Finance Committee Website Packet March 3, 2025MARCH 3, 2025; FINANCE COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA PAGE 1
FINANCE COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA
MONDAY, MARCH 3, 2025
MEETING BEGINS AT 12:00 PM
100 MIKAELA WAY, AVON CO 81620
1. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL
2. APPROVAL OF S EPTEMBER 16, 2024 MINUTES
3. PUBLIC COMMENT [Public comments are limited to three (3) minutes. The speaker may be given an
additional one (1) minute, which may be approved by a majority of the Committee.]
4. APPOINTMENT OF COMMITTEE CHAIRPERSON
5. DISCUSSION: EPS ECONOMIC STUDY
6. NEXT COMMITTEE MEETING DATE:
May 5, 2025
7. ADJOURNMENT
FUTURE AGENDAS:
MULTIYEAR BUDGET
MEETING AGENDAS AND PACKETS ARE FOUND AT: WWW.AVON.ORG
MEETING NOTICES ARE POSTED AT AVON TOWN HALL, AVON RECREATION CENTER, AVON ELEMENTARY AND AVON PUBLIC LIBRARY
IF YOU HAVE ANY SPECIAL ACCOMMODATION NEEDS, PLEASE, IN ADVANCE OF THE MEETING,
CALL TOWN CLERK MIGUEL JAUREGUI CASANUEVA AT 970-748-4001 OR EMAIL MJAUREGUI@AVON.ORG WITH ANY SPECIAL REQUESTS
FINANCE COMMITTEE MEETING
MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 16, 2024
HYBRID MEETING; IN-PERSON AND ON TEAMS
Finance Committee Meeting, September 16, 2024 1 | 2
1. ROLL CALL
Present in Person: Committee members Clark Rogers, Craig Ferraro (arrived a few minutes late), John
Widerman (arrived a few minutes late), Lisa Post, Markian Fedeschuk and Steve Coyer and Councilor
Tamra Underwood.
Absent: Councilor Rich Carroll
Staff: Town Manager Eric Heil (arrived a few minutes late), Deputy Town Manager Patty McKenny, Chief
Financial Officer Paul Redmond, Financial Analyst Chase Simmons, and Chief Administrative Officer
Ineke de Jong, as Secretary.
The meeting was called to order at 12:00 p.m.
2. APPROVAL OF MAY 20TH, 2024 MINUTES
The minutes did not get approved at the last meeting as there was no quorum for that meeting. Committee
member Lisa Post moved to approve the minutes. Committee member Steve Coyer seconded that
motion and it passed 4 to 0.
3. APPROVAL OF JULY 15TH, 2024 MINUTES
Committee member Lisa Post moved to approve the minutes. Committee member Clark Rogers
seconded that motion and it passed 4 to 0.
Craig Ferraro joined the meeting at 12:02 p.m.
John Widerman joined the meeting at 12:03 p.m.
Town Manager Eric Heil joined the meeting at 12:10 p.m.
4. PUBLIC COMMENT
There was no public comment.
5. RESOLUTION 24-01 SUPPORTING TOWN OF AVON BALLOT ISSUE 2C - USE TAX ON CONSTRUCTION
MATERIALS TO FUND COMMUNITY HOUSING (CFO PAUL REDMOND)
Chief Financial Officer Paul Redmond introduced Resolution 24-01 and was present to answer any
questions. Committee member John Widerman volunteered to be chairman of the committee.
Councilor Underwood moved to appoint John Widerman as Chairman, committee member Steve
Coyer seconded that motion. and it passed 6 to 0.
Committee chair John Widerman then moved to approve Resolution 24-01 Supporting Town of
Avon Ballot Issue 2C - Use Tax on Construction Materials to Fund Community Housing. Committee
Member Clark Rogers seconded that motion, and it passed 6 to 0.
6. GENERAL UPDATE ON 2024 FINANCIALS (CFO PAUL REDMOND)
Chief Financial Officer Paul Redmond delivered his presentation on the financial results through
June 2024. Lodging numbers have dropped and overall revenues are down about 2% through June.
As this was a work session, no action was taken.
7. GENERAL UPDATE ON 2025 PROPOSED BUDGET AND REVENUE PROJECTIONS (CFO PAUL REDMOND)
Chief Financial Officer Paul Redmond delivered a presentation with revenue projections for 2025,
FINANCE COMMITTEE MEETING
MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 16, 2024
HYBRID MEETING; IN-PERSON AND ON TEAMS
Finance Committee Meeting, September 16, 2024 2 | 2
flat to the adopted 2024’s budget.
A summary of the feedback from the committee includes:
• Employee compensation is very important for retention.
• Does the Town offer inflation /Cost of Living increases
• Has staff considered moving away from calendar year budgeting and moving to a July 1 to June
30th budget year?
• The Cost of Living surveys in our region seem a bit inaccurate at times and downplay the actual
cost of housing in Eagle County.
• How are the Town’s reserves looking, a $13Mln balance is very healthy.
As this was a work session, no action was taken.
8. DISCUSSION: COMMITTEE EXPIRATION AND DESIRE TO E XTEND (TOWN MANAGER ERIC HEIL)
The committee is set to expire on December 31, 2024. At the beginning of the year, staff heard
great interest & enthusiasm from the committee members to continue to serve on the committee.
Later this year, staff could make a recommendation to Council to pass a resolution to make this a
permanent committee so it does not expire every 2 years. Staff sees value of the committee looking
at budgets, revenues, info on the Village at Avon and possibly the financial implications of the
extension of vested rights in the Village at Avon. The committee members expressed it would be
great to continue and for staff to bounce ideas of the committee before it goes to Council. The
committee recommended going to Council to consider committee permanency.
Committee member Markian Fedeschuk left the meeting at 1:00 p.m.
9. NEXT COMMITTEE MEETING DATE
All members agreed to skip the November meeting (due to a conflict with PZC) & reconvene on
Monday January 13, 2025 at 12:00 p.m. The agenda will include review of the RFP for the 2025 fiscal
peer community comparison study and a few other items.
Staff said there would be a committee appreciation dinner for all Avon boards, committees & the
planning & zoning commission on Tuesday December 17.
The committee asked Paul to send out the draft 2025 budget when it gets published to see if they have
any comments or feedback.
10. ADJOURNMENT
Committee Chair John Widerman moved to adjourn the meeting. Committee member Craig Ferraro
seconded that motion and the meeting adjourned, the time was 1:05 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted by:
Ineke de Jong, Chief Administrative Officer.
These minutes are action minutes and only a summary of the proceedings of the meeting. They are not intended to be
comprehensive or to include each statement, person speaking or to portray with complete accuracy. The most accurate records
of the meeting are the audio of the meeting, which is housed in the Town Clerk' s office.
970.748.4088 predmond@avon.org
TO: Finance Committee Members FROM: Paul Redmond, Chief Finance Officer
RE: EPS Fiscal Analysis
DATE: February 26, 2025
SUMMARY: Economic & Planning Systems Inc has prepared the scope of work, Attachment A, to
determine the Town’s economic base or “economic drivers”. The report will be comprised of three sections
to show how the Town’s economy and jobs, land use and tax revenues are related to each other.
Committee comments, questions and directions are welcome.
BACKGROUND: Attachment B to this report is the 2022 Fiscal Analysis from Economic & Planning
Systems, Inc. (“EPS”), About EPS (epsys.com). This Fiscal Analysis Report updates and expands an early
Fiscal Analysis report prepared by EPS in 2018. This serves as a great tool to benchmark the Town of
Avon’s finances, revenues and taxes compared to other mountain resort communities.
This document is planned to be updated every three years to serve as a snapshot of the Town of Avon’s
finances compared to our peer communities. The document will be updated in 2025.
CURRENT SCOPE OF WORK: The scope of work will include an analysis of jobs and the sales and
lodging tax trends. It is important to review these trends as they provide crucial information about the
overall health and direction of the Town’s economy.
The report will also provide an inventory on the number of units used as vacation rentals and how often
these units are occupied. Knowing the number of visitors coming to Avon and when they visit the Town will
allow Staff to plan special events to maximize tax revenues. Staff would like to work with DestiMetrics in
late 2025 to have timely accurate numbers on those visiting the Town.
EPS will also analyze the retail and restaurant spending potential in Avon, categorizing spending into three
groups: residents, guests and non-residents shopping or dining in Avon. This analysis is to measure how
much spend is captured by our local businesses and its contribution to the Town’s tax revenues. More
importantly, this will provide insight into the economic importance of each of these groups in supporting the
economy.
This report will provide understanding of spending in Avon, how much of the spending is retained in Avon
and the role of sales tax revenues in supporting municipal services. The analysis provides valuable
information for economic planning and policy decisions to enhance local business growth and future tax
revenue generation.
FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS: The 2025 budget includes $25K for performing this work.
RECOMMENDED UPDATES TO SCOPE OF WORK: Staff suggests the current scope of work is missing
a couple key components. First, we feel the report should analyze our current population and look at the
growth rate. Additionally, we would like this report to show a comparison with other communities to
determine our economy’s health with our peers.
Thank you, Paul
ATTACHMENT A – EPS Fiscal Peer Review 2022
Page 2 of 2
ATTACHMENT B – EPS Scope of Work
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc.
The Economics of Land Use
Prepared by:Prepared for:
Town of Avon
Peer Community Comparison of Revenues, Budgets and Services and Assessment of Real Estate Cost of Ownership
July 14, 2022 EPS #213079
ATT A: EPS Fiscal Analysis Report
ATT A: EPS Fiscal Analysis Report
ii Peer Community Comparison of Revenues, Budgets and Services and Assessment of Real Estate Cost of Ownership
Table of Contents
2
3
4
1
5
6
Introduction and Town Profile 1
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1
Executive Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2
Town Profile . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Demographic Snapshot . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8
Comparison Municipalities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9
Peer Municipality Comparison 11
Demographics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11
Municipal Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12
Staffing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
General Fund Revenues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Property Tax Rates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Other Revenue Sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Mountain Resort Host Community Comparisons 19
Sales Tax 19
Lodging and Ski Lift Tax . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Property Tax and Real Estate Cost of Ownership 23
Metro Districts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Real Estate Transfer Tax . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
Cost of Ownership Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .25
Inflow–Outflow Analysis 29
Taxable Sales . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
Expenditure Patterns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .29
Store Sales by Demand Segment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .32
Revenue Outlook 35
Planned Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
Estimated Tax Revenue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
ATT A: EPS Fiscal Analysis Report
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc . iii
Ta
b
l
e
s
Table 1 . Municipal Services Comparison . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Table 2 . Total Annual Estimated Tax Revenue, Town of Avon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6
Table 3 . Avon Full-Time Employees, 2021 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Table 4 . Demographic Summary, 2021 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8
Table 5 . Avon Residential and Commercial Construction, 2011-2021 . . . . . . . . . . . .8
Table 6 . Comparison Communities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9
Table 7 . Demographics, Peer Communities, 2021 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Table 8 . Services Provided, Peer Communities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Table 9 . Full-Time Employees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Table 10 . General Fund Revenue Summary, Peer Communities, 2021 . . . . . . . . . . 15
Table 11 . Additional Revenue Sources, Peer Communities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Table 12 . Sales Tax Collections, 2018-2020 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Table 13 . Lodging, STR, and Ski Tax, Comparison Cities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Table 14 . RETT and RETA Rates in Colorado . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
Table 15 . RETT Revenues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Table 16 . Seven Year Cost of Ownership Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Table 17 . Taxable Sales, Town of Avon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .29
Table 18 . Housing Unit Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
Table 19 . Expenditure Potential, Full-Time Resident and Second Homeowner . . . . . 30
Table 20 . Retail Sales Capture, Resident . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
Table 21 . Retail Sales Capture, Part-Time Residents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
Table 22 . Visitor Days . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
Table 23 . Visitor Spending . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
Table 24 . Store Sales by Demand Segment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .32
Table 25 . Proposed Development, Town of Avon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
Table 26 . Development Market Value Estimates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .36
Table 27 . Estimated Annual Property Tax Revenue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .36
Table 28 . Estimated Hotel and STR Sales and Lodging Tax Revenue . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
Table 29 . Estimated Gas Station Sales Tax Revenue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
Table 30 . Total Annual Estimated Tax Revenue, Town of Avon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
Table A1 . Sales Tax Rates, Peer Communities, 2021 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .40
Table A2 . Mill Levies, Peer Communities, 2021 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .40
Table A3 . Sales Tax with Retail Sales Fee, Peer Communities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
Table A4 . Lodging and STR Tax, Peer Communities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
Table A5 . Metro District Mill Levies, 2021 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
ATT A: EPS Fiscal Analysis Report
iv Peer Community Comparison of Revenues, Budgets and Services and Assessment of Real Estate Cost of Ownership
Fi
g
u
r
e
s
Figure 1 . Seven Year Tax Cost of Ownership on a Home . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4
Figure 2 . Store Sales by Demand Segment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Figure 3 . General Fund Revenue, 2021 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Figure 4 . General Fund Revenue per Housing Unit, 2021 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Figure 5 . Major General Fund Revenue Source, 2021 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Figure 6 . Sales Tax Rates, 2021 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Figure 7 . Property Mill Levies, 2021 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Figure 8 . Sales Tax Rate, 2021 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20
Figure 9 . Lodging Tax Rate, 2021 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Figure 10 . Combined Sales, Lodging, and STR Tax Rate, 2021 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .22
Figure 11 . Vail Valley Metro District Mill Levies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .23
Figure 12 . Vail Valley Metro District Mill Levies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24
Figure 13 . Seven Year Cost of Ownership Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Figure 14 . National Property Tax Comparison, 2019 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
Figure 15 . Store Sales by Demand Segment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .33
ATT A: EPS Fiscal Analysis Report
Introduction
The Town of Avon’s 2017-2019 Strategic Plan directed that consultant services be
retained to analyze revenues collected from all major sources including the Real
Estate Transfer Tax (RETT) . In 2018, as part of that effort, EPS was retained to conduct a
comprehensive revenue analysis for the Town compared to several peer municipalities,
resort host towns, and residential areas in Eagle County .
