrative costs of collection for both the sales and use tax as well as insurance. These costs are collected from the EOTC budget one year in arrears. The cost increased starting in 2019 due primarily to increased staff time devoted to collection and auditing in the County’s Finance Department starting in 2018. In order to maintain compliance with State law and auditing requirements, the County Finance Director felt this increase in oversight is necessary. The cost increase in 2020 is due to the administrative cost of the new Transportation Administrator position in 2019 (payroll, technical support, and human resources support). 2) Administrative costs and meeting costs - $12,673 The proposed budget includes other administrative and meeting costs. This includes costs such as recording and broadcasting EOTC meetings, food at EOTC meetings, and costs associated with the Transportation Administrator positions (communications - cell phone, work related travel, professional dues, education and training, postage and shipping, materials and supplies, and computers and computer equipment). 17 265 3) Country Inn taxi program in-lieu of bus stop safety improvements - $7,154 The EOTC implemented the Aspen Country Inn taxi service in 2001 to address bus stop safety issues faced by residents at this senior-priority housing complex. The lack of a traffic signal, crosswalk, or median at this location along Highway 82 makes it unsafe for Country Inn residents to use transit for down valley trips or for return trips from Aspen. The Aspen Country Inn taxi program allows residents to use a taxi when their travel would otherwise require the crossing of Highway 82. Although this service was underutilized in recent years compared to budget, demand has increased since mid-2019 and continues to fluctuate. 4) X-Games transit subsidy - $115,000 This subsidy is paid to RFTA to help fund transit services for the X-Games. This request was renewed for one year in 2021 and is up for renewal again in 2022. This subsidy is a reimbursement for transit costs incurred during the X-Games. In 2021, while the EOTC approved the X-Games transit subsidy request, due to COVID-19 the X-Games did not have an in person audience and as a result transit services were not required. So, while the EOTC approved these funds in 2021, these funds were never expended. Please see Attachment 5 from the Aspen Skiing Company for details. 5) Brush Creek Park and Ride operating costs - $95,000 The City of Aspen’s Parking Department manages the parking area of the Brush Creek Park and Ride Lot for the EOTC per an intergovernmental agreement. No staff cost for parking enforcement or management of the lot is included. Instead, this budget funds maintenance, utilities, snow removal, trash removal, irrigation, and weed control. The budget was increased by $10,000 for 2020 as snow removal costs alone in 2019 rose to 35% of the budget leaving a potentially insufficient amount in case of an unexpected repair or unforeseen cost. The cost for this service is expected to increase notably to about $95,000 annually starting in 2022 because of the installation of restrooms, additional landscaping and lighting, and increased paved parking area. In addition, costs for operating and maintaining the new Dynamic Message Sign (DMS) is also included in this line item. Staff have reviewed existing costs for repair, maintenance and snow removal at Rubey Park as well as other RFTA Park and Rides with restroom facilities to determine this cost estimate. As the FLAP grant improvements are to be installed in 2022, staff will monitor costs at the upgraded facility and adjust anticipated costs accordingly in subsequent budget years. 6) No-fare Aspen-Snowmass-Woody Creek bus service subsidy - $851,198 ($848,433 Aspen-BC- Snowmass, $2,765 Woody Creek) The EOTC previously agreed with RFTA to set the Aspen-Snowmass subsidy at 36.7% of the actual cost of the service two years prior to the year being budgeted. Thus, the $851,198 budget for 2022 is 36.7% of the actual cost for 2020. The 2023 and 2024 estimated costs are based on the 2021 and 2022 budgets for this service. The initial EOTC subsidy was set at the amount of fare revenue estimated to be lost by eliminating the fare for this service. For 2010, the first full year of no-fare service, that estimate of lost fare revenue was approximately $480,000, and the actual cost of the service that year was approximately $1,308,000. Thus 36.7% of the actual cost was estimated to be recovered from fare revenue. For the 2021 budget cycle, which reflects actual service provided in 2019, there is a more significant increase in the cost as the BRT connecting service between Snowmass Village and Brush Creek Park and Ride is also factored in at the same 36.7% rate. As you may recall, in 2019 RFTA took over the base cost of the BRT connecting service between Snowmass and Brush Creek Park and Ride as a result of the 18 266 passage of Ballot Measure 7A. Previously the EOTC paid the full amount of this increased service including the base cost and no-fare subsidy. As a result, the increase in this line item reflects the increased service and resulting no-fare subsidy between Snowmass Village and the Brush Creek Park and Ride that began in 2019 when RFTA assumed this base cost as a part for their normal operating expenditures. As was reviewed earlier in this memo, staff has been in discussions with RFTA regarding the transfer of this line item to RFTA. However, due to ongoing economic turbulence in 2020 and 2021 the EOTC continued to fund this important service until it could be determined that such a transfer could be done without impacts to other RFTA services. Staff resumed discussions of this transfer of the No-Fare service to RFTA in 2021 for the 2022 budget year. As of the writing of this memo, RFTA staff and board is considering the transfer. At this time, staff has included the cost of this service to the current budget horizon of 2026. Should all or a portion of the No-Fare service transfer be successful in the 2022 budget year, then all or a portion of these budgeted funds will not be expended. 7) We-Cycle operational support – $100,000 The EOTC had approved 2 years of funding at this level for 2018 and 2019 and a one-year operational support obligation in 2020. We-Cycle has requested another one-year obligation for operational support in 2021. See Attachment 4 for more detail. 8) Regional Transportation Administrator - $152,529 The EOTC previously approved this on-going full-time position beginning in 2018. This amount reflects the cost of the position including base salary and County benefits as well as health insurance and wellness benefits. Projects 9) Snowmass Mall Transit Station - $6,000,000 ($721,213 additional funds plus $5,278,787 required by ballot measure) (2022 allocation approved as part of 2021 EOTC budget) The EOTC is required by a 2000 ballot measure to provide a total of $7 million to Snowmass Village for transit enhancements, which has been programmed over the years for the new Snowmass Mall transit station. The current balance of this obligation in 2022 is $5,278,787. In order to ensure that the project continues to move forward in the face of shifting State and Federal grant availability, Snowmass Village requested and was approved by the EOTC in 2021 for additional funding in the amount of $721,213 from the EOTC in 2022. This brought the EOTC contribution for construction funds to a projected 50%, or $6 million, of the then estimated total project cost of $10-$12 million. This allocation by the EOTC has put this project in an advantageous position when applying for other grants, particularly with increasing cost estimates. The project is currently moving through the design process. Please see the update memo from David Peckler, Town of Snowmass Village Transportation Director, included with the Updates memo in this packet for more details. 