This report is an update of the 2018 report and addresses specific stakeholder comments
from the prior report, adds an expanded set of peer municipalities, and includes a cost
of ownership analysis to help measure the impacts of one-time RETTs . The purpose is to
provide comparison data in the following areas to inform the Town Council and Staff’s
considerations on revenue sources, tax levels, and funding strategies .
X Revenue diversity – How reliant is the Town on sales and lodging tax compared to
peer communities?
X Sales and use and lodging tax rates – How do the town’s tax rates compare to
surrounding areas, including the effect of add-ons such as resort taxes and public
improvement fees?
X Property Tax and Real Estate Cost of Ownership – How do property taxes and real
estate transfer taxes or fees compare to major residential areas in the Vail Valley?
What is the cost in taxes and transfer fees of owning the same priced home in
different areas of the Vail Valley and Eagle County?
1. Introduction and Town Profile
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc . 1
ATT A: EPS Fiscal Analysis Report
1. The Town of Avon provides a full range of municipal services to its residents
and guests similar to other peer comparison municipalities. However, Avon is
distinguishable from several municipalities because it operates its own free public
transit system.
Avon is a full-service municipality with a staff of approximately 100 full time employees .
The Town’s major services include public safety, public works, culture-recreation,
community development, and Town general government and administrative functions
including Mayor and Town Council, Planning and Zoning Commission, Town Attorney,
Town Clerk, and Municipal Court as shown in Table 1 . The Town also operates a free
public transportation system, similar to Breckenridge and Vail . Only Vail and Steamboat
have their own fire departments; special districts provide fire and EMS coverage in Avon
and each of the other peer comparison municipalities .
The Town’s transit system costs approximately $2 .1 million annually to operate . Funding
is provided by the General Fund ($1 .3 million, 60%) with the remainder coming from
various other revenues sources including property taxes, charges for services, and
operating grants . Vail and Breckenridge are the only other comparison municipalities
who operate transit systems .
Avon provides this level of service with comparatively lean staffing levels . Out of 10
municipalities analyzed, Avon has the second lowest staffing levels (ranked 8th) when
normalized for the size of the community (employees per housing unit) .
Table 1. Municipal Services Comparison
Description
Fire/
EMS Police
Parks &
Rec
Rec.
Facilities
Public
Transit
Public
Works
Avon ✔✔✔✔✔
Basalt ✔✔✔✔✔
Breckenridge ✔✔✔✔✔
Eagle ✔✔✔ ✔
Frisco ✔✔✔ ✔
Silverthorne ✔✔✔ ✔
Snowmass ✔✔✔✔✔
Steamboat ✔✔✔✔ ✔
Telluride ✔✔✔✔✔
Vail ✔✔✔✔✔✔
Winter Park ✔✔✔ ✔
Source: Economic & Planning Systems
2 Peer Community Comparison of Revenues, Budgets and Services and Assessment of Real Estate Cost of Ownership
ATT A: EPS Fiscal Analysis Report
2. The Town of Avon is average in terms of the diversity of its revenues with about 57
percent coming from sales tax, but better off than communities with less assessed
value or no general property tax.
Municipalities with a heavy reliance on just one or two revenue sources can be more
susceptible to economic and market downturns . In Avon, 56 .9 percent of the General
Fund revenue came from sales tax in 2021 which is almost exactly the average of the
peer municipalities in which sales tax was on average 57 percent of the General Funds
in 2021 .
Property tax, while only about 10 percent of the General Fund, is an important revenue
that provides more stability than sales tax outside of abnormal housing market
downturns . In the peer municipalities property tax ranged from 1 .4 percent to 16 .0
percent of general fund revenues among the peer communities . In Avon, 9 .6 percent
of general fund revenues were generated from property tax, the fourth-highest of the
peer municipalities behind Breckenridge (16 percent), Vail (14 .5 percent), and the much
smaller Town of Basalt (13 .6 percent) .
Steamboat Springs and Silverthorne do not levy a general property tax and rely more
heavily on sales and lodging tax .
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc . 3
ATT A: EPS Fiscal Analysis Report
3. Even with the Town’s 2.0 percent real estate transfer tax (RETT), the taxes on
owning and selling a home in Avon over seven years are lower than many areas of
the Vail Valley and Eagle County.
The Town’s 2 .0 percent RETT is higher than most other areas of Eagle County where 1 .0
percent RETTs are more common . The highest transfer fee however is found in Beaver
Creek at 2 .375 percent .
The total property tax mill levy in Avon is 62 .617 . This is similar to Edwards (59 .002), Berry
Creek (64 .049), and Arrowhead (68 .161) metro districts . Total mill levies in Avon are about
10 mills lower than Eagle-Vail and Beaver Creek; 29 mills lower than Eagle Ranch; and
more than 50 mills lower than Red Sky Ranch and Cordillera . The total mill levy in Vail
is about 10 mills less than in Avon, but property values are considerably higher in Vail,
making property taxes higher as well .
Using these mill levies and local RETT and real estate transfer assessment (RETA) rates,
EPS estimated the tax cost of owning a home in several areas of the Vail Valley and
Eagle County using a $700,000 median home price (Eagle County, 2021) . As shown
below, Avon has a lower seven year cost of ownership than Red Sky Ranch, Cordillera,
Cotton Ranch, and Eagle Ranch . It is assumed that the RETT or RETA are split equally
by buyer and seller . While there is not a lot of residential development in the Village at
Avon metro district today, it has the highest cost of ownership .
Figure 1. Seven Year Tax Cost of Ownership on a Home (Property Tax, and RETT or RETA)
$0
$10,000
$20,000
$30,000
$40,000
$50,000
$60,000
Village at
Avon
Red Sky
Ranch
Metro
District
Cordillera
Metro
District
Cotton
Ranch
Metro
District
Eagle Ranch
Metro
District
Town of
Avon
Minturn Gypsum Beaver
Creek
Metro
District
Eagle-Vail Arrowhead
Metro
District
Berry Creek
Metro
District
Vail Town of
Eagle
Edwards
Metro
District
Estimated Cost of Ownerhsip
Chart Title
Source: Economic & Planning Systems
Z:\Shared\Projects\DEN\213079 Avon Revenue and Economic Study\Data\213079-Peer Community Budget.xlsx
4 Peer Community Comparison of Revenues, Budgets and Services and Assessment of Real Estate Cost of Ownership
ATT A: EPS Fiscal Analysis Report
4. Full-time residents in Avon are estimated to generate 21.6 percent of retail sales or
about 1 out of every 5 sales tax dollars. Conversely, visitors and other people in the
region contribute about 4 out of every 5 dollars in sales tax.
Like many other mountain towns, Avon’s retail economy is largely driven by overnight
visitors and second homeowners . An estimated 46 .5 percent of Avon’s retail sales
are driven by regional inflow (spending from the larger Vail Valley and I-70 Corridor) .
Another 28 .3 percent of sales are estimated to come from visitors, and about 3 .6 percent
from part time residents in the Town as shown in Figure 2 .
Figure 2. Store Sales by Demand Segment
46.5%
28.3%
21.6%
3.6%
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50%
Regional Inflow
Overnight Visitors
Residents
Second Homeowners
Estimated % of Store Sales
Chart Title
Source: Economic & Planning Systems
[link to source]
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc . 5
ATT A: EPS Fiscal Analysis Report
5. There are seven significant development projects in the Town expected over the
next five years. They are projected to generate $374,050 in new town tax revenue,
with $85,021 coming from the Village at Avon Hotel.
The planned development projects include a 4,425 square foot Maverik gas station, a
243 room hotel, and several condominium and townhome projects . The Village at Avon
Hotel is estimated to account for approximately 23 percent of these projected revenues,
highlighting the importance of non-residential development that generates sales and/
or lodging tax and higher property taxes per dollar of assessed value . The total revenue
generated for the Town from these projects, shown below in red font, would represent
an estimated 1 .8 percent increase from the 2021 general fund revenue .
Table 2. Total Annual Estimated Tax Revenue, Town of Avon
From Retail Sales From Lodging Sales Totals
Location and Project
Town
Prop. Tax
Retail
Sales Fee PIF
Town
Sales Tax
Lodging
Tax/Fee STR Tax
All Taxes
and Fees Town Only
8.956 mills 4.00%0.75%4.00%4.00%2.00%
Village at Avon [1]
Maverik Gas Station $3,735 $53,100 $9,956 $2,522 ------$69,313 $6,257
Village at Avon Hotel 6 3 ,113 461,214 86,478 21,908 $461,214 ---1,093,926 85,021
Total $66,848 $514,314 $96,434 $24,430 $461,214 $0 $1,163,240 $91,278
Other Areas
Riverfront Townhomes $16,183 ------$7,473 $7,473 $3,737 $34,867 $27,394
Riverfront Condos 37,347 ------22,995 22,995 11, 49 8 94,834 71,839
Frontgate Townhomes 11,204 ------5,174 5,174 2,587 24,139 18,965
Frontgate Condos 70,025 ------4 3 ,116 4 3 ,116 21,558 177,814 134,698
McGrady Acres Townhomes 29,877 ---------------29,877 29,877
Total $164,636 $0 $0 $78,758 $78,758 $39,379 $361,531 $282,773
Total Town Revenue $231,484 $103,188 $78,758 $39,379 $374,050
2021 General Fund Revenue $2,047,905 ------$12,139,470 $2,017,544 ---$21,326,845 $21,326,845
% Impact 8.0%------0.6%3.9%------1.8%
[1] 4.00% Town Sales Tax is applied on the 4.75% Retail Sales Fee & PIF for developments in Village (at Avon)
Source: Economic & Planning Systems
6 Peer Community Comparison of Revenues, Budgets and Services and Assessment of Real Estate Cost of Ownership
ATT A: EPS Fiscal Analysis Report
Table 3. Avon Full-Time Employees, 2021
Town Profile
Avon is a home rule municipality
in Eagle County located along I-70,
eight miles west of Vail . It is an
important shopping, services, and
visitor destination in the Vail Valley
and Colorado in general . Avon is a
commercial hub for the region with
major shopping locations including a
Walmart Supercenter, Home Depot,
City Market, several sporting goods
stores, and other retail businesses,
restaurants, and hotels .
While not a direct ski area portal
like Vail or Breckenridge, Avon is the
primary access point to Beaver Creek
Ski Resort (owned by Vail Resorts),
which attracts approximately 900,000 annual skier visits compared to 1 .4 to 1 .6 million at Vail
and Breckenridge . Beaver Creek and its associated base village and nearby neighborhoods
such as Bachelor Gulch are in unincorporated Eagle County . Avon is connected to Beaver
Creek by the Riverfront Gondola, which travels to Beaver Creek Landing from Avon Station .
The Town also has a free bus service to bring residents and visitors to Avon Station and a
winter skier shuttle that takes skiers up to Beaver Creek Village .
Avon is a full-service municipality with a staff of nearly 100 full-time employees, as shown
in Table 3 . The Town’s major services include a Police Department, a Public Works
Department, plus Town government and administrative functions including the Mayor
and Town Council, Planning and Zoning Commission, Town Attorney, Town Clerk, and
Municipal Court . The Town does not have its own Fire Department; fire protection is
provided by the Eagle River Fire Protection District .
Department
Full-Time
Positions
General Government 7.00
Human Resources 3.75
Finance & IT 10.00
Community Development 4.00
Police 23.00
Public Works 17.00
Engineering 7.00
Recreation 10.00
Mobility 9.00
Fleet Maintenance 9.00
Total 99.75
Source: 2021 Avon Adopted Budget;
Economic & Planning Systems
The Town also operates its own free public
transportation system consisting of three in-town
shuttles (Blue Line, Red Line, and Avon Loop Night
Rider), a skier shuttle to Beaver Creek, and an
evening restaurant shuttle connecting Avon with
Beaver Creek Resort . The Town’s transit system
complements but is separate from regional
commuter service provided by the Eagle County
Regional Transit Authority .
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc . 7
ATT A: EPS Fiscal Analysis Report
Demographic Snapshot
Avon has a full-time resident population estimated at 6,072, as shown in Table 4 .
Avon’s population is younger on average than Eagle County’s, with a median age of
33 .1 compared to 36 .0 countywide . Also, average household size in Avon is 2 .79, which
is similar to the County average of 2 .71 . As of 2021, Avon’s average household income is
$104,554, 22 percent lower than the countywide average of $127,705; Median household
income for Avon is $78,031, while Eagle County is $92,631 .
In Avon, about 39 percent of the households are non-family households (roommates
and people living alone), as shown in Table 4 . Family households (related by blood or
marriage) comprise 61 percent of all households . A household is a person or a group of
people, related by blood or unrelated (“non-family households”), living in one occupied
dwelling unit .
Table 4. Demographic Summary, 2021
Description Avon
Eagle
County
Population 6,072 57,726
Household Income
Average Household Income $104,554 $127,705
Median Household Income $78,031 $92,631
Average Household Size 2.79 2.71
Median Age 33.1 36.0
Housing Type
Family Household 60.7%66.2%
Non-Family Household 39.3%33.8%
Tenure
Owner Occupied 51.2%68.3%
Renter Occupied 48.8%31.7%
Households
Families with children under 18 years 34.5%31.8%
Source: ESRI; U.S. Census; Economic & Planning Systems
Since 2011 372 new residential units and nearly 690,000 square feet of commercial
space were built in Avon, as shown in Table 5 . Since 2011, the largest residential project
that delivered in the Town of Avon was the Riverfront Townhomes, which completed
in 2019 . These building permit trends are indicative of a community that is largely built
out . Construction is comprised of smaller infill projects punctuated by occasional larger
development and redevelopment projects .
Table 5. Avon Residential and Commercial Construction, 2011-2021
2011-2020
New Construction 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Total Ann. #
Residential Units 9 8 12 10 10 7 6 20 278 12 372 41
Commercial Sq. Ft.54,250 217,293 0 114,614 90,309 60,043 93,579 23,276 36,082 0 689,446 76,605
Source: Town of Avon Community Development Department; Economic & Planning Systems
8 Peer Community Comparison of Revenues, Budgets and Services and Assessment of Real Estate Cost of Ownership
ATT A: EPS Fiscal Analysis Report
Comparison Municipalities
For revenue and tax rate comparisons, three sets of comparison or “peer” communities
were defined as summarize below and listed in Table 6 .
X Peer Comparison: Data collected for comparison of municipalities with similar
economic structures include demographics, services provided, employee metrics, and
a general fund revenue analysis.
X Mountain Resort Host Communities: Data collected for comparable ski resort
municipalities where ski areas have major infrastructure. Sales and lodging tax
comparisons are further evaluated.
X Property Tax and Real Estate Cost of Ownership: Data collected for comparison
include property tax and Real Estate Transfer Taxes (RETT) and Real Estate Transfer
Assessments (RETA) costs for Eagle County municipalities with RETT and large metro
districts.
Table 6. Comparison Communities
Description Peer Comparison
Mountain Resort
Host Comparison
Property Tax/ RETT
Comparison
Comparisons Revenues (Budget)Sales & Lodging Tax Cost of Ownership
Aspen ✔
Arrowhead Metro District ✔
Basalt ✔
Beaver Creek ✔
Beaver Creek Metro District ✔
Berry Creek Metro District ✔
Breckenridge ✔✔
Copper Mountain ✔
Cordillera Metro District ✔
Cotton Ranch Metro District ✔
Eagle ✔ ✔
Eagle Ranch Metro District ✔
Eagle-Vail ✔
Edwards Metro District ✔
Frisco ✔✔
Gypsum ✔
Keystone ✔
Minturn ✔
Mountain Village ✔
Red Sky Ranch Metro District ✔
Silverthorne ✔
Snowmass Village ✔✔
Steamboat Springs ✔✔
Telluride ✔✔
Vail ✔✔✔
Village at Avon ✔
Winter Park ✔✔
Source: Economic & Planning Systems
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc . 9
ATT A: EPS Fiscal Analysis Report
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
ATT A: EPS Fiscal Analysis Report
This chapter provides a summary of demographics, services, and budget comparisons
between the Town of Avon and peer municipalities including:
X Basalt
X Breckenridge
X Eagle
X Frisco
X Silverthorne
X Snowmass Village
X Steamboat Springs
X Telluride
X Vail
X Winter Park
The main purpose of this chapter is to evaluate how Avon’s mix of general fund revenues
compare to similar municipalities . Towns and cities are generally more resilient when not
dependent on just one revenue source .
Demographics
Avon (pop . 6,952) is the third-largest of the peer municipalities in terms of population,
as shown in Table 7 . However, in mountain communities, the local government and
other service providers serve a large population comprised of full time residents, part time
residents and second homeowners, and overnight visitors . A key metric in mountain
communities is therefore the number or percentage of housing units that are classified
as “vacant” . Vacant housing units as defined in Census and other demographic data
include a range of housing units that are not lived in by full time residents . In this report,
some revenues and other data are evaluated on a per housing unit basis as the number
of housing units is a proxy for the size of the total service population (full and part time
residents and guests) .
Approximately 34 .9 percent of housing units were classified as vacant in Avon, the fourth-
lowest of the peer municipalities . Only Basalt and Eagle have a lower percentage of
second homes, conversely representing that they have a higher percentage of full-time
residents . In the Town of Winter Park, approximately 80 .7 percent of housing units were
classified as vacant, the highest among the peer municipalities .
2. Peer Municipality Comparison
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc . 11
ATT A: EPS Fiscal Analysis Report
Table 7. Demographics, Peer Communities, 2021
Description
Housing Units
Population Owner Renter
Vacant/
2nd Homes Total
Avon 6,072 33.3%31.8%34.9%100.0%
Basalt 4,416 58.5%25.7%15.9%100.0%
Breckenridge 4,808 13.5%14.2%72.3%100.0%
Frisco 2,848 25.7%15.6%58.7%100.0%
Eagle 7,016 66.3%25.2%8.4%100.0%
Silverthorne 4,134 43.4%26.2%30.4%100.0%
Snowmass 2,916 30.2%25.2%44.7%100.0%
Steamboat 13,387 31.6%21.6%46.8%100.0%
Telluride 2,503 21.2%33.9%45.0%100.0%
Vail 5,835 19.6%16.6%63.8%100.0%
Winter Park 1,121 9.6%9.7%80.7%100.0%
Source: Economic & Planning Systems
Municipal Services
People living in municipalities benefit from a more complete suite of services from
the City or Town . This level of service can be higher in the City or Town than in an
unincorporated area even when the unincorporated area is served by special taxing
districts . Common municipal services for most the peer municipalities include
police, parks and recreation, recreational facilities, and public works, as shown in Table 8 .
Steamboat Springs and Vail are the only municipalities with their own Fire Departments,
while Avon is served by the Eagle River Fire Protection District . Six of the municipalities
operate their own transit system, including Avon, while Eagle, Frisco, Silverthorne,
Steamboat, and Winter Park rely on regionally funded transportation .
Table 8. Services Provided, Peer Communities
Description Fire/EMS Police
Parks &
Rec
Rec.
Facilities
Public
Transit
Public
Works
Avon ✔✔✔✔✔
Basalt ✔✔✔✔✔
Breckenridge ✔✔✔✔✔
Eagle ✔✔✔ ✔
Frisco ✔✔✔ ✔
Silverthorne ✔✔✔ ✔
Snowmass ✔✔✔✔✔
Steamboat ✔✔✔✔ ✔
Telluride ✔✔✔✔✔
Vail ✔✔✔✔✔✔
Winter Park ✔✔✔ ✔
Source: Economic & Planning Systems
12 Peer Community Comparison of Revenues, Budgets and Services and Assessment of Real Estate Cost of Ownership
ATT A: EPS Fiscal Analysis Report
Staffing
In 2021 Avon had nearly 100 full-time
employees, the fifth-highest of the
peer municipalities, as shown in Table
9 . Municipal staffing levels typically
directly relate to the size of the
community, however, to normalize
for the size of the local and guest
populations, the number of employees
per housing unit were calculated .
Silverthorne had approximately 46 .63
full-time employees per thousand
housing units, the highest of the
peer municipalities, while Avon
had 26 .06 full-time employees per
housing unit, ranking eighth out of
the 10 peer municipalities .
Description
FT
Employees
Per Thousand
Housing Units
Per Housing
Unit Rank
1=Highest
Silverthorne 105.00 46.63 1
Vail 336.00 42.29 2
Telluride 84.00 39.40 3
Frisco 98.00 38.28 4
Breckenridge 253.00 33.52 5
Snowmass 75.00 30.34 6
Steamboat 300.78 27.49 7
Avon 99.75 26.06 8
Basalt 36.00 16.27 9
Eagle 50.00 14.80 10
Source: Economic & Planning Systems
Table 9. Full-Time Employees
General Fund Revenues
This section provides a summary of revenues for the Town of Avon and the peer
municipalities including total revenues and revenues by source .
Revenues
As of 2021, the Town of Avon’s general fund revenue was $21 .3 million, making it the
fourth-largest in general fund revenue of the peer municipalities, as shown in Figure
3 . When normalized per housing unit, Avon has similar funding levels as Silverthorne,
Telluride, Frisco, and Vail . Avon’s per housing unit general fund revenue of $5,573 was the
third-highest of the peer municipalities, as shown in Figure 4 . Snowmass Village’s general
fund revenue per housing unit of $7,627 was the highest of the peer municipalities .