10) EOTC Professional Services, Regional Transportation Participation, Retreat - $15,000 In 2020 and 2021, the EOTC approved an “EOTC Professional Services and Regional Transportation Participation” line item in the amount of $8,000 and $5,000 respectively. This is a helpful line item for staff to be able to participate and make progress on low cost regional efforts that progress the EOTC Strategic Plan and Comprehensive Valley Transportation Plan as they emerge. In the past, these funds have been used for the Elected Officials Transportation and Housing Summit (ended up being cancelled 19 267 due to COVID) in collaboration with CDOT, the City of Rifle and the City of Glenwood Springs in 2020; and funding for permitting for a Buttermilk Park and Ride directional sign on Highway 82 in 2021. In 2022, staff is looking to hold an EOTC long-term planning discussion / retreat. Based on past experience, retreats cost about $10,000 with food, venue and a professional facilitator. This would leave the remaining $5,000 for other professional services and regional participation efforts. To this end, Staff is recommending that $15,000 be allocated for this line item. Should the event cost less than projected, then the remaining funds would be available for future use. 11) Brush Creek P&R FLAP Grant Match - $3,316,672 (balance of 2021 allocation proposed to be forwarded to 2022) This FLAP match was initially $2 million from the EOTC and $2.2 million from the Federal Highways Administration (FHWA) for a total project cost of $4.2 million. As the EOTC is aware, through the design process, the cost estimate for the project increased to $6.5 million. Now at 100% plans the cost estimate has increased to $6.9 million including cost escalation for construction in 2022. As the FHWA funds were not available for construction in 2021, this project is recommended to be forwarded in the EOTC budget from 2021 to 2022. In 2021, $176,950 were invoiced from FHWA for design of the facility upgrades. As a result, with the $176,950 expended in 2021, the balance of the original 2021 allocation ($3,493,622 + $44,506 in 2020), $3,316,672, is proposed to be forwarded from 2021 to 2022. The FHWA has increased their funding obligation from $2.2 million to $2.4 million, staff has identified a CMAQ grant in the amount of $1,545,000 (up from an original estimate of $1,034,012), and $500,000 from RFTA to be utilized for this project, with the remaining balance being requested from the EOTC being a total match amount of $3,538,128. Total invoices to date for this project is $44,506 in 2020 and $176,950 in 2021 for matching design costs. The staff proposed budget is expected to cover the entire project cost including the restrooms, paving of the recycled asphalt area, and associated lighting and landscaping as approved by the EOTC in April 2020. Currently allocated funds for this project are in excess of the presently estimated project amount of $6.9 million. As the current construction estimate was determined in 2020, due to observed rapidly escalating construction costs over the course of 2021, staff recommends maintaining the currently allocated funds for this project in anticipation that bids come back over the current construction estimate. In the case bids come in below the current budgeted amount, those EOTC funds in excess of the actual project cost will not be expended and will remain in the EOTC account for use on other projects in the future. As of the writing of this memo, construction is expected to begin in spring 2022. It is worth noting that the Brush Creek Park and Ride and transit facilities will remain operational throughout construction. Parking at the facility will be temporarily relocated to the east end gravel lot during construction. 12) Bike / Pedestrian Connection from BC P&R to Rio Grande / AABC Feasibility- $25,000 As the EOTC may recall from the October 2020 meeting, this is a new partnership project to look at the trail connection from the Brush Creek Park and Ride to the Aspen Airport Business Center starting in 2021. The total feasibility study cost was anticipated to be $75,000 with Pitkin County Open Space and Trails (OST), City of Aspen Parks and Open Space, and the Elected Officials Transportation Committee each contributing $25,000. The EOTC approved $25,000 for this feasibility study in October 2020 for 2021. 20 268 To date, Pitkin County OST has advertised an RFP for the project and SGM has been selected to lead the effort. Total project cost is now contracted at $108,000 although the EOTC contribution remains at $25,000 for 2021. In order to keep the project moving in 2022, $25,000 is requested from the EOTC to complete this study in collaboration with the City of Aspen and Pitkin County in 2022. The local project team consists of representatives from the City of Aspen Parks and Open Space Department, Pitkin County Open Space and Trails, the Town of Snowmass Village Parks and Recreation Department, and the Regional Transportation Administrator. This initial phase in 2021 and early 2022 will consist of a feasibility analysis and a determination of possible alignment alternatives including estimated costs. Following review and presentation to each of the trails and open space boards in February 2022, the alternatives are proposed to be presented to the EOTC at the March 2022 meeting. Should an alternative or set of alternatives appear workable to each of the open space and trails boards and the EOTC, then the next phase will be to vet those alternatives with the public in 2022. $25,000 is requested for this public input phase and has been included in the 2022 EOTC recommended budget. This would be a partnership with the City of Aspen Parks and Open Space ($25,000 contribution) and Pitkin County Open Space and Trails ($25,000 contribution) for a total phase 2 project budget of $75,000. It is worth noting that should the Aspen Open Space Board, the Pitkin County Open Space and Trails Board, and the EOTC identify no viable alternative through this review, then this public input phase may not be pursued. In this case, these EOTC funds would not be expended. 13) Truscott to Owl Creek Trail - Feasibility, Planning, and Design (2021 Near Term Transit Improvement Program Effort – Tier 1) – $200,000 This proposal is to allocate funding to hire a consulting team to conduct the feasibility, planning, public input, and design for the Truscott to Owl Creek Trail. The goal of this improvement is to provide basic bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure that connects the Aspen Country Inn (low-income senior priority housing) and other residential and commercial developments along this southwest side stretch of Highway 82 to transit stops at Truscott and Buttermilk. While this improvement will not bridge the bicycle and pedestrian divide that Highway 82 creates, it will provide safe connections to Truscott, which has a bicycle and pedestrian underpass and Buttermilk, which currently has a signalized bicycle and pedestrian crossing. This improvement is not intended to supplant the EOTC’s support of the Aspen Country Inn’s Taxi in Lieu service, but is instead intended to compliment it. Preliminary cost estimates for this trail connection provided by Mead and Hunt are: $200,000 Design $1,050,000 Construction = $1,250,000 Total Project Cost The 2022 EOTC allocation request is $200,000 for project planning, public engagement, construction funding source and partner identification, and engineering design. Funding sources outside the EOTC are likely necessary in order to bring this project to fruition. 21 269 14) Buttermilk Underpass and Transit Signal Bypasses - Feasibility and Initial Design (2021 Near Term Transit Improvement Program Effort – Tier 1) - $200,000 This proposal is to allocate funding to hire a consulting team to begin the feasibility, stakeholder input, and initial design for the Buttermilk Underpass and Transit Signal Bypass Lanes. The goals for these improvements are to: 1) provide superior protection for bicyclists and pedestrians across Highway 82 at Buttermilk, 2) remove the pedestrian crossing time at the Owl Creek signal thereby reducing transit and overall vehicle congestion, and 3) increase transit efficiency by allowing transit vehicles the ability to bypass one of the two signals at this intersection. These improvements would consist of: 1) a grade separated bicycle and pedestrian crossing at Buttermilk, 2) a bus bypass lane going up valley at the Harmony signal, and 3) a bus bypass lane going down valley at the Owl Creek signal. A grade separated bicycle and pedestrian crossing is necessary to implement an Owl Creek signal transit bypass lane since the at-grade bicycle and pedestrian crossing would be eliminated. Preliminary cost estimates for this trail connection provided by Mead and Hunt are: $830,000 Design $8,570,000 Construction = $9,400,000 Total Project Cost RFTA currently has $500,000 allocated for this project as a part of Destination 2040. Although significant other funding sources are clearly necessary, these funds and the partnership with RFTA are important in securing State and Federal funding. In order to best leverage these RFTA funds, Staff recommends not utilizing the RFTA funds until construction. The 2022 EOTC allocation request is $200,000 for Design Phase 1 to begin the initial planning, stakeholder engagement, funding source identification, and initial design. Based on the results of Phase 1, an additional funding request may be necessary for 2023 to continue the engineering design. Phase 1 will identify potential grant funding and partnerships to be pursued for both final design and construction. Significant funding sources outside the EOTC are necessary in order to bring this project to fruition. 