Figure 3. General Fund Revenue, 2021
$0
$5,000,000
$10,000,000
$15,000,000
$20,000,000
$25,000,000
$30,000,000
$35,000,000
$40,000,000
$45,000,000
Vail Steamboat Brekenridge Avon Snowmass Frisco Silverthorne Telluride Eagle Winter Park Basalt
Total General Fund, 2021
Chart Title
Source: Economic & Planning Systems
Z:\Shared\Projects\DEN\213079 Avon Revenue and Economic Study\Data\213079-Peer Community Budget.xlsx Economic & Planning Systems, Inc . 13
ATT A: EPS Fiscal Analysis Report
Figure 4. General Fund Revenue per Housing Unit, 2021
$0
$1,000
$2,000
$3,000
$4,000
$5,000
$6,000
$7,000
$8,000
Snowmass Silverthorne Avon Telluride Frisco Vail Basalt Steamboat Winter Park Breckenridge Eagle
General Fund Revenue
per Housing Unit, 2021
Chart Title
Source: Economic & Planning Systems
Z:\Shared\Projects\DEN\213079 Avon Revenue and Economic Study\Data\213079-Peer Community Budget.xlsxMunicipalities with a heavy reliance on just one or two revenue sources can be more
susceptible to economic and market downturns . As sales tax revenues are generally
more volatile, municipalities with a lower reliance on sales tax revenue and more diverse
revenue sources could be more resilient in economic downturns . Among all peer
municipalities, sales and use tax and property tax were the largest revenue sources, as
shown in Figure 5 and Table 10 .
Figure 5. Major General Fund Revenue Source, 2021
76.0%
58.4%
67.7%
52.2%56.9%
65.4%63.3%61.7%
53.1%
39.3%
29.8%
4.0%
13.6%3.5%
14.5%9.6%1.4%
6.6%
16.0%
4.7%
19.9% 28.0% 28.9% 33.2% 33.5% 34.6% 35.3% 38.3% 40.3% 44.8% 65.5%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Eagle Basalt Winter Park Vail Avon Steamboat Frisco Silverthorne Telluride Breckenridge Snowmass
% of General Fund
Revenue, 2021
Chart Title
Sales Tax Property Tax All Other
Source: Economic & Planning Systems
Z:\Shared\Projects\DEN\213079 Avon Revenue and Economic Study\Data\213079-Peer Community Budget.xlsx
Average Peer
Community Sales Tax
Percent of General Fund:
56.7%
Breckenridge and Snowmass Village were the only two municipalities with less than
50 percent of their general fund revenues generated from sales tax . An average of
56 .7 percent of general fund revenues were generated from sales tax among the peer
municipalities . Four of the municipalities (Vail, Telluride, Breckenridge, and Snowmass)
were below that average .
In Breckenridge, sales tax accounts for 39 .3 percent of revenue due to high revenues
from property tax and recreation facility fees (user fees) . In Snowmass Village, sales tax
accounts for just 29 .8 percent of revenue, as the Village receives a large amount of revenue
from service fees . In Avon, sales tax accounted for $12 .1 million, or 56 .9 percent of general
fund revenue, and property taxes accounted for $2 .0 million, or 9 .6 percent, with the
two accounting for 66 .5 percent of general fund revenue, the fifth-highest of the peer
communities .
14 Peer Community Comparison of Revenues, Budgets and Services and Assessment of Real Estate Cost of Ownership
ATT A: EPS Fiscal Analysis Report
Property tax revenue, which is generally more stable than sales tax collections, ranged from 1 .4 percent to 16 .0 percent of general fund revenues
among the peer communities . In Avon, 9 .6 percent of general fund revenues were generated from sales tax, the fourth-highest of the peer
municipalities . This still shows however the Town’s reliance on sales tax which is over half of its General Fund revenue .
Table 10. General Fund Revenue Summary, Peer Communities, 2021
Eagle County Summit County Pitkin County San Miguel County Routt County Grand County
Revenue Avon Vail Eagle
Brecken-
ridge Frisco
Silver-
thorne
Snowmass
Village Basalt Telluride
Steamboat
Springs Winter Park
2021 Revenues
Sales & Use Tax $12,139,470 $21,500,000 $6,658,000 $8,609,623 $8,900,000 $8,011,359 $5,623,751 $4,857,702 $6,293,540 $24,717,940 $5,871,697
Property Tax 2,047,905 5,975,000 353,142 3,500,910 193 , 011 0 881,050 1,133,172 783,145 0 300,407
Lodging Tax 2,017,544 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
RETT 0 0 0 0 0 779,240 0 0 0 0 1,513,430
Intergovernmental 1,169,778 2,324,872 574,045 1,099,573 206,000 100,000 1,041,254 276,859 538,247 2,681,645 45,500
All Other 3,952,148 11,350,340 1,170,040 8,721,165 4,750,600 4,096,728 11,308,074 2,047,431 4,231,909 10,423,811 946,180
Total $21,326,845 $41,150,212 $8,755,227 $21,931,271 $14,049,611 $12,987,327 $18,854,129 $8,315,164 $11,846,841 $37,823,396 $8,677,214
$21.3M $41.2M $8.8M $21.9M $14.0M $13.0M $18.9M $8.3M $11.8M $37.8M $8.7M
Percent
Sales & Use Tax 56.9%52.2%76.0%39.3%63.3%61.7%29.8%58.4%53.1%65.4%67.7%
Property Tax 9.6%14.5%4.0%16.0%1.4%0.0%4.7%13.6%6.6%0.0%3.5%
Lodging Tax 9.5%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
RETT 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%6.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%17.4%
Intergovernmental 5.5%5.6%6.6%5.0%1.5%0.8%5.5%3.3%4.5%7.1%0.5%
All Other 18.5%27.6%13.4%39.8%33.8%31.5%60.0%24.6%35.7%27.6%10.9%
Total 100.0%100.0%100.0%100.0%100.0%100.0%100.0%100.0%100.0%100.0%100.0%
Housing Units 3,827 7,946 3,378 7,548 2,560 2,252 2,472 2,213 2,132 10,943 2,813
2021 Per Housing Unit
Sales & Use Tax $3,172 $2,706 $1,971 $1,141 $3,477 $3,557 $2,275 $2,195 $2,952 $2,259 $2,087
Property Tax 535 752 105 464 75 0 356 512 367 0 107
Lodging Tax 527 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
RETT 0 0 0 0 0 346 0 0 0 0 538
Intergovernmental 306 293 170 146 80 44 421 125 252 245 16
All Other 1,033 1,428 346 1,155 1,856 1,819 4,574 925 1,985 953 336
Total $5,573 $5,179 $2,592 $2,906 $5,488 $5,767 $7,627 $3,757 $5,557 $3,456 $3,085
Source: Economic & Planning Systems
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc . 15
ATT A: EPS Fiscal Analysis Report
Sales and Use Tax Rates
As noted in the previous sections, sales and use tax represents the largest revenue source
for most municipalities . As sales tax rates directly affect the amount of general fund
revenue raised, and the amount that guests or locals pay for goods and services, local
governments may be influenced to maintain competitiveness and keep rates similar to
nearby communities . The Town of Avon has a total sales tax rate of 8 .4 percent, which is
comparable to the other Eagle County municipalities, as shown in Figure 6 and Appendix
Table A1 . Winter Park and Snowmass Village have the highest combined sales tax rates,
with rates of 11 .2 percent and 10 .4 percent, respectively .
Figure 6. Sales Tax Rates, 2021
7.00%
3.90%4.50%
2.50%
4.75%
4.00% 4.00%
4.50%
2.00% 2.00%
3.00%
2.90%
2.90%
2.90%
2.90%
2.90%
2.90%
2.90% 2.90%
2.90%
2.90% 2.90%
2.90%
1.30%
3.60%
1.00%
1.00%
2.00%
1.00%
1.00% 1.00%
1.00%
2.00% 2.00%
1.50%
4.75%
0.50%0.50%1.48%0.50% 0.50%1.48% 1.48%
11.20%
10.40%
9.15%8.90%8.88%8.65%8.40% 8.40% 8.40%8.38% 8.38%
7.40%
0.00%
2.00%
4.00%
6.00%
8.00%
10.00%
12.00%
Winter Park Snowmass Village (at
Avon)
Eagle Breckenridge Telluride Avon Vail Steamboat Frisco Silverthorne Basalt
Sales Tax, 2021
Chart Title
Town/City State County Retail Fee & PIF All Other
Source: Economic & Planning Systems
Z:\Shared\Projects\DEN\213079 Avon Revenue and Economic Study\Data\213079-Peer Tax.xlsx
16 Peer Community Comparison of Revenues, Budgets and Services and Assessment of Real Estate Cost of Ownership
ATT A: EPS Fiscal Analysis Report
Property Tax Rates
The total property tax mill levy in Avon is 62 .617 . This is similar to Edwards (59 .002), Berry
Creek (64 .049), and Arrowhead (68 .161) as shown in Figure 7 and Appendix Table A2 . It is
about 10 mills lower than Eagle-Vail and Beaver Creek; 29 mills lower than Eagle Ranch;
and more than 50 mills lower than Red Sky Ranch and Cordillera . The total mill levy in Vail
is about 10 mills less than Avon, but property values are considerably higher .
The Summit County municipalities are all at approximately 57 .000 mills . Within Eagle
County, Vail has the lowest mill levy . For a home price of $700,000, a homeowner in Avon
would pay approximately $3,134 annually in property tax, while a homeowner living in
Vail, with the lowest mill levy of the peer municipalities, would pay approximately $2,574
annually on the same value home . Vail is able to have lower property taxes however
because it receives almost twice as much sales tax as Avon .
Figure 7. Property Mill Levies, 2021
8.956 10.391
2.301 5.070 7.346 0.798 3.248 4.736 5.991
24.649 22.779
24.649 25.046 18.835
22.779
18.835 18.835 17.246
24.649
13.323
8.499 7.534
8.499
16.991 19.530
7.534 19.530 19.530
11.903
8.499
11.830
20.513 20.651 25.202 17.656 13.670 19.442 17.659 17.659 20.786 13.550
13.091
62.617 61.355 60.651 59.693 57.105 57.101 56.822 56.024 53.183 51.434
44.235
0.000
10.000
20.000
30.000
40.000
50.000
60.000
70.000
Avon Basalt Eagle Steamboat Breckenridge Snowmass Frisco Silverthorne Winter Park Vail Telluride
Property Mill Levies, 2021
Chart Title
Town/City School County All Other
Source: Economic & Planning Systems
Z:\Shared\Projects\DEN\213079 Avon Revenue and Economic Study\Data\213079-Peer Tax.xlsx
It is important to note that these property tax levies reflect the municipality’s general
mill levy and exclude metro districts, which are further evaluated in Chapter Four . In
the municipalities surveyed, Town or City levies are typically the smallest portion of the
total mill levy, with most variation derived from school and county levies . For example,
the Eagle County School District mill levy is 5 .814 mills higher than in Summit County,
and Town and City mill levies across the municipalities range from 0 .798 in Snowmass
Village to 10 .391 mills in Basalt . Steamboat does not have a general operating mill levy as
it eliminated its property tax in the 1980s to shift the tax burden to visitors and away from
businesses and residents .
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc . 17
ATT A: EPS Fiscal Analysis Report
Other Revenue Sources
Apart from property and sales tax revenues, the peer municipalities also collect several
other revenues . These include lodging taxes, recreational marijuana taxes, RETT, lift
ticket taxes, and tobacco and nicotine taxes, as shown in Table 11 . All municipalities
surveyed include a lodging tax, and almost all have a tobacco or nicotine tax . Four of the
municipalities have a local recreational marijuana tax in addition to the town/city sales tax .