15) Snowmass Direct Transit Service Improvement Analysis (2021 Near Term Transit Improvement Program Effort – Tier 1) - $50,000 This proposal is to allocate funding to hire a consulting team to conduct the Snowmass Direct Transit Service Improvement Analysis. The goal of this analysis is to look at current service levels and routes servicing Snowmass Village from both up valley and down valley directions to determine service levels that will maximize transit ridership and thereby reducing vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and greenhouse gas emissions. Before simply increasing service levels to Snowmass Village, this analysis is to look at transit connections to Snowmass Village to evaluate transit effectiveness and efficiency, and determine cost, frequency, and expected utilization of increased/enhanced service levels. It is staff’s opinion that as Snowmass Village is one of the largest transit service areas in the Roaring Fork Valley and service levels to Snowmass Village have increased over the past several years, a comprehensive analysis of existing service levels in collaboration with RFTA and the Town of Snowmass Village is needed at this time. 22 270 The 2022 allocation request is $50,000. The results of this analysis are expected to recommend reconfiguring service to best meet demand and/or implement new services. At this time, should this project move forward a report out of the results are expected at the Spring 2023 EOTC meeting. 17) Permanent Automated Vehicle Counters - Planning, Design, Permitting, Construction (2021 Near Term Transit Improvement Program Effort – Tier 1) - $200,000 This proposal is to allocate funding to hire a consulting and implementation team to plan, design, permit, and construct / install a system of vehicle counters in the Upper Valley. Currently, the only permanent counter on Highway 82 in the upper valley is at the Castle Creek bridge. While this counter has been very beneficial over the years and should remain in place, to be able to better track VMT, GHG emissions, and congestion over the long term, additional permanent counters are recommended. While the specific locations of these counters are not yet identified, the general locations identified to date are at Brush Creek Road near Highway 82, Owl Creek Road, and on Highway 82 at the AABC / Airport. Another possible location is just down valley of the Brush Creek Park and Ride on Highway 82 and Power Plant Road. Staff will work with the consulting team to determine the most beneficial locations and types of counters based on the specific circumstances. Based on preliminary cost estimates for approximately five counters, the 2022 allocation request is $200,000. RECOMMENDED EOTC ACTION: - Adopt staff recommended 2022 EOTC Budget (Motion, Second, and Roll Call Vote by Jurisdiction) Adoption of the annual EOTC budget requires resolutions of approval from the City of Aspen and Town of Snowmass Village. Draft resolutions are attached to this memo. An affirmative vote by each jurisdiction at the EOTC meeting authorizes signature on these resolutions. As the fiscal agent for the EOTC, Pitkin County will formally adopt the EOTC budget, as approved by the EOTC, as a part of the annual County budget process. As a result, the County budget approval process will act at the County’s formal adoption in lieu of a separate resolution. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Staff Proposed 2022 EOTC Budget 2. 2022 EOTC Decision Making Matrix 3. 2022 EOTC Revenue Comparison Chart 4. Memo from We-Cycle 5. Memo from Aspen Skiing Company 6. Town of Snowmass Village Draft Resolution of Approval 7. City of Aspen Draft Resolution of Approval 23 271 2022 EOTC Proposed BudgetEOTC Transit Project Funding Projection or Projection orActualActualBudgetBudgetPlanPlanPlanPlan20192020202120222023202420252026FUNDING SOURCES:Pitkin County 1/2% sales tax6,929,287 6,787,148 8,008,835 7,672,464 7,979,363 8,298,538 8,630,480 8,975,699 less RFTA contribution (81.04% of 1/2% sales tax)5,615,494 5,500,305 6,490,360 6,217,765 6,466,476 6,725,135 6,994,141 7,273,906 net 1/2% sales tax funding to EOTC1,313,793 1,286,843 1,518,475 1,454,699 1,512,887 1,573,403 1,636,339 1,701,793 Pitkin County 1/2% use tax1,648,572 996,543 425,000 433,925 443,037 452,341 461,840 471,539 Investment income & misc.295,008 276,309 91,171 40,143 40,444 40,848 41,461 42,187 Total Funding Sources3,257,373 2,559,694 2,034,646 1,928,767 1,996,368 2,066,592 2,139,640 2,215,519 FUNDING USES:Ongoing / OperationalUse tax collection costs & overhead143,616 159,491 177,028 151,827 155,167 158,581 162,228 165,959 Administrative costs & meeting costs11,215 5,755 12,400 12,673 12,952 13,237 13,541 13,852 Country Inn taxi program in-lieu of bus stop safety improvements6,982 3,444 7,000 7,154 7,311 7,472 7,644 7,820 X-Games transit subsidy 115,000 115,000 115,000 Brush Creek Park and Ride operating costs33,240 29,993 42,882 95,000 97,090 99,226 101,508 103,843 No-fare Aspen-Snowmass-Woody Creek bus service - year-round662,158 690,075 813,678 851,198 963,493 1,002,033 1,042,114 1,083,799 WE-cycle operational support100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 Regional Transportation Administrator133,450 141,713 143,556 152,529 158,630 164,182 170,749 176,725 sub-total Ongoing / Operational1,205,662 1,245,470 1,296,544 1,485,381 1,394,643 1,444,731 1,497,784 1,551,998 net funding available for projects2,051,711 1,314,224 738,102 443,386 601,725 621,861 641,856 663,521 ProjectsBattery Electric Bus Program500,000 Variable message sign on Hwy 8211,310 494,652 39,060 Snowmass Mall transit station (2000 Ballot Required Funding $7M - 2022 balance $5,278,787) - 650,000 300,000 6,000,000 EOTC Professional Services, Regional Transportation Participation, Retreat1,890 5,000 15,000 Brush Creek Park and Ride FLAP grant match 44,506176,9503,316,672 Community Task Force - Integrated Mobility System Feasibility, Phase 218,420 25,000 Upper Valley Transit Enhancement Study 45,000 Bike / Ped Connection from BC P&R to Rio Grande / AABC - Feasibility25,00025,000 Maroon Creek Roundabout - CDOT Reconstruction Contribution271,000 2021 Near Term Transit Improvement Program Efforts: Truscott to Owl Creek Trail - Feasibility, Planning, and Design200,000 Buttermilk Underpass and Transit Signal Bypasses - Feasibility and Initial Design200,000 Snowmass Direct Transit Service Improvement Analysis50,000 Permanent Automated Vehicle Counters - Planning, Design, Permitting, Install200,000sub-total Projects511,310 1,209,467 616,010 10,277,672 - - - - Total Uses1,716,972 2,454,938 1,912,554 11,763,053 1,394,643 1,444,731 1,497,784 1,551,998 EOTC ANNUAL SURPLUS/(DEFICIT)1,540,401 104,756 122,092 (9,834,286) 601,725 621,861 641,856 663,521 EOTC CUMULATIVE SURPLUS FUND BALANCE11,477,423 11,582,180 11,704,272 1,869,986 2,471,711 3,093,572 3,735,428 4,398,949 (625,726) 688,498 1,426,600 1,869,986 2,471,711 3,093,572 3,735,428 4,398,949 a) sales tax 22.21% -2.05% 18.00%-4.20%4.00% 4.00% 4.00% 4.00%b) use tax 11.1%-39.6%-4.26%2.10%2.10% 2.10% 2.10% 2.10%c) investment earnings rate1.5%0.5%0.69%0.54%0.75% 1.00% 1.50% 1.75%Revenue projections: Unobligated EOTC Fund Balance (Current Year Operations and All Current and Future Projects) Attachment 124272 EOTC Decision Making MatrixScoring:Greatly Exceeds5Exceeds42022 EOTC BudgetMeets3Combined Average ‐ Partially Meets2COA, TOSV, RFTA, PitCo, TADoes Not Meet19/1/2021Aspen Country Inn ‐Taxi in Lieu of Bus StopNo‐Fare Aspen‐Snowmass‐Woody Creek Bus Service ‐ Year RoundBC P&R FHWA FLAP Grant Match for P&R ImprovementsSnowmass Mall Transit StationX‐Games Bus SubsidyWe‐Cycle Operating SupportBike/Ped Connection from BC P&R to Rio Grande / AABC ‐ Feasability Maroon Creek Roundabout Reconstruction ‐ CDOT RequestTruscott to Owl Creek Trail ‐ Feasibility, Planning, and Initial Design Buttermilk Underpass and Transit Signal Bypasses ‐ Feasibility and Initial DesignSnowmass Direct Transit Service Improvement AnalysisPermenant Automated Vehicle Counters ‐ Planning, Design, Permitting, ConstructionHOV Lane Enforcement AnalsysisBrush Creek Park and Ride ‐ Long‐Term ParkingScoreScoreScoreScoreScoreScoreScoreScoreScoreScoreScoreScoreScoreScoreMission:Describes what the EOTC does2.44.84.23.833.23.43.323.54.24.03.83.63.1Work collectively to reduce and manage the volume of vehicles on the road and parking system and continue to develop and support a comprehensive multimodal, long‐range strategy that will insure a convenient, equitable and efficient transportation system for the Roaring Fork Valley.2.44.84.23.833.23.43.323.54.24.03.83.63.1Vision: Describes where the EOTC is going2.254.6433.63.63.43.93.83.93.53.93.2We envision the Roaring Fork Valley as the embodiment of a sustainable transportation system emphasizing mass transit and mobility that contributes to the happiness and wellbeing of residents and visitors. 2.254.6433.63.63.43.93.83.93.53.93.2Guiding Principles:Describes the principles to be enacted as the EOTC pursues it's Vision6.412.813128.69.811.610.49.910.810.710.59.78.7Environmental SustainabilityAll projects will promote a balanced natural and built environment while reducing greenhouse gas emissions.1.64.44.242.63.43.82.83.63.33.63.43.52.6Economic SustainabilityEfforts will strive to increase emergency and economic resiliency while considering the financial, legal and physical practicality of each project. 2.23.643.832.83.43.82.93.53.53.83.23.3Social SustainabilityEncourage a top‐line transportation experience for all residents and visitors while striving to increase equity, proximity, reliability, and efficiency of the network to meet the transportation needs of all people. 