There is no retail marijuana in Avon or Vail, although there are retail dispensaries in Eagle-
Vail in unincorporated Eagle County . Just four of the municipalities do not have a RETT or
Real Estate Transfer Assessment (RETA), which is further evaluated in Chapter Four .
Table 11. Additional Revenue Sources, Peer Communities
Description Lodging Tax
Recreational
Marijuana
Tax RETT
Lift Ticket
Tax
Tobacoo/
Nicotine
Tax
Avon ✔ ✔ ✔
Basalt ✔ ✔
Breckenridge ✔✔✔✔✔
Eagle ✔ ✔
Frisco ✔✔✔ ✔
Silverthorne ✔✔ ✔
Snowmass Village ✔✔✔ ✔
Steamboat Springs ✔ ✔
Telluride ✔ ✔
Vail ✔ ✔✔✔
Winter Park ✔ ✔ ✔
Source: Economic & Planning Systems
18 Peer Community Comparison of Revenues, Budgets and Services and Assessment of Real Estate Cost of Ownership
ATT A: EPS Fiscal Analysis Report
This chapter compares sales and
lodging tax rates in Avon to the
mountain resort host comparison
communities . For this analysis, an
expanded set of ski resort communities
is used, including:
X Aspen
X Beaver Creek
X Breckenridge
X Copper Mountain
X Frisco
X Keystone
X Snowmass Village
X Steamboat Springs
X Telluride
X Mountain Village
X Vail
X Winter Park
Sales Tax
Sales tax rates are generally similar across the mountain resort host communities,
as shown in Figure 8 and Appendix Table A3 . To better account for all of the costs
to consumers associated with all potential sales fees, EPS included additional sales
and resort fees in this comparison, such as Public Improvement Fees (PIF) and civic
assessment fees .
Avon charges a 4 .0 percent sales tax (General Fund) on retail purchases including food
for home consumption (groceries) . When combined with the State, county, and county
transit taxes, the total sales tax rate is 8 .4 percent . An additional 0 .750 percent PIF is
applied to sales at the Village at Avon . In the rest of the Town where the PIF does not
apply, Avon’s total sales tax is similar to other mountain communities, the same as Vail,
and just slightly higher than Aspen and Breckenridge .
3. Mountain Resort Host Community Comparisons
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc . 19
ATT A: EPS Fiscal Analysis Report
Winter Park, Snowmass Village, Beaver Creek, and Aspen have higher total sales tax
rates than Avon . Winter Park has the highest total sales tax rate, at 11 .2 percent, which
is driven by its 7 .0 percent town sales tax, the highest of the mountain resort and host
communities . While Beaver Creek has a low base sales tax, it has a Civic Assessment fee
of 5 .35 percent which is charged on total sales, bringing its total sales tax rate to 10 .250
percent . Keystone and Copper Mountain are in unincorporated Summit County and
therefore do not have a municipal sales tax, allowing them to have the lowest total sales
tax rates .
Figure 8. Sales Tax Rate, 2021
11.200%
10.400%
4.400%
9.300%
4.400%
8.875%8.650% 8.650%8.400% 8.400% 8.400%8.375%
6.375% 6.375%
5.350%
4.750%
0.500%
11.200%
10.400%
9.750%9.300%9.150%8.875%8.650% 8.650%8.400% 8.400% 8.400%8.375%
6.875%6.375%
0.000%
3.000%
6.000%
9.000%
12.000%
Winter Park Snowmass
Village
Beaver Creek Aspen Village (at
Avon)
Breckenridge Mountain
Village
Telluride Avon Vail Steamboat
Springs
Frisco Keystone Copper
Mountain
Sales Tax Rate, 2021
Chart Title
Sales Tax Retail Sales Fee/PIF Total
Source: Economic & Planning Systems
Z:\Shared\Projects\DEN\213079 Avon Revenue and Economic Study\Data\213079-Peer Tax.xlsx
In 2020, the Town of Avon collected approximately $9 .0 million in sales tax, up 8 .0
percent from 2018, the third-highest growth rate among the peer communities, as
shown in Table 12 . The 2021 Colorado Mountain Migration Report (Northwest Colorado
Council of Governments and Colorado Association of Ski Towns) reported an outflow of
residents coming from cities to high quality-of-life places, especially Colorado’s mountain
communities . This helped generate better than expected sales tax revenues despite
COVID-19 restrictions . In addition, the Wayfair State Supreme Court decision, which
allowed Colorado communities to collect online tax collections, further helped mountain
resort communities maintain sales tax collections during the pandemic .
Table 12. Sales Tax Collections, 2018-2020
Description
2018-2020
2018 2019 2020 % Change Ann. %
Avon $8,427,334 $9,020,664 $9,099,246 8.0%3.9%
Aspen $15,909,760 $17,200,101 $16,063,631 1.0%0.5%
Breckenridge $15,306,755 $16,548,676 $15,358,273 0.3%0.2%
Frisco $9,618,813 $10,236,448 $10,497,912 9.1%4.5%
Mountain Village $4,443,492 $5,037,531 $4,715,191 6.1%3.0%
Snowmass Village $2,125,123 $2,418,450 $2,133,137 0.4%0.2%
Steamboat Springs $25,915,144 $28,079,412 $27,693,978 6.9%3.4%
Telluride $ 7,111,934 $8,000,872 $7,708,983 8.4%4.1%
Vail $27,886,112 $29,405,828 $24,973,411 -10.4%-5.4%
Winter Park $8,818,827 $9,680,453 $8,534,056 -3.2%-1.6%
Source: Economic & Planning Systems
20 Peer Community Comparison of Revenues, Budgets and Services and Assessment of Real Estate Cost of Ownership
ATT A: EPS Fiscal Analysis Report
Lodging and Ski Lift Tax
Most of the peer ski resort communities have a lodging tax, while just three have a short-
term rental tax, and two resort communities have a ski lift tax, as shown in Table 13 .
Vail and Breckenridge have
established a ski lift tax of
4 .0 percent and 4 .5 percent,
respectively . In Vail, this revenue
is deposited into its General Fund .
The Town of Vail received about
$5 .3 million in revenue from its ski
lift tax in 2020 . In Breckenridge,
the tax is utilized for transportation
services and infrastructure . The
tax was approved by voters of
Breckenridge in November of 2015
and took effect in July of 2016 .
Breckenridge estimates about $3 .5
million in annual revenue from the
lift tax, and Vail Resorts agreed to a
revenue guarantee in this amount .
Most peer communities charge a lodging tax on short-term accommodations ranging
from 0 .96 percent in Beaver Creek to 4 .0 percent in Mountain Village and Avon, as shown
in Figure 9 and Appendix Table A4 . In addition, a few peer communities had dedicated
taxes on short-term accommodations, including Avon (2 .0 percent), Frisco (5 .0 percent),
and Telluride (2 .5 percent) . Avon had the highest combined sales and lodging tax, as
shown in Figure 10, driven by its above-average sales tax and highest lodging tax of the
peer municipalities .
Figure 9. Lodging Tax Rate, 2021
4.000% 4.000%
3.400%
3.000%
2.400%2.350%
2.000% 2.000%
1.400%
1.000%0.960%
0.0%
1.0%
2.0%
3.0%
4.0%
5.0%
Avon Mountain
Village
Breckenridge Steamboat
Springs
Snowmass
Village
Frisco Aspen Telluride Vail Winter Park Beaver Creek
Lodging Tax Rate, 2021
Chart Title
Source: Economic & Planning Systems
Z:\Shared\Projects\DEN\213079 Avon Revenue and Economic Study\Data\213079-Peer Tax.xlsx
Table 13. Lodging, STR, and Ski Tax, Comparison Cities
Description
Lodging
Tax STR Tax
Ski Lift
Tax
Avon ✔✔
Aspen ✔
Breckenridge ✔ 4.5%
Copper Mountain
Frisco ✔✔
Keystone
Mountain Village ✔
Snowmass Village ✔
Steamboat Springs ✔
Telluride ✔✔
Vail ✔ 4.0%
Winter Park ✔
Source: Economic & Planning Systems
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc . 21
ATT A: EPS Fiscal Analysis Report
Figure 10. Combined Sales, Lodging, and STR Tax Rate, 2021
8.375%9.150%8.400%8.650%
10.400%
8.650%8.875%
11.200%
9.300%9.750%
8.400% 8.400%
6.875%6.375%
2.350%
4.000%4.000%2.000%
2.400%
4.000%3.400%
1.000%
2.000%0.960%
1.400%1.000%
5.000%2.000%2.000%
2.500%
15.725%15.150%14.400%
13.150%12.800%12.650%12.275%12.200%11.300%10.710%9.800%9.400%
6.875%6.375%
0.000%
2.000%
4.000%
6.000%
8.000%
10.000%
12.000%
14.000%
16.000%
18.000%
Frisco Village (at
Avon)
Avon Telluride Snowmass
Village
Mountain
Village
Breckenridge Winter Park Aspen Beaver Creek Vail Steamboat
Springs
Keystone Copper
Mountain
Tax Rate
Chart Title
Sales Tax/Retail Sales Fee (Inclusive of PIF & Civic Assessment Fees)Lodging Tax STR
Source: Economic & Planning Systems
Z:\Shared\Projects\DEN\213079-Avon Revenue and Economic Study\Data\213079-Peer Tax.xlsx
22 Peer Community Comparison of Revenues, Budgets and Services and Assessment of Real Estate Cost of Ownership
ATT A: EPS Fiscal Analysis Report
This chapter compares property tax rates with particular focus on large Title 32
Metropolitan Districts (Metro Districts) . In addition, Real Estate Transfer Taxes (RETT)
and Real Estate Transfer Assessments (RETA) are analyzed, and a cost of ownership
compared using the tax rates from each area .
Metro Districts
There is a substantial amount of residential development in unincorporated Eagle County
organized under homeowners’ associations (HOAs) and Metro Districts . Metro Districts are
an infrastructure financing and funding mechanism in which a property and/or sales tax
is levied on property within the district to fund construction and sometimes maintenance
of public improvements, usually roads, water and sewer . Metro districts are typically
formed by the land developer and governed by the developer for a period of time until
new board elections allow a broader representation of district residents to be elected .
The total mill levies in several large development areas in the Vail Valley are shown below in
Figures 11 and 12, and Appendix Table A5 and compared to Avon . Edwards (Homestead
Metro District) has the lowest total metro district mill levy at 59 .002 in 2021, as its debt
has been paid off and only the 1 .691 operating mill levy remains on top of the other taxing
districts . Other metro districts have mill levies for debt and operating ranging from about
12 .000 to over 60 .000 mills . Four of the metro districts have mill levies over 100 .000 mills,
including Avon Station Metro District with the highest mill levy of 128 .125 .
Figure 11. Vail Valley Metro District Mill Levies
4. Property Tax and Real Estate Cost
of Ownership
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc . 23
ATT A: EPS Fiscal Analysis Report
Figure 12. Vail Valley Metro District Mill Levies
Real Estate Transfer Tax
As noted in the Introduction, the property tax and RETT/RETA comparison communities
were chosen on the criterion that they have a real estate transfer tax . Many mountain and
resort communities in Colorado have a RETT that generally range from 1 .0 to 2 .0 of the
transaction price . It is customary for the buyer and seller to split the cost of transfer fees in a
sale . Communities often earmark RETT revenue for capital projects funding and affordable/
workforce housing although some use it for general operations and maintenance .
Each peer community has a 1 .0 percent RETT on all
property sales or transfers with monetary compensation .
Avon has a higher RETT at 2 .0 percent . Avon’s 2 .0
percent RETT is the primary source of funding for capital
improvement projects and is deposited into the Capital
Projects Fund . The RETT is a volatile revenue source as
it varies with the strength of the real estate market, new
real estate development, and major property acquisitions .
When TABOR passed in 1992 it prohibited new or
increased RETTs from being enacted in Colorado but
allowed existing RETTs to continue . Under TABOR, the
Town could raise or eliminate the locals’ exemption
because it would effectively be a tax decrease, but the
Town cannot lower or eliminate the local’s exemption
because that could be interpreted as an increase
to the RETT, which is prohibited by TABOR . A list of
other Colorado municipalities with existing RETTs and
corresponding rates are tracked, as shown in Table 14 .
Silverthorne is the only mountain peer community that
does not have a RETT, although it pursues RETAs or
“transfer fees” on some new development . Many large
HOAs in the area also have RETAs including Eagle Ranch
(1 .0 percent), Arrowhead (1 .5 percent), and the Beaver Creek Resort Company (2 .375 percent) .
Community
RETA
Rate
RETT
Rate
Avon N/A 2.0%
Arrowhead 1.5%N/A
Aspen [1]N/A 1.5%
Beaver 2.4%N/A
Breckenridge N/A 1.0%
Crested Butte N/A 3.0%
Eagle Ranch 1.0%N/A
Frisco N/A 1.0%
Gypsum N/A 1.0%
Minturn N/A 1.0%
Ophir N/A 4.0%
Silverthorne 1.0%N/A
Snowmass Village N/A 1.0%
Telluride N/A 3.0%
Vail N/A 1.0%
Winter Park N/A 1.0%
[1] Combined RETT rates of 0.5% and 1.0%
Source: Economic & Planning Systems
Table 14. RETT and RETA Rates in Colorado
128.125
115.552 113.833
91.651
71.893 71.877 68.161 64.049 62.617 59.002
0.000
20.000
40.000
60.000
80.000
100.000
120.000
140.000
Avon
Station
Red Sky
Ranch
Cordillera Eagle Ranch Beaver
Creek
Eagle-Vail Arrowhead Berry Creek Avon Edwards
Mill Levy
Chart Title
Source: Economic & Planning Systems
Z:\Shared\Projects\DEN\213079 Avon Revenue and Economic Study\Models\213079-Cost of Ownership & RETT.xlsx
24 Peer Community Comparison of Revenues, Budgets and Services and Assessment of Real Estate Cost of Ownership
ATT A: EPS Fiscal Analysis Report
In 2020, Vail had $8 .6 million in RETT revenue, while Avon collected $5 .9 million in revenue,
as shown in Table 15 . In 2021, Avon’s Capital Improvement Fund revenues from RETT were
conservatively projected at $2 .5 million, although are likely to be higher as a majority of
RETT revenues are dedicated to the Capital Improvement Fund .
Table 15. RETT Revenues
Eagle County Summit County
Description Avon Vail Breckenridge Frisco Silverthorne
2019 $5,001,145 $7,224,668 $7,166,614 $1,542,417 $1,019,127
2020 $5,998,950 $8,650,000 $5,700,000 $1,400,000 $920,000
Source: Economic & Planning Systems
RETT revenue is most commonly utilized to fund capital improvement projects .
Avon, Breckenridge, and Frisco use the RETT as their key funding source for capital
improvements . Vail dedicates its RETT to recreation, parks and open space, and
sustainable environmental practices . Gypsum uses its RETT in the General Fund .
Cost of Ownership Analysis
EPS estimated the cost of real estate ownership over a seven-year period for the
comparable areas, as shown in Figure 13 and Table 16 . Property taxes were derived
from applying the respective mill levies to the assessed value of $700,000, which is the
approximate median home price in Eagle County . The projected annual property tax
was then multiplied over a seven-year period, an average holding period for a home . To
estimate the real estate transfer fees at the point of sale in year seven, RETT and RETA
rates were then applied to an average sale price of $700,000, with 50 percent of that
amount estimated to be paid by the owner/seller .
Figure 13. Seven Year Cost of Ownership Analysis
$0
$5,000
$10,000
$15,000
$20,000
$25,000
$30,000
$35,000
$40,000
$45,000
Red Sky
Ranch
Metro
District
Cordillera
Metro
District
Cotton
Ranch
Metro
District
Eagle
Ranch
Metro
District
Town of
Avon
Minturn Gypsum Beaver
Creek
Metro
District
Eagle-Vail Arrowhead
Metro
District
Berry Creek
Metro
District
Vail Town of
Eagle
Edwards
Metro
District
Estimated Cost of
Ownership
Chart Title
Source: Economic & Planning Systems
Z:\Shared\Projects\DEN\213079 Avon Revenue and Economic Study\Data\213079-Peer Community Budget.xlsx Economic & Planning Systems, Inc . 25
ATT A: EPS Fiscal Analysis Report
The total ownership cost including property taxes and the RETT ranged from $20,000 to
$55,000 for homes located in municipalities and metro districts across the Vail Valley and
Eagle County .
A typical household in the Red Sky Ranch Metro is estimated to pay $40,484 in total fees,
the highest of the peer communities . A homeowner in Avon would pay a total of $28,938
which is less than in Red Sky Ranch, Cordillera, Cotton Ranch, and Eagle Ranch .
Table 16. Seven Year Cost of Ownership Analysis
Description
Factor
Annual
Property
Tax
7-Year
Property
Tax
RETT Rate
Total
RETT
50% RETT
Paid by
Seller
Total
Ownership
Cost
Rank
1=Highest
Eagle County Median Home Price $700,000 $700,000
Assessed Value 7.15%$50,050
Mill Levy
Red Sky Ranch Metro District 115.552 $5,783 $40,484 N/A N/A N/A $40,484 1
Cordillera Metro District 113.833 $5,697 $39,881 N/A N/A N/A $39,881 2
Cotton Ranch Metro District 100.348 $5,022 $35,157 1.0%$7,000 $3,500 $38,657 3
Eagle Ranch Metro District 91.651 $4,587 $32,110 N/A N/A N/A $32,110 4
Beaver Creek Metro District 71.893 $3,598 $25,188 N/A N/A N/A $25,188 8
Minturn 71.880 $3,598 $25,183 1.0%$7,000 $3,500 $28,683 6
Eagle-Vail 71.877 $3,597 $25,182 N/A N/A N/A $25,182 9
Arrowhead Metro District 68.161 $3,411 $23,880 N/A N/A N/A $23,880 10
Berry Creek Metro District 64.049 $3,206 $22,439 N/A N/A N/A $22,439 11
Gypsum 63.003 $3,153 $22,073 1.0%$7,000 $3,500 $25,573 7
Town of Avon 62.617 $3,134 $21,938 2.0%$14,000 $7,000 $28,938 5
Town of Eagle 60.651 $3,036 $21,249 N/A N/A N/A $21,249 13
Edwards Metro District 59.002 $2,953 $20,671 N/A N/A N/A $20,671 14
Vail 51.434 $2,574 $18,020 1.0%$7,000 $3,500 $21,520 12
Source: Economic & Planning Systems
26 Peer Community Comparison of Revenues, Budgets and Services and Assessment of Real Estate Cost of Ownership
ATT A: EPS Fiscal Analysis Report
National Property Tax Rates
To add further context into property taxes not only among Avon’s peer communities
but nationally, EPS collected property tax rankings from the Tax Foundation, as shown
in Figure 14 . Colorado had the 5th lowest property taxes in 2019, with just Wyoming,
Louisiana, Alabama, and Hawaii paying lower property taxes on average than Colorado .
New Jersey had the highest property taxes on average across the United States .
Figure 14. National Property Tax Comparison, 2019
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc . 27
ATT A: EPS Fiscal Analysis Report
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
ATT A: EPS Fiscal Analysis Report
5. Inflow–Outflow Analysis
The analysis in this chapter
estimates the sources of retail
sales and sales tax in Avon . i .e ., how
much sales tax comes from full time
and part time residents (second
homeowners), visitors, and from the
surrounding region and pass through
inflow . This type of analysis is called an
inflow-outflow analysis . The outflow
component is retail sales leakage
(money spent outside the town) .
Taxable Sales
Town sales tax and taxable sales data
by major store type was compiled and
analyzed, shown in Table 17 . Several store
categories were combined to prevent
the disclosure of individual store sales to
comply with requirements on the privacy
of sales tax records . Total taxable retail
sales in the Town were approximately
$270 .4 million in 2021 .
Table 17. Taxable Sales, Town of Avon
Estimated Taxable
SalesStore Type
Convenience Goods $66,569,919
Shopper’s Goods $154,178,696
Eating and Drinking $49,663,930
Total $270,412,545
Source: Economic & Planning Systems
Expenditure Patterns
The first step in estimating retail
expenditures is developing an inventory
of housing and lodging . Full-time
residents in Avon are comprised of 2,490
households, with an average household
income of $104,554 . Second homeowners
are associated with approximately 941
housing units in the Town of Avon, as
shown in Table 18 . These pure second
homes (not in an overnight rental
program) were estimated by subtracting
the number of short term rentals from
the number of housing units defined
as vacant for seasonal, recreational, or
occasional by the Census .
Table 18. Housing Unit Summary
Description
Residential
Units
% of
Total
Full-Time 2,490 64.7%
Second Homeowner 941 24.5%
Second Home (not short term rental)415 10.8%
Total Units 3,846 100.0%
Source: Economic & Planning Systems
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc . 29
ATT A: EPS Fiscal Analysis Report
EPS estimated annual retail expenditures for full time residents and second homeowners
in the Town of Avon, shown in Table 19 . Retail expenditures are a function of population
and households, and household income within a determined trade area . The total
personal income (TPI) of a given area is determined by multiplying total households by
average household income .
Second homes are assumed to have an occupancy rate of 20 percent, or the equivalent
of 10 weeks per year . The total personal income (TPI) of full-time residents is calculated at
$260 .3 million, while second homeowners are estimated to have a TPI of $37 .6 million .
Statewide expenditure patterns show that an average of 36 .6 percent of TPI is spent on
the retail goods in (“brick and mortar” stores) included in the analysis:
X 13 .3 percent of TPI is spent on Convenience Goods . These are items purchased
frequently and close to home such as groceries; health and personal care items; and
beer wine and liquor .
X 16 .5 percent of TPI is spent on Shoppers goods . These includes larger purchases that
are comparison shopped and bought in department stores, warehouse clubs, and
supercenters, clothing stores, outdoor equipment stores, electronics and appliance
stores, and other specialty retailers .
X Spending on food and beverage is in restaurants and bars and is 6 .8 percent of TPI
comprise 6 .8 percent of TPI
X Total retail expenditures are estimated at $95 .2 million for full-time residents and $13 .7
million for second homeowners .
Table 19. Expenditure Potential, Full-Time Resident and Second Homeowner
Description
% of
Spending
Full Time
Resident
Second
Homeowner
% TPI (2017)($000s)($000s)
Average Household Income $104,554 $200,000
Households 2,490 941
Occupancy 100%20%
Total Personal Income (TPI)100%$260,339 $37,640
Store Type
Convenience Goods 13.3%$34,604 $5,003
Shopper’s Goods 16.5%$43,025 $6,221
Eating and Drinking 6.8%$17,592 $2,543
Total Retail Spending ($000s)36.6%$95,220 $13,767
[1] Second homeowner households exclude overnight rental programs
Source: 2017 Census of Retail Trade; Economic & Planning Systems
30 Peer Community Comparison of Revenues, Budgets and Services and Assessment of Real Estate Cost of Ownership
ATT A: EPS Fiscal Analysis Report
Using the store sales and expenditure information, EPS estimated the percent of
spending that is “captured” in Avon for residents and part-time residents, as shown
in Table 20 and Table 21 . The store categories with the most local spending capture
are Shopper’s Goods and Convenience Goods, as these are items that are low cost and
frequently purchased items (e .g ., groceries, and health and personal care items) . In total,
residents are estimated to make approximately 60 percent of their retail store purchases
in Avon and 40 percent elsewhere .
Table 20. Retail Sales Capture, Resident
Store Type
% of Spending
% TPI (2017)
2021
($000s)
Local Capture Leakage
%
Res. Expen.