2.64.84.84.233.64.43.83.44.03.63.33.02.8Key Strategies:Describes how the EOTC will move toward enacting it's Guiding Principles and realizing it's Vision6.211.812.8129.61110.810.628.310.711.09.010.77.9Multi‐Modal Network that Encourages Mode Shift All decisions will support public mass transit and mobility. In addition, new technologies that support mode shift away from private vehicles will be embraced. 2.44.64.64.43.64.23.83.33.33.74.32.83.92.8Regionalism and Cross‐Sector ApproachAll decisions will consider the needs of the whole Roaring Fork Valley as well as the context of the greater regulatory and community environment, such as housing and land use controls. 1.83.43.83.63.43.43.43.762.33.53.53.03.22.7Communication and Inter‐Governmental Engagement The EOTC will strive to communicate and engage with local stakeholders, citizens, partner organizations, and other local, State and Federal government agencies to support its Mission, Vision, and Guiding Principles and implement its Key Strategies.23.84.442.63.43.63.562.73.53.23.23.62.4Total Score17.234.434.631.824.227.629.427.7425.629.529.626.827.922.9Regional Priorities ‐ EOTC CVTPXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXMulti‐Modal Hub and Transit Connections to Airport / AABCMulti‐Modal Solution to Entrance to AspenSnowmass Village to BC P&R Service Commensurate with Highway 82 Corridor Transit ServiceElectrification of Transit SystemFirst and Last Mile SolutionsTransit Speed, Accessibility, Reliability, and Efficiency EnhancementsCongestion Mitigation MeasuresTechnologies and Innovation to Encourage Mode ShiftUpper Valley Priorities ‐ EOTC CVTPBike and Pedestrian Connections to Transit Stops and BC P&RExisting Obligations / Previously Scored ProjectsNew Requests / EffortsCriteria ‐EOTC Strategic PlanDescription of CriteriaPlace "X" in cell if the expenditure meets PriorityPark and Ride ImprovementsAttachment 225273 Attachment 3 2018, 2019 and 2020 Revenue Comparison and 2021 Projections 2018, 2019, and 2020 Actual Revenues 2021 Revenue Projection – Est. as of October 2021 (2022 Draft Budget) Revenue Destination 2018 Revenue - Actual 2019 Revenue – Actual 2020 Revenue - Actual Dollar Change and Percent Change – Actual (2018 & 2020) 2021 Revenue – Projected (18% Sales Tax Change) Dollar Change and Percent – 2018 & 2021 (18% Sales Tax Change) Pitkin County 0.5% Transit Sales Tax RFTA (81.04%) $4,594,862 $5,615,494 $5,500,305 $905,443 19.7% $6,490,360 $1,895,498 41.3% EOTC (18.96%) $1,075,007 $1,313,793 $1,286,843 $211,836 19.7% $1,518,475 $443,468 41.3% Pitkin County 0.5% Transit Use Tax EOTC $1,484,002 $1,648,572 $996,543 - $487,459 - 32.8% $425,000 - $1,059,002 - 71.3% Investment Income EOTC $166,211 $295,008 $276,309 $110,098 66.2% $91,171 - $75,040 - 45.1% Total EOTC Annual Revenues EOTC $2,725,220 $3,257,373 $2,559,694 - $165,526 - 6% $2,034,646 -$690,574 -25.3% 26 274 TO: David Pesnichak, Elected Officials Transportation Committee FROM: Mirte Mallory, WE-cycle, Co-Founder and Executive Director RE: 2022 WE-cycle EOTC Funding Request REQUEST OF EOTC: Continued investment in WE-cycle, at the $100,000 level, to support day to day operations of the Upper Valley’s bike transit system designed as a first- and-last mile feeder to RFTA and an in-town, on- demand transit offering. The EOTC is an aligned funding source for WE-cycle given its multi-jurisdictional service offering and ability to support the region’s mass transit system with a healthy, active, and low-carbon transportation alternative. CONTEXT: WE-cycle is half-way through its ninth season of operations in the Upper Valley and sixth season in the Mid-Valley. Since 2017, the EOTC has been an annual funding partner of WE-cycle and its contributions have been instrumental in helping WE-cycle stabilize its service year over year. Thanks to EOTC’s support, and that of local jurisdictions, the Roaring Fork Transportation Authority (RFTA), and private partners, WE-cycle has become an established and relied-upon part of the Upper Valley’s transportation system. With bikeshare now an expected part of the valley’s transit landscape, WE-cycle is focused on its long-term operational model and securing sustainable funding sources. As such, WE-cycle is working closely with RFTA and valley-wide jurisdictions on the Regional Bike Share Study and First- and-Last Mile Mobility Study (RBSS & FLMM) intended to formalize an operating, funding, and governance model for WE-cycle and its respective partnerships with RFTA and jurisdictions. A key component of the study is to create an allocation methodology for the Destination 2040 bikeshare specific funds. The study is also anticipated to make a recommendation as to the EOTC’s possible role in supporting bikeshare, both from a funding and policy perspective. The study’s conclusion is expected by the end of 2021 or early 2022. Given the timing of RBSS & FLMM studies, WE-cycle is asking for operating support from the EOTC for 2022 only. WE-cycle looks forward to discussing long-term collaborations with, and respective funding opportunities from, the EOTC upon receiving the study’s guidance. FUNDING PARTNERS: WE-cycle, a 501c3 not for profit organization, is funded through a public private partnership. Its 2021 annual revenue is anticipated to be $800,000, comprised of 63% public funding and 37% from private partners. Despite of increased labor and equipment costs, currently being experienced by all industries, WE-cycle anticipates meeting its annual budget. WE-cycle’s fare-free service, for the first 30 minutes of each ride, is underwritten by the City of Aspen, the Town of Basalt, Eagle County, and Town of Snowmass Village. Riders incur Overtime Fees for each additional minute of $0.50/minute for the pedal bikes and $5.00/minute for the e-bikes. WE-cycle is designed for short, point to point transit-oriented trips with a pricing structure intended to discourage longer, recreational rides. WE-cycle’s is pleased to welcome back Community Partner, Aspen Snowmass Sotheby’s International Realty and Impact Sponsor, Aspen Valley Hospital. Attachment 4 27 275 SYSTEM UPDATES: WE-cycle’s 2021 ridership is slowly returning to pre-pandemic levels. Ridership in August of 2021 exceeded that of August 2019 by just over 3%. Downtown Aspen stations are being heavily used underscoring the difficulty of getting into and parking in town. Ridership patterns continue to demonstrate a work from home trends and varied commuting hours from prior years. The connection to and from RFTA remains strong with 36% of WE-cycle rides originating or ending at a WE-cycle station adjacent to a RFTA BRT stop. Underscoring the use of bikeshare for quick, connection-oriented trips, the average ride time, system-wide, is 10.23 minutes. Of note, WE-cycle did not open until early June of 2020 per compliance with public health guidelines. Figure 1: WE-cycle ridership, system-wide, May – August, 2018 – 2019. True to WE-cycle’s spirit of innovation and commitment to reduce transportation-generated carbon emissions, in June, WE-cycle launched a solar-powered e-bikeshare pilot. WE-cycle partnered with its bikeshare manufacturer, PBSC Urban Solutions Inc, and the local solar-company, Skyhook Solar, to pioneer the first solar-powered e- bikeshare stations in Colorado and the only operational ones in the US. With one station at Aspen Valley Hospital and the other at the Basalt BRT, this technology allows WE- cycle’s 25 e-bikes to recharge by the sun while docked at a bikeshare station rather than being removed from service and charged in the shop. Figure 2: Solar-powered e-bikeshare station at the Basalt BRT. Photo: Craig Turpin The pilot is proving successful and WE-cycle is optimistic that the future of e-bikeshare will be able to rely on solar-power charging and thereby further reduce the carbon emissions of its operations and offering. Attachment 4 28 276 To: Elected Officials Transportation Committee From: Aspen Skiing Company Date: August 27, 2021 Re: 2022-24 X Games Aspen Funding Request In 2021, Aspen Snowmass hosted its 20th consecutive X Games at Buttermilk Mountain with the support of our valued community partners. The event looked a lot different without crowds, concerts or on-site sponsor activations but accomplished the main goals of celebrating athletic achievement, feeding the youth pipeline and marketing to the world via multiple media platforms. It took seamless collaboration between multiple local agencies, ESPN and ASC to pull off an event of this caliber during the height of the pandemic. High frequency Covid testing, mask mandates, staff and competition bubbles and limiting access allowed the community to safely host the first major winter sports event during the pandemic and became a blueprint for successfully hosting events in a modified and safe format. The outcome of the community’s efforts resulted in record-breaking coverage of X Games Aspen. 