($000s)%
Res. Expen.
($000s)
Total Personal Income (TPI)100%$260,339
Convenience Goods 13.3%$34,604 90%$31,144 10%$3,460
Shoppers’ Goods 16.5%$43,025 33%$14,198 67%$28,826
Eating and Drinking 6.8%$17,592 75%$13,194 25%$4,398
Total Retail Goods 36.6%$95,220 61%$58,535 39%$36,685
Source: 2017 Census of Retail Trade; Economic & Planning Systems
Table 21. Retail Sales Capture, Part-Time Residents
Store Type
% of Spending
% TPI (2017)
2021
($000s)
Local Capture Leakage
%
Res. Expen.
($000s)%
Res. Expen.
($000s)
Total Personal Income (TPI)100%$37,640
Convenience Goods 13.3%$5,003 75%$3,752 25%$1,251
Shoppers’ Goods 16.5%$6,221 75%$4,665 25%$1,555
Eating and Drinking 6.8%$2,543 50%$1,272 50%$1,272
Total Retail Goods 36.6%$13,767 70%$9,689 30%$4,078
Source: 2017 Census of Retail Trade; Economic & Planning Systems
Visitor Expenditures
Visitor expenditures are estimated as dollar per day per person figures . First, total
overnight visitor days are estimated from the bed base and occupancy figures provided
by the Town of Avon . The winter season generates 60 percent of total visitation and 319,139
visitor days, as shown in Table 22 . Total overnight visitor days are estimated at 696,046 for
2021 .
Table 22. Visitor Days
Season
Accomm.
Units
Persons
per Unit
Days Total
Capacity
Occ. Rate Total
Days
Winter (Nov 15. - May 31)1,409 2.5 151 531,898 60%319,139
Summer and Shoulder 1,409 2.5 214 753,815 50%376,908
Total 365 1,285,713 55%696,046
Source: Economic & Planning Systems
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc . 31
ATT A: EPS Fiscal Analysis Report
Overnight visitors are estimated to spend approximately $110 per day per person year-
round, as shown in Table 23 . Overnight visitors spend the most on Eating and Drinking,
estimated at $40 per day per person .
Table 23. Visitor Spending
$ Per Day per Person Expenditures ($000s)
Store Type Winter Summer Winter Summer Total
Spending Days 319,139 376,908
Convenience Goods $35 $35 $ 11,170 $13,192 $24,362
Shoppers Goods $35 $35 $ 11,170 $13,192 $24,362
Eating and Drinking $40 $40 $12,766 $15,076 $27,842
Total Retail Goods ($000s)$ 110 $ 110 $35,105 $41,460 $76,565
Source: Economic & Planning Systems
Store Sales by Demand Segment
The sales from the four demand groups are compared to total store sales compiled
from Town sales tax records . Total sales come from residents, overnights visitors, second
homeowners, and inflow from outside the Town, summarized in Table 24 and Figure 15 .
X With store sales of $270 million, permanent residents account for approximately 22
percent of the sales, or $58 .5 million
X Overnight visitors account for an estimated 28 percent of store sales, or $76 .5 million
X Part time residents have a smaller impact on retail sales, accounting for an estimated 3
percent of total retail sales, or $9 .6 million per year .
X In total, it is estimated that 46 percent of retail sales, and therefore sales taxes in Avon
comes from regional inflow, or $125 .6 million in taxable sales annually .
X Approximately one out of every five dollars that the Town receives in sales tax comes
from Town residents .
Table 24. Store Sales by Demand Segment
Store Type
Avon Store
Sales
Sales to
Residents
Overnight
Visitors
Second
Homeowners
Regional
Inflow
($000s)($000s)($000s)($000s)($000s)
Sales
Convenience Goods $66,570 $31,144 $24,362 $3,752 $7,312
Shoppers’ Goods $154,179 $14,198 $24,362 $4,665 $110,954
Eating and Drinking $49,664 $13,194 $27,842 $1,272 $7,357
Total Retail Goods ($000s)$270,413 $58,535 $76,565 $9,689 $125,623
% of Total Store Sales
Convenience Goods 100.0%46.8%36.6%5.6%11.0%
Shoppers’ Goods 100.0%9.2%15.8%3.0%72.0%
Eating and Drinking 100.0%26.6%56.1%2.6%14.8%
Total Retail Goods ($000s)100.0%21.6%28.3%3.6%46.5%
Source: Economic & Planning Systems
32 Peer Community Comparison of Revenues, Budgets and Services and Assessment of Real Estate Cost of Ownership
ATT A: EPS Fiscal Analysis Report
Figure 15. Store Sales by Demand Segment
46.5%
28.3%
21.6%
3.6%
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50%
Regional Inflow
Overnight Visitors
Residents
Second Homeowners
Estimated % of Store Sales
Chart Title
Source: Economic & Planning Systems
[link to source]
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc . 33
ATT A: EPS Fiscal Analysis Report
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
ATT A: EPS Fiscal Analysis Report
6. Revenue Outlook
This chapter evaluates the estimated revenue generated of upcoming planned
development in the Town of Avon . Annual property, sales, and lodging taxes are
estimated and compared to historical general fund revenues .
Planned Development
Several development projects are expected to be built in the next five years in the Town,
as shown in Table 25 . Planned projects include a 4,425 square foot Maverik gas station, a
243 room hotel, and several condominium and townhome projects . Each new project will
generate new property tax revenue . The Village at Avon hotel will generate new lodging
tax and sales tax revenues . In addition, the 4,425 square foot Maverik gas station will
generate sales tax revenue and the Riverfront and Frontgate projects are anticipated to
generate short-term rental revenue .
Table 25. Proposed Development, Town of Avon
Development Size Expected Tax Revenue
Avon Development Sq. Ft.Units Property Sales STR Lodging
Maverik Gas Station 4,425 ✔✔
Village at Avon Hotel 243 ✔✔ ✔
Riverfront Townhomes 13 ✔ ✔
Riverfront Condos 40 ✔ ✔
Frontgate Townhomes 9 ✔ ✔
Frontgate Condos 75 ✔ ✔
McGrady Acres Townhomes 24 ✔
Source: Town of Avon; Economic & Planning Systems
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc . 35
ATT A: EPS Fiscal Analysis Report
EPS estimated the market value of the projects as the first step in projecting property tax
revenues . The estimated value of the projects totaled nearly $290 .2 million, as shown in
Table 26 .
Table 26. Development Market Value Estimates
Market Value Per
Avon Development Sq. Ft.Units Sq. Ft.Unit Estimated Value
Maverik Gas Station 4,425 $325 $1,438,000
Village at Avon Hotel 243 $100,000 $24,300,000
Riverfront Townhomes 13 $2,000,000 $26,000,000
Riverfront Condos 40 $1,500,000 $60,000,000
Frontgate Townhomes 9 $2,000,000 $18,000,000
Frontgate Condos 75 $1,500,000 $112,500,000
McGrady Acres Townhomes 24 $2,000,000 $48,000,000
Total $290,238,000
Source: Town of Avon; Economic & Planning Systems
Estimated Tax Revenue
The tax generation potential of future development takes into account the revenues the
Town is eligible to receive . The Maverick Gas Station and Village at Avon Hotel are located
within the Village at Avon metro district . Within the Village at Avon, the Town does not
collect directly the 4 .0 percent lodging or sales taxes . The metro district collects, in their
place, a 4 .0 percent sales fee and a 0 .75 percent add on public improvement fee (PIF) . The
Town’s tax code however defines the sales fee and PIF revenues as taxable, so the Town
receives 4 .0 percent sales tax on the 4 .75 percent total sales fees
Property Tax
Based on the estimated market value of the developments, EPS applied the assessment
ratios and the Town General Fund mill levy to determine the estimated property tax
revenue . The planned developments are estimated to generate $231,484 in annual town
property tax revenue, as shown in Table 27 .
Table 27. Estimated Annual Property Tax Revenue
Maverik
Gas Station
Village at
Avon Hotel
Riverfront
Townhomes
Riverfront
Condos
Frontgate
Townhomes
Frontgate
Condos
McGrady
Townhomes
Total
Property Tax
RevenueDescriptionMills
Statutory Actual Value $1,438,000 $24,300,000 $26,000,000 $60,000,000 $18,000,000 $112,500,000 $48,000,000
Assessment Rate 29.00%29.00%6.95%6.95%6.95%6.95%6.95%
Assessed Value $417,020 $7,047,000 $1,807,000 $4,170,000 $1,251,000 $7,818,750 $3,336,000
Town Mill Levy 8.956 $3,735 $63,113 $16,183 $37,347 $11,204 $70,025 $29,877 $231,484
Source: Economic & Planning Systems
36 Peer Community Comparison of Revenues, Budgets and Services and Assessment of Real Estate Cost of Ownership
ATT A: EPS Fiscal Analysis Report
Lodging Taxes and Fees
EPS also estimated the lodging and sales tax generated from the proposed Village at
Avon Hotel and expected STR units at the Riverfront and Frontgate projects . Hotels
pay lodging tax on room revenues, so an estimate of annual room sales was developed .
A stabilized occupancy rate of 65 percent was applied to estimate revenue, based on
historical occupancy trends resulting in $11 .5 million in lodging sales . Similarly, the
townhomes and condominiums rented as short term rentals generate between $129,000
and $1 .1 million in lodging sales depending on the size of the development . Using Town’s
lodging tax rate of 4 .0 percent, the Village at Avon retail sales fee of 4 .0 percent and 0 .75
percent add-on PIF, the fees and taxes are as follows and shown in Table 28:
X Village at Avon Metro District – The metro district receives $548,000 in lodging sales
fees.
X Town of Avon – The Town receives $22,000 in sales tax on the Hotel sales fees and
add-on PIF (4.0% sales tax on the 4.75% fees). The Town also receives sales, lodging,
and STR taxes from the condominiums and townhomes ranging from $13,000 to
$108,000.
Table 28. Estimated Hotel and STR Sales and Lodging Tax Revenue
Village at STR Riverfront STR Frontgate
Description Avon Hotel Townhomes Condos Townhomes Condos
Room Revenue Assumptions
Number of Rooms 243 13 40 9 75
% in overnight rentals 100%25%25%25%25%
Occupancy 65%45%45%45%45%
Average Nightly Room Rate $200 $350 $350 $350 $350
Room Revenue $11,530,350 $186,834 $574,875 $129,347 $1,077,891
Village at Avon Revenues
Village at Avon Lodging Sales Fee at 4.00%$461,214 N/A N/A N/A N/A
Village at Avon Add-On PIF at 0.75%$86,478 N/A N/A N/A N/A
Total $547,692 $0 $0 $0 $0
Town of Avon Revenues
Short-Term Rental Tax at 2.00%N/A $3,737 $11,498 $2,587 $21,558
Avon Lodging Tax at 4.00%N/A $7,473 $22,995 $5,174 $43,116
Avon Sales Tax at 4.00%N/A $7,473 $22,995 $5,174 $43,116
Town Tax on Village at Avon (4.00% on 4.75%)$21,908 N/A N/A N/A N/A
Total $21,908 $18,683 $57,488 $12,935 $107,789
Source: Economic & Planning Systems
Sales Tax
The gas station is expected to have an annual revenue of $1 .3 million, based on estimated
sales of a $300 sales per square foot value . After applying the Town’s sales tax rate of 4 .0
percent on the 4 .75 percent Retail Sales Fee and PIF, the Maverik Gas Station is expected
to generate $63,056 in annual sales tax to the Village at Avon and approximately $2,500 in
revenue for the Town, as shown in Table 29 .
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc . 37
ATT A: EPS Fiscal Analysis Report
Table 29. Estimated Gas Station Sales Tax Revenue
Description Sq. Ft.
Sales per
Sq. Ft.