2021 Recap 105MM video views on Social Media (Facebook, Instagram, TikTok and YouTube) 483% increase 16 hours of Live TV reaching tens of millions across the US in original programming Televised and packaged for rebroadcast globally to 197 countries and more than 500MM homes 70+% viewership between ages 18-34 Looking forward to the 2022 X Games we remain optimistic that we will see the return of spectators, music and on-site activations along with all the energy and vitality of a younger demographic coming to visit our resort, but realize our planning must remain flexible, fluid and prudent with Covid still prevalent. Much like last year, a lot can change between now and January 21st , so we are again requesting the $115,000 contribution to support our community wide X Games effort from the EOTC in the form of a reimbursement instead of an upfront commitment. This reimbursement is a maximum amount, and can be reduced in scope in this particular year if spectator access ends up being restricted due to Covid-19. ASC and ESPN, along with all of our community partners will continue to monitor the COVID-19 developments as we plan the upcoming event. The safety of the athletes, staff, spectators and the community will remain our top priority as we plan for 2022. Thank you for EOTC’s continued support of this valuable community initiative. Buck Erickson Director of Event Operations Aspen Skiing Company X Games Aspen Attachment 5 29 277 TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE RESOLUTION NO. SERIES OF 2021 A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE, COLORADO, APPROVING THE 2022 BUDGET FOR THE PITKIN COUNTY 1/2 CENT TRANSIT SALES AND USE TAX WHEREAS, the Town Council of Snowmass Village, the Aspen City Council and the Pitkin County Board of County Commissioners (the "Parties") have previously identified general elements of their Comprehensive Valley Transportation Plan (the "Plan") which are eligible for funding from the Pitkin County one-half cent transit sales and use tax; and WHEREAS, the Parties entered into an Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) dated May 3rd, 2021 which identifies the method and process by which the Parties are to implement the Plan; and WHEREAS, at the EOTC meeting held on October 28, 2021, the Parties considered and approved the attached 2022 budget for the Pitkin County one-half cent transit sales and use tax; and WHEREAS, the Town of Snowmass Village Council now desires to ratify the budget approval given at the EOTC meeting by adoption of this resolution. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Town Council of the Town of Snowmass Village, Colorado, that the 2022 budget for the one-half cent transit sales and use tax is hereby approved. READ, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the Town Council of the Town of Snowmass Village, Colorado on the 28 of October, 2021, upon a motion made by Council Member __________, the second of Council Member __________, and upon a vote of ___ in favor and ___ opposed. TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE _________________________ Bill Madsen, Mayor Attachment 6 30 278 APPROVED AS TO FORM ________________________ John Dresser, Town Attorney ATTEST: _________________________ Rhonda Coxan, Town Clerk Attachment 6 31 279 RESOLUTION NO. ____ SERIES OF 2021 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, APPROVING THE 2022 BUDGET FOR THE PITKIN COUNTY 1/2 CENT TRANSIT SALES AND USE TAX WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council, the Pitkin County Board of County Commissioners and the Town Council of Snowmass Village (the "Parties") have previously identified general elements of their Comprehensive Valley Transportation Plan (the "Plan") which are eligible for funding from the Pitkin County one-half cent transit sales and use tax; and WHEREAS, the Parties entered into an Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) dated May 3rd, 2021 which identifies the method and process by which the Parties are to implement the Plan; and WHEREAS, at the EOTC meeting held on October 28, 2021, the Parties considered and approved the attached 2022 budget for the Pitkin County one-half cent transit sales and use tax; and WHEREAS, the City of Aspen wishes to ratify the approvals given at the EOTC meeting by adoption of this resolution. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado, that the attached 2022 budget for the one-half cent transit sales and use tax is hereby approved. RESOLVED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 28 day of October, 2021, by the City Council for the City of Aspen, Colorado. _________________________ Torre, Mayor I, Nicole Henning, duly appointed and acting City Clerk, do certify that the foregoing is a true and accurate copy of that resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado, at a meeting held October 28, 2021. _________________________ Nicole Henning, City Clerk Attachment 7 32 280 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY EOTC MEETING DATE: October 28, 2021 AGENDA ITEM TITLE: EOTC 2022 Work Plan STAFF RESPONSIBLE: David Pesnichak, Transportation Administrator ISSUE STATEMENT: Attached for review and approval is the Proposed 2022 Work Plan. This Work Plan is to provide transparency in the work efforts proposed to advance the 2020 EOTC Strategic Plan and 2020 EOTC Comprehensive Valley Transportation Plan (CVTP). In addition to the work items, this Plan also recommends regular meeting and retreat / long-term planning dates for 2022 along with topical focus areas for each of the EOTC meetings. BACKGROUND: The EOTC has many work items that need to be addressed in the coming years. In order to ensure we are all moving in an agreed upon direction, staff has created the attached 2022 Work Plan. The creation of an annual Work Plan is a requirement of the EOTC Strategic Plan. This Plan is to bring together the following work projects facing the EOTC through 2023. This Plan is not intended to be all-inclusive and is anticipated to be updated as needed. Note that while the Work Plan includes all proposed projects to be undertaken by the EOTC in the coming year, some projects also require a budget expenditure to proceed. Following each of the projects listed below is a note whether that project is “Work Plan only” with no requested budgetary allocation or is “Work Plan and Budget” which do require a budgetary allocation to move forward. Projects that require a budgetary allocation are more fully described in the Budget memo. The following projects are proposed within the attached Work Plan: 2022: - Pursue EOTC Budget Mitigation (Work Plan only) - EOTC Retreat / Long-Term Planning Discussion (Work Plan and Budget) - Brush Creek Park and Ride - FLAP Improvements - Construction (Work Plan and Budget) - Develop Partnership with Holy Cross Energy for EV Charger Install (Work Plan only) - Bike / Ped Connection to Rio Grande / AABC Feasibility Study – Phase 2 (Work Plan and Budget) - Recommendation on Long-Term Parking Plan (Parking over 24 hours) (Work Plan only) - 2021 EOTC Near Term Transit Improvement Program - Truscott to Owl Creek Trail – Planning, Design, Public Input, Identification of Funding Sources (Work Plan and Budget) 33 281 - Buttermilk Bike/Pedestrian Underpass and Transit Signal Bypasses - Initial Design, Public Input, Identification of Funding Sources (Work Plan and Budget) - HOV Lane Enforcement Analysis (Work Plan only) - Analysis of Up Valley and Down Valley BRT Direct Service to Snowmass (Work Plan and Budget) - Additional Permanent Automated Vehicle Counters (Work Plan and Budget) - Participate in Snowmass Transit Center, Airport, and Regional Transportation Planning / Visioning, as appropriate 2023: - Continue Progress on Implementation of 2021 EOTC Transit Improvement Program, as appropriate - Brush Creek Park and Ride - Food Truck /Farm Stand Experiment - Participate in Snowmass Transit Center, Brush Creek P&R Development, Airport, and regional transportation planning / visioning, as appropriate In addition to the above actions, the Work Plan also identifies the responsible party, preliminary timeline, expected outcome and the link to the Strategic Plan and CVTP from the action. The Work Plan includes the following regular meeting / retreat dates, host, and topic area for 2022: Date Location Time Estimate Anticipated Topic March 24, 2022 (Thursday) Pitkin County 4pm to 6pm Brush Creek Park and Ride to AABC Trail Connection Review EOTC Retreat / Long-Term Planning Prep – April 28 April 28, 2022 (Thursday) TBD 3pm to 6pm EOTC Retreat / Long-Term Planning Discussion May 26, 2022 (Thursday) Town of Snowmass Village 4pm to 6pm HOV Lane Enforcement Analysis Review Brush Creek Park and Ride - Long-Term Parking Plan Review (parking over 24 hours) October 27, 2022 (Thursday) City of Aspen 4pm to 6pm 2023 Budget and Work Plan The Work Plan also calls for additional meetings, if necessary, in order to complete necessary tasks identified within the Plan. BUDGETARY IMPACT: Staff has proposed a line item for $15,000 in 2021 to help support this Work Plan, including a 2022 EOTC retreat / long-term planning discussions, professional services, meeting space, or other materials as 34 282 needed. (This line item supports the retreat / long-term planning discussion as well as other low-cost efforts that advance the EOTC Strategic Plan and CVTP.) RECOMMENDED ACTION: - Adopt staff recommended 2022 EOTC Work Plan and Meeting Schedule (Motion, Second, and Roll Call Vote by Jurisdiction) Adoption of the annual EOTC Work Plan and Meeting Schedule requires resolutions of approval from the City of Aspen, Town of Snowmass Village, and Pitkin County. Draft resolutions are attached to this memo. An affirmative vote by each jurisdiction at the EOTC meeting authorizes signature on these resolutions. ATTACHMENTS: 1.2022 Draft EOTC Work Plan and Meeting Schedule 2.Town of Snowmass Village Draft Resolution of Approval 3.City of Aspen Draft Resolution of Approval 4.Pitkin County Draft Resolution of Approval 35 283 Proposed EOTC Work Plan and Meeting Schedule 2022 Action Responsible Party Timeline Expected Outcome Link to Strategic Plan and CVTP Pursue EOTC Budget Mitigation ETOC Staff in Collaboration with RFTA All Year Determine if Transfer of Cost of No-Fare Service to RFTA is Feasible Option to Mitigate the Effects of Sales and Use Tax Collection Changes. EOTC Administration EOTC Retreat / Long-Term Planning Discussion EOTC Staff April EOTC Mtg Understanding of future transportation trends and available options for mitigation EOTC Administration Brush Creek P&R: FLAP Improvements – Construction Develop Partnership with HCE for EV Charger Install Bike / Ped Connection to Rio Grande / AABC – Feasibility Study – Phase 2 Recommendation on Long-Term Parking Plan EOTC Staff in Collaboration with RFTA, CDOT, FHWA, COA, and TOSV EOTC Staff EOTC Staff in Collaboration with PitCo and COA Open Space and Trails EOTC Staff All Year All Year March EOTC Mtg Review May EOTC Mtg Review Complete Construction of Approved FLAP Improvements. Develop Partnership for Installation of EV Chargers following Completion of FLAP Improvements. Identification of Technically Feasible Alternatives for Connecting BC P&R to Rio Grande / AABC for Public Outreach Consideration in 2022. Staff Recommendation on how Long-Term Parking (over 24 hours) could be Accommodated and Managed Guiding Principles: Environmental Sustainability, Economic Sustainability, Social Sustainability Key Strategies: Multi-Modal Network that Encourages Mode Shift, Regionalism and Cross-Sector Approach, Communication and Inter-Governmental Engagement CVTP Regional Priorities: Park and Ride Improvements; First and Last Mile Solutions; Transit Speed, Accessibility, Reliability, and Efficiency Enhancements; Technologies and Innovation to Encourage Mode Shift CVTP Upper Valley Priorities: Bike and Pedestrian Connections to Transit Stops and BC P&R; Multi-Modal Solution to Entrance to Aspen; Electrification of Transit System Attachment 136284 2021 EOTC Near Term Transit Improvement Program: Truscott to Owl Creek Trail Buttermilk Bike / Pedestrian Underpass and Transit Signal Bypasses HOV Lane Enforcement Analysis Analysis of Up Valley and Down Valley BRT Direct Service to Snowmass Additional Permanent Automated Vehicle Counters EOTC Staff EOTC Staff EOTC Staff EOTC Staff EOTC Staff All Year All Year May EOTC Mtg Review All Year – Report Out Spring 2023 All Year Planning, Stakeholder Outreach, Design, and Partnership and Funding Identification. Planning, Stakeholder Outreach, Initial Design, and Partnership and Funding Identification. Analysis of Manual and Automated Enforcement Methods. Snowmass transit connection analysis to evaluate transit effectiveness and efficiency, and determine cost, frequency, and expected utilization of increased / enhanced service levels. Plan, Design, Permit, Construct Additional Vehicle Counters in Key Locations within Upper Valley Guiding Principles: Environmental Sustainability, Economic Sustainability, Social Sustainability Key Strategies: Multi-Modal Network that Encourages Mode Shift, Regionalism and Cross-Sector Approach, Communication and Inter-Governmental Engagement CVTP Regional Priorities: Park and Ride Lot Improvements; First and Last Mile Solutions; Transit Speed, Accessibility, Reliability, and Efficiency Enhancements; Congestion Mitigation Measures; Technologies and Innovation to Encourage Mode Shift CVTP Upper Valley Priorities: Bike and Pedestrian Connections to Transit Stops and BC P&R; Multi-Modal Solution to Entrance to Aspen; Snowmass Village to Brush Creek Park and Ride Service Commensurate with Highway 82 Corridor Transit Service Participate in Snowmass Transit Center, Airport, and Regional Transportation Planning / Visioning Staff and EOTC, as Appropriate All Year Participate in Transportation Related Planning and Visioning, as Appropriate. Dependent on Project / Initiative Attachment 137285 2023 Action Responsible Party Timeline Expected Outcome Link to Strategic Plan and CVTP Continue Progress on Implementation of 2021 EOTC Transit Improvement Program EOTC Staff All Year Continued Implementation of 2021 EOTC Transit Improvement Program Guiding Principles: Environmental Sustainability, Economic Sustainability, Social Sustainability Key Strategies: Multi-Modal Network that Encourages Mode Shift, Regionalism and Cross-Sector Approach, Communication and Inter-Governmental Engagement CVTP Regional Priorities: First and Last Mile Solutions; Transit Speed, Accessibility, Reliability, and Efficiency Enhancements; Congestion Mitigation Measures; Technologies and Innovation to Encourage Mode Shift CVTP Upper Valley Priorities: Bike and Pedestrian Connections to Transit Stops and BC P&R; Multi-Modal Solution to Entrance to Aspen; Airport / AABC Multi-Modal transit Hub and transit Circulation Enhancements Attachment 138286 Brush Creek P&R: Food Truck / Farm Stand – Experiment EOTC Staff All Year Manage and Execute Food Truck / Farm Stand Experiment if Permitted. Guiding Principles: Environmental Sustainability, Economic Sustainability, Social Sustainability Key Strategies: Multi-Modal Network that Encourages Mode Shift, Regionalism and Cross-Sector Approach, Communication and Inter-Governmental Engagement CVTP Regional Priorities: Park and Ride Improvements; First and Last Mile Solutions; Transit Speed, Accessibility, Reliability, and Efficiency Enhancements CVTP Upper Valley Priorities: Bike and Pedestrian Connections to Transit Stops and BC P&R Participate in Snowmass Transit Center, Brush Creek P&R Development, Airport, and regional transportation planning / visioning Staff and EOTC, as Appropriate All Year Participate in Transportation Related Planning and Visioning, as Appropriate. Dependent on Project / Initiative Attachment 139287 2022 EOTC Scheduled Meeting Dates Date Location Time Estimate Anticipated Topic March 24, 2022 (Thursday) Pitkin County 4pm to 6pm Brush Creek Park and Ride to AABC Trail Connection Review EOTC Retreat / Long-Term Planning Prep – April 28 April 28, 2022 (Thursday) TBD 3pm to 6pm EOTC Retreat/Long-Term Planning Discussion May 26, 2022 (Thursday) Town of Snowmass Village 4pm to 6pm HOV Lane Enforcement Analysis Review Brush Creek Park and Ride - Long-Term Parking Plan Review (parking over 24 hours) October 27, 2022 (Thursday) City of Aspen 4pm to 6pm 2023 Budget and Work Plan Note: Additional meeting may be necessary in order to complete necessary tasks identified within this Plan. Attachment 140288 TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE RESOLUTION NO. SERIES OF 2021 A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE, COLORADO, APPROVING THE 2022 WORK PLAN FOR THE ELECTED OFFICIALS TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE (EOTC) WHEREAS, the Town Council of Snowmass Village, the Aspen City Council and the Pitkin County Board of County Commissioners (the "Parties") have previously identified general elements of their Comprehensive Valley Transportation Plan (the "Plan") which are eligible for funding from the Pitkin County one-half cent transit sales and use tax; and WHEREAS, the Parties entered into an Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) dated May 3rd, 2021 which identifies the method and process by which the Parties are to implement the Plan; and WHEREAS, at the EOTC meeting held on October 28, 2021, the Parties considered and approved the attached 2022 work plan for the Pitkin County one-half cent transit sales and use tax; and WHEREAS, the Town of Snowmass Village Council now desires to ratify the work plan approval given at the EOTC meeting by adoption of this resolution. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Town Council of the Town of Snowmass Village, Colorado, that the 2022 work plan for the one-half cent transit sales and use tax is hereby approved. READ, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the Town Council of the Town of Snowmass Village, Colorado on the 28 of October, 2021, upon a motion made by Council Member __________, the second of Council Member __________, and upon a vote of _ in favor and _ opposed. TOWN OF SNOWMASS VILLAGE _________________________ Bill Madsen, Mayor 41 289 APPROVED AS TO FORM ________________________ John Dresser, Town Attorney ATTEST: _________________________ Rhonda Coxan, Town Clerk 42 290 RESOLUTION NO. ____ SERIES OF 2021 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, APPROVING THE 2022 WORK PLAN FOR THE ELECTED OFFICIALS TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE (EOTC) WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council, the Pitkin County Board of County Commissioners and the Town Council of Snowmass Village (the "Parties") have previously identified general elements of their Comprehensive Valley Transportation Plan (the "Plan") which are eligible for funding from the Pitkin County one-half cent transit sales and use tax; and WHEREAS, the Parties entered into an Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) dated May 3rd, 2021 which identifies the method and process by which the Parties are to implement the Plan; and WHEREAS, at the EOTC meeting held on October 28, 2021, the Parties considered and approved the attached 2022 work plan for the Pitkin County one-half cent transit sales and use tax; and WHEREAS, the City of Aspen wishes to ratify the approvals given at the EOTC meeting by adoption of this resolution. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado, that the attached 2022 work plan for the one-half cent transit sales and use tax is hereby approved. RESOLVED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 28 day of October, 2021, by the City Council for the City of Aspen, Colorado. _________________________ Torre, Mayor I, Nicole Henning, duly appointed and acting City Clerk, do certify that the foregoing is a true and accurate copy of that resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado, at a meeting held October 28, 2021. _________________________ Nicole Henning, City Clerk 43 291 1 RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS (“BOCC”) OF PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO ADOPTING THE 2022 ELECTED OFFICIALS TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE (“EOTC”) WORK PLAN RESOLUTION NO. ______, 2021 RECITALS WHEREAS, Pursuant to Section 2.8.3 (Actions) of the Pitkin County Home Rule Charter (“HRC”) official action by formal resolution shall be required for all actions of the Board not requiring ordinance power on matters of significant importance affecting citizens, and; WHEREAS, the Town Council of Snowmass Village, the Aspen City Council and the Pitkin County Board of County Commissioners (the "Parties") have previously identified general elements of their Comprehensive Valley Transportation Plan (the "Plan") which are eligible for funding from the Pitkin County one-half cent transit sales and use tax; and WHEREAS, the Parties entered into an Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) dated May 3rd, 2021 which identifies the method and process by which the Parties are to implement the Plan; and WHEREAS, at the EOTC meeting held on October 28, 2021, the Parties considered and approved the attached 2022 work plan for the Pitkin County one-half cent transit sales and use tax; and WHEREAS, at the EOTC meeting held on October 28, 2021, the Parties considered and approved the attached 2022 work plan hereto as Exhibit “A”, and; WHEREAS, the BOCC finds that it is in the best interests of the citizens of Pitkin County to approve this Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of Pitkin County, Colorado that it hereby adopts a Resolution of the Board of County Commissioners (“BOCC”) of Pitkin County, Colorado adopting the 2022 EOTC work plan and authorizes the Chair to sign the Resolution and upon the satisfaction of the County Attorney as to form, execute any other associated documents necessary to complete this matter. APPROVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS BY A MAJORITY VOTE AFTER A DULY NOTICED PUBLIC HEARING, AT THE ELECTED OFFICIAL TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE MEETING HELD ON OCTOBER 28, 2021. Attachment 4 44 292 2 ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS By _________________________ By: _____________________________ Jeanette Jones Kelly McNicholas Kury, Chair Deputy County Clerk Date: ______________ APPROVED AS TO FORM: MANAGER APPROVAL ___________________________ _________________________________ John Ely, County Attorney Jon Peacock, County Manager Effective 01-01-2020 Attachment 4 45 293 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY EOTC MEETING DATE: October 28, 2021 AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Transportation Administrator Updates STAFF RESPONSIBLE: David Pesnichak, Transportation Administrator ISSUE STATEMENT: This memo is intended to keep the EOTC up to date on efforts that are within or could affect areas within the EOTC’s purview. The updates included in this memo are as follows. a)Status Update on 2021 EOTC Near Term Transit Improvement Program b)Town of Snowmass Village Transit Center – Progress Update (Provided by David Peckler, Transportation Director, Town of Snowmass Village) BACKGROUND: The following update is provided for EOTC information. a.Status Update on 2021 EOTC Near Term Transit Improvement Program As the EOTC members may recall, at the July 29, 2021 EOTC meeting, the Committee adopted the 2021 EOTC Near Term Transit Improvement Program. The purpose of this Program is to identify the near term priority projects to improve transit within the Upper Valley. As originally anticipated, staff has utilized this document to development the upcoming EOTC budgets and work plans starting in 2022. You will see most of the Tier 1 projects from the Program proposed for funding and/or identified as a Budget and/or Work Plan effort in 2022. For projects that are proposed to move forward in 2022, updates are provided within the Budget and/or Work Plan memo within this packet. Please see Attachment 1 for an update overview of each of the projects within the Near Term Transit Improvement Program. Notable updates not otherwise included in the Budget and/or Work Plan memo within this packet include: - Design and Feasibility Review of Maroon Creek Roundabout Down Valley Channelization and Down Valley Queue Jump at Cemetery Lane. Following a preliminary review of the radii analysis for this improvement through the Maroon Creek Roundabout, it became evident that the vertical lane separator necessary for the 46 294 channelization would not be compatible with large trucks (WB-67s) and RFTA’s large MCI coaches. As a result, staff flagged this issue as a fatal flaw in the concept before allocating any additional financial or staff resources to this project. Due to this identified fatal flaw in the radii analysis, Committee members will not find funding or other programming recommended for this project within the 2022 or 2023 EOTC budget or Work Plan. b.Town of Snowmass Village Transit Center – Progress Update (Provided by David Peckler, Transportation Director, Town of Snowmass Village) AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY TO: Elected Officials Transportation Committee FROM:David Peckler, Town of Snowmass Village Transportation Director MEETING DATE: October 28, 2021 SUBJECT: Snowmass Transit Station Project Update BACKGROUND: In the Spring of 2020, the Town Council formally approved “Option 5” as the preferred design for the proposed Mall Transit Station. Upon that approval, staff has worked with the EOTC and the State of Colorado (specifically a $300,000 MMOF grant) to allocate $1,250,000 to undertake the design of the Snowmass Transit Station (STS) in 2021 in preparation for construction in 2022. Following a competitive bid process, Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc. (SEH) was selected as the lead design firm for the project. We are using a construction management/general contractor (CM/GC) design/construct approach for this project. RA Nelson has been selected as the general contractor and they are working with SEH to develop a construction cost projection based on 50% Design Drawings. We anticipate having that cost projection in early October. I am projecting the construction cost for the facility to be in the $20 million range. I am preparing a grant application for the project to be submitted to the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) and/or Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) for a Section 5339 Bus and Bus Facility program grant. The application is due on November 19, 2021. With the “local match” we have being roughly 47 295 40% of a State grant project or 62% of a Federal grant project, I feel that we are in a competitive position to be awarded a State or Federal grant covering the project’s construction costs. Construction will start when the grant funding is in place. The adopted conceptual design of the STS was done by SEH and approved by Council in April. We have tweaked the project slightly to save on construction costs, but the bus platform is essentially the same. Since the adoption of the conceptual plan, staff has completed the Environmental Assessment for the project and has submitted it to the FTA for their review and acceptance. This is a requirement for any project that is looking to secure Federal funding for construction. We have also submitted a draft of an Equity Analysis to CDOT for CDOT’s review. Our project is listed as a Priority Project for the Intermountain Transportation Planning Region (IMTPR). The IMTPR is the CDOT planning region that covers Pitkin County and the Highway 82 corridor. The project has been reviewed by the Transportation Commission and was awarded $4.5 million from the State in SB-267 funding. We have kept the Roaring Fork Transportation Authority (RFTA) informed on the design work for the transit station and it has been incorporated in their Destination 2040 Plan. FINANCIAL IMPACT: The original Rough Order of Magnitude (ROM) cost projection for the project was $24 million. We have reengineered the replacement parking beneath the transit deck to reduce the amount of excavation need for the parking. We also reoriented the stagging bays to have less of an impact on the West side of the station to reduce the height of the retaining wall there and fill requirements. At present we have $6 million dedicated to the project from the Elected Officials Transportation Committee (EOTC). There is $2 million in local funding for the project and $500,000 from RFTA. The SB-267 award to the project was $4.5 million. I am preparing to submit a grant application for a Federal and/or State grant of $8 million. _____________________________________________________________________________________ BUDGETARY IMPACT: None at this time. RECOMMENDED ACTION: None at this time. ATTACHMENTS: 1.2021 EOTC Near Term Transit Improvement Program with Project Tracking 48 296 Project Name IMS Tenant Project Attribute(s) Relative Implementation Cost ($‐$$$)Notes Project Tracking Tier 1 Aspen Country Inn Trail Improvements to Bike / Ped Underpass and Transit Stops at Truscott and Buttermilk ** BRT Enhancements Higher value to dollar ratio $ Important bike / ped connection to transit for senior housing and service destinations. Basic infrastructure connection. Move to concept plan in 2021. PROGRAMMING: 2022 Feasibility, Planning, Design, Stakeholder Engagement, Construction Funding Identification ‐ Budget $200k & Work Plan; Cost Estimate: $200k total design, $1,050,000 total construction = Total $1.25M (Mead and Hunt ‐ 8‐19‐21) Design and Feasibility Review of Maroon Creek Roundabout Down Valley Channelization and Down Valley Queue Jump at Cemetery Lane ** BRT Enhancements Higher value to dollar ratio $$ (design only) Move to design and permitting to further evaluate feasibility. Initial rollout anticipated as an experiment. Requires CDOT approved design and permitting. Potential benefit to all motorized roadway users including transit. Channelization likely to be seasonal due to snow removal issues. Move to concept plan in 2021. Fatal Flaw Identified, STOP 8‐26‐21 ‐ Radii analysis shows incompatibility with WB‐67s and RFTA MCI Coaches; Cost Estimates: $30k queue jump & $25k channel design, $200k queue jump & $21,500 channelization install = Total $276,500 (Mead and Hunt ‐ 8‐19‐ 21) Design and Feasibility Review of Harmony / Owl Creek Transit Signal Bypass Lane and Buttermilk Bike / Ped Underpass ** BRT Enhancements Higher value to dollar ratio $$ (design only) First move to design to make eligible for funding. Superior bike / ped protection crossing Hwy 82 and increased transit speed and reliability. High construction cost. Move to concept plan in 2021. PROGRAMMING: 2022 Feasibility, Stakeholder Engagement, and Initial Design ‐ Budget $200k & Work Plan; Cost Estimate: $830k underpass / bypass lane design, $8.570M construction = Total $9.4M (Mead and Hunt ‐ 8‐19‐21) HOV Lane Enforcement Analysis HOV Lane Enforcement Important Preliminary Effort $ (analysis only) Necessary to determine best alternatives for HOV enforcement options (automated vs. personnel). Could require a phased implementation. PROGRAMMING: 2022 Staff Analysis ‐ Budget $0 & Work Plan Analysis of Up Valley and Down Valley BRT Direct Service to Snowmass BRT Enhancements Higher value to dollar ratio $ (analysis only) Aspen to Snowmass, and Snowmass to down valley transit connection analysis to evaluate transit effectiveness and efficiency, and determine cost, frequency, and expected utilization of increased/enhanced service levels. Current BRT connecting service to remain in place. PROGRAMMING: 2022 Budget $50k & Work Plan Additional Permanent Automated Vehicle Counters on Brush Creek Road, Owl Creek Road, Airport/AABC and Highway 82 in Pitkin County Congestion Reduction Measures Important Preliminary Effort $$ Additional vehicle counters are necessary to monitor program success, VMT and greenhouse gas emissions over the long term. PROGRAMMING: 2022 Planning, Permitting, Design, and Install Budget $200k & Work Plan Tier 2 Pilot Ridesharing app for Commuters Ride Sharing Dependent on Tier 1 Effort $‐$$ Effort dependent on HOV lane enforcement implementation for highest level of effectiveness. May be able to use results of RFTA's 2021 First Last Mile Mobility (FLMM) Study to guide this effort. Ongoing cost and staff time unknown. Pending Analysis of Regional Ride Hailing and Car Sharing Service Ride Sharing and Ride Hailing Lower value to dollar ratio $ (analysis only) Potentially lower relative benefits to transit ridership, GHG emissions, and VMT reductions. Analysis necessary to determine service scope, type and ensure service supports transit. May be able to use results of RFTA's 2021 First Last Mile Mobility (FLMM) Study to guide this effort. Pending Analysis of Valley Wide Commuter Parking, EV Charging, and Ride Hailing / Sharing Pick Up / Drop Off Locations Congestion Reduction Measures, Ride Sharing, and Ride Hailing Important Preliminary Effort $ (analysis only) Necessary to determine amount and location of needed parking, appropriate parking pricing, and incentives via EV charging placement to encourage transit ridership. Pending 2021 EOTC Near‐Term Transit Improvement Program ‐ Approved July 29, 2021 ‐ Administrative Direction ‐ UPDATED 8‐27‐21 First Priority ‐ Higher value* to dollar ratio and / or Important preliminary effort Second Priority ‐ Lower value* to dollar ratio and / or Dependent on Tier 1 effort Attachment 1 49 297 Tier 3 Service Center Road Signalization and Hwy 82 Brush Creek P&R to Airport Speed Limit Reduction BRT Enhancements Hold status due to dependence on efforts outside EOTC purview and Significant legal hurdles $$ Relatively expensive improvement. Gains in vehicular and bike / ped safety accessing transit. Hold due to ongoing design of new airport terminal and layout. Speed limit reduction to be reviewed by CDOT and possibly incorporated with signalization of intersection. Would require amending Access Control Plan with CDOT. Hold Extension of HOV Lanes Up Valley from Airport and / or Down Valley of Maroon Creek Roundabout BRT Enhancements Significant legal hurdles and Significant cost $$ Initial construction cost of exclusive bus lanes must be reimbursed to EOTC if any loss of exclusive bus lanes occurs. Source of reimbursement funds is unknown and amount of initial construction cost reimbursement could be high. Potential conflicts with ROD. Only to be pursued if 1) no loss to bus only lane can be achieved and 2) effective HOV lane enforcement is in place. Hold Dynamic Road Pricing (Cordon Pricing or Managed / HOT Lane) Congestion Reduction Measures Significant legal hurdles and Significant cost $$$ Significant legal hurdles as State law would need to be amended to allow for cordon pricing. Cordon pricing or managed lane would require significant permitting, operational infrastructure, and partnerships. Implementation, public relations and maintenance costs expected to be high for either cordon or managed lanes. Potential legal hurdles if bus only lanes are converted to HOT lanes. Amendment or new Hwy 82 EIS / ROD is necessary. Additional analysis is necessary. Could have significant positive impacts on GHG emissions and VMT if implementable. Hold Sage Way Sidewalk Extension BRT Enhancements Hold status due to dependence on efforts outside EOTC purview $ Hold pending implementation of Access Control Plan to be triggered by Airport redevelopment and/or large developments within the AABC. Hold Signal Timing for Transit Speed and Reliability Improvement BRT Enhancements Not to be pursued at this time $$ Limited deployment in Pitkin County modeling showed very little effectiveness. Additional modeling for entire Hwy 82 corridor may demonstrate ability to substantively improve transit speed and reliability. N/A Airport Terminal BRT Routing BRT Enhancements Not to be pursued at this time $$$ Dependent on Airport terminal redevelopment. Very expensive improvement as down valley BRT line would need to be grade separated to and from the Airport in order to maintain current transit times. Gains in access at airport terminal only with possible detriment to greater BRT system. Significant transit operational issues to be overcome. Other options should be analyzed first. N/A HAWK Beacon at Aspen Country Inn BRT Enhancements Significant cost $$ Relatively significant implementation cost relative to number of users. N/A * "Value" is determination based on efforts' ability to support transit through increased access, speed and reliability; reduce greenhouse gas emissions (GHG); and reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT) ** Efforts are proposed to be carried forward in the second half of 2021 for development of conceptual design by Mead and Hunt utilizing remaining UVTE study funds Third Priority ‐ Hold status due to dependence on efforts outside EOTC purview, Significant cost, and / or Significant legal hurdles Other Efforts Considered ‐ Not to be Pursued at this Time Attachment 1 50 298