Estimated
Sales
Metro Dist. Revenue Avon Revenue
Fee & PIF (4.75%)(4% on Fee & PIF)
Maverik Gas Station 4,425 $300 $1,327,500 $63,056 $2,522
Source: Economic & Planning Systems
Total Town Revenues
The proposed projects are estimated to generate approximately $374,050 in annual Town
revenue, as shown in Table 30 . The Village at Avon Hotel is expected to generate the
largest revenue to the Town, estimated at approximately $85,021 annually . In total, these
projects could result in a 1 .8 percent increase over the 2021 general fund revenue .
The Village at Avon Hotel accounts for approximately 23 percent of these estimated Town
revenues highlighting the importance of non-residential development that generates
sales and/or lodging tax . Nonresidential development also generates more property tax as
property tax on nonresidential property is paid on 29 percent of market value compared
to 6 .95 percent of value for residential property .
Table 30. Total Annual Estimated Tax Revenue, Town of Avon
From Retail Sales From Lodging Sales Totals
Location and Project
Town
Prop. Tax
Retail
Sales Fee PIF
Town
Sales Tax
Lodging
Tax/Fee STR Tax
All Taxes
and Fees Town Only
8.956 mills 4.00%0.75%4.00%4.00%2.00%
Village at Avon [1]
Maverik Gas Station $3,735 $53,100 $9,956 $2,522 ------$69,313 $6,257
Village at Avon Hotel 6 3 ,113 461,214 86,478 21,908 $461,214 ---1,093,926 85,021
Total $66,848 $514,314 $96,434 $24,430 $461,214 $0 $1,163,240 $91,278
Other Areas
Riverfront Townhomes $16,183 ------$7,473 $7,473 $3,737 $34,867 $27,394
Riverfront Condos 37,347 ------22,995 22,995 11, 49 8 94,834 71,839
Frontgate Townhomes 11,204 ------5,174 5,174 2,587 24,139 18,965
Frontgate Condos 70,025 ------4 3 ,116 4 3 ,116 21,558 177,814 134,698
McGrady Acres Townhomes 29,877 ---------------29,877 29,877
Total $164,636 $0 $0 $78,758 $78,758 $39,379 $361,531 $282,773
Total Town Revenue $231,484 $103,188 $78,758 $39,379 $374,050
2021 General Fund Revenue $2,047,905 ------$12,139,470 $2,017,544 ---$21,326,845 $21,326,845
% Impact 8.0%------0.6%3.9%------1.8%
[1] 4.00% Town Sales Tax is applied on the 4.75% Retail Sales Fee & PIF for developments in Village (at Avon)
Source: Economic & Planning Systems
38 Peer Community Comparison of Revenues, Budgets and Services and Assessment of Real Estate Cost of Ownership
ATT A: EPS Fiscal Analysis Report
Appendix
ATT A: EPS Fiscal Analysis Report
Table A1. Sales Tax Rates, Peer Communities, 2021
Eagle County Summit County Pitkin County San Miguel County Routt County Grand County
Revenue Avon Vail Eagle
Brecken-
ridge Frisco
Silver-
thorne
Snowmass
Village Basalt Telluride
Steamboat
Springs Winter Park
Sales Tax
Town/City Sales Tax 4.000%4.000%4.500%2.500%2.000%2.000%3.900%3.000%4.750%4.500%7.000%
State Sales Tax 2.900%2.900%2.900%2.900%2.900%2.900%2.900%2.900%2.900%2.900%2.900%
County Sales Tax 1.000%1.000%1.000%2.000%2.000%2.000%3.600%1.500%1.000%1.000%1.300%
County Transit Tax 0.500%0.500%0.500%0.750%0.750%0.750%0.000%0.000%0.000%0.000%0.000%
Regional Housing Auth. 0.000%0.000%0.000%0.725%0.725%0.725%0.000%0.000%0.000%0.000%0.000%
Total 8.400%8.400%8.900%8.875%8.375%8.375%10.400%7.400%8.650%8.400%11.200%
Source: Economic & Planning Systems
Table A2. Mill Levies, Peer Communities, 2021
Eagle County Summit County Pitkin County San Miguel County Routt County Grand County
Revenue Avon Vail Eagle
Brecken-
ridge Frisco
Silver-
thorne
Snowmass
Village Basalt Telluride
Steamboat
Springs Winter Park
Taxing Districts
Town/City 8.956 4.736 2.301 5.070 0.798 0.000 7.346 10.391 5.991 4.500%7.000%
County 8.499 8.499 8.499 19.530 19.530 19.530 7.534 7.534 11.830 2.900%2.900%
School District 24.649 24.649 24.649 18.835 18.835 18.835 22.779 22.779 13.323 1.000%1.300%
College District 4.013 4.013 4.013 4.013 4.013 4.013 4.013 4.013 0.000 0.000%0.000%
Fire District 9.703 0.000 11.260 9.110 13.099 13.099 9.602 8.822 4.793 0.000%0.000%
Water/San 0.759 0.759 0.759 0.000 0.000 0.000 5.827 2.453 2.643
Other 6.038 8.778 9.170 0.547 0.547 0.547 0.000 5.363 5.655
Subtotal 62.617 51.434 60.651 57.105 56.822 56.024 57.101 61.355 44.235 59.693 11.200%
Source: Economic & Planning Systems
40 Peer Community Comparison of Revenues, Budgets and Services and Assessment of Real Estate Cost of Ownership
ATT A: EPS Fiscal Analysis Report
Table A3. Sales Tax with Retail Sales Fee, Peer Communities
Eagle County Summit County Pitkin County San Miguel County Routt County Grand County
Tax Type Avon
Village at
Avon
Beaver
Creek Vail
Brecken-
ridge
Copper
Mountain Keystone Frisco Aspen
Snowmass
Village
Mountain
Village Telluride
Steamboat
Springs Winter Park
Sales Tax
Town/City Sales Tax 4.000%0.000%0.000%4.000%2.500%0.000%0.000%2.000%2.400%3.500%4.500%4.500%4.500%7.000%
State Sales Tax 2.900%2.900%2.900%2.900%2.900%2.900%2.900%2.900%2.900%2.900%2.900%2.900%2.900%2.900%
County Sales Tax 1.000%1.000%1.000%1.000%2.000%2.000%2.000%2.000%3.600%3.600%1.000%1.000%1.000%1.300%
Transit Tax 0.500%0.500%0.500%0.500%0.750%0.750%0.750%0.750%0.400%0.400%0.250%0.250%0.000%0.000%
Regional Housing Auth. 0.000%0.000%0.000%0.000%0.725%0.725%0.725%0.725%0.000%0.000%0.000%0.000%0.000%0.000%
Total 8.400%4.400%4.400%8.400%8.875%6.375%6.375%8.375%9.300%10.400%8.650%8.650%8.400%11.200%
Retail Sales Fee [1]---4.750%5.350%---------0.500%---------------------
Total 8.400%9.150%9.750%8.400%8.875%6.375%6.875%8.375%9.300%10.400%8.650%8.650%8.400%11.200%
[1] Includes PIF, Sales Assessments, and Civic Assessment Fees
Source: Economic & Planning Systems
Table A4. Lodging and STR Tax, Peer Communities
Eagle County Summit County Pitkin County San Miguel County Routt County Grand County
Tax Type Avon
Beaver
Creek Vail
Brecken-
ridge
Copper
Mountain Keystone Frisco Aspen
Snowmass
Village
Mountain
Village Telluride
Steamboat
Springs Winter Park
Lodging Tax
Lodging Tax 4.000%0.960%1.400%3.400%0.000%0.000%2.350%2.000%2.400%4.000%2.000%1.000%1.000%
Local Mktg. District 0.000%0.000%0.000%0.000%0.000%0.000%0.000%0.000%0.000%0.000%0.000%2.000%0.000%
Lodging Combined Rate 4.000%0.960%1.400%3.400%0.000%0.000%2.350%2.000%2.400%4.000%2.000%3.000%1.000%
Short-Term Rental Tax 2.000%5.000%2.500%
Total Combined Rate 6.000%0.960%1.400%3.400%0.000%0.000%7.350%2.000%2.400%4.000%4.500%3.000%1.000%
[1] Includes PIF, Sales Assessments, and Civic Assessment Fees
Source: Economic & Planning Systems
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc . 41
ATT A: EPS Fiscal Analysis Report
Table A5. Metro District Mill Levies, 2021
Description
Town of
Avon
Town of
Eagle
Eagle-
Vail Gypsum Minturn Vail
Arrowhead
Metro
District
Avon
Station
Beaver
Creek Metro
District
Berry Creek
Metro
District
Cordillera
Metro
District
Cotton Ranch
Metro District
Eagle Ranch
Metro
District
Edwards
Metro
District
Red Sky
Ranch Metro
District
Metro District Tax Mill Levy 0.000 0.000 18.217 0.000 0.000 0.000 14.500 66.295 27.935 12.155 57.281 37.345 30.999 1.691 59.000
Other Mill Levies
Town/City Mill Levy 8.956 2.301 0.000 5.094 17.934 4.736 0.000 8.956 0.000 0.000 0.000 5.094 2.301 0.000 0.000
Eagle County 8.499 8.499 8.499 8.499 8.499 8.499 8.499 8.499 8.499 8.499 8.499 8.499 8.499 8.499 8.499
Colorado Moutain College 4.013 4.013 4.013 4.013 4.013 4.013 4.013 4.013 4.013 4.013 4.013 4.013 4.013 4.013 4.013
School District 24.649 24.649 24.649 24.649 24.649 24.649 24.649 24.649 24.649 24.649 24.649 24.649 24.649 24.649 24.649
Colorado River WCD 0.501 0.501 0.501 0.501 0.501 0.501 0.501 0.501 0.501 0.501 0.501 0.501 0.501 0.501 0.501
Eagle County Health Services 2.763 2.763 2.763 2.763 2.763 2.763 2.763 2.763 2.763 2.763 2.763 2.763 2.763 2.763 2.763
Fire District 9.703 11.260 8.576 10.570 9.703 0.000 9.703 9.703 0.000 7.936 8.576 10.570 11.260 8.576 8.576
Water Sanitation 0.759 0.759 0.759 0.759 0.759 0.759 0.759 0.759 0.759 0.759 0.759 0.759 0.759 0.759 0.759
Eagle Valley Library District 2.774 2.774 2.774 2.774 2.774 2.774 2.774 2.774 2.774 2.774 2.774 2.774 2.774 2.774 2.774
Other 0.000 3.132 1.127 3.381 0.285 2.740 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 4.018 3.381 3.133 4.777 4.018
Total Mill Levy 62.617 60.651 71.877 63.003 71.880 51.434 68.161 128.912 71.893 64.049 113.833 100.348 91.651 59.002 115.552
RETT/RETA 2.0%------1.0%1.0%1.0%---2.0%---------1.0%---------
Source: Economic & Planning Systems
42 Peer Community Comparison of Revenues, Budgets and Services and Assessment of Real Estate Cost of Ownership
ATT A: EPS Fiscal Analysis Report
ATTACHMENT B Economic & Planning Systems, Inc.
2. ATT A Avon Economic Base Study Scope Outline.docx 1
Project Purpose
The purpose of this Economic Base study is to document the Town’s economic
base or “economic drivers”. The Town is particularly interested in how or if
tourism has grown and how much tourism and guests (spending) contribute to
jobs and tax revenues. The work will be comprised of three main components
intended to show how the Town’s economy and jobs, land use, and tax revenues
are related to each other.
• Economic trends: This includes an analysis of jobs by industry, trends in jobs,
and sales and lodging tax trends.
• Bed base: The inventory of property used as tourist/visitor accommodations
and overnight (short-term) rentals is a large factor in how many guests visit
the Town. We will document changes/growth over time in the lodging
inventory, and estimate visitors and spending.
• Retail and restaurants: These businesses and land use types enable the Town
to capture the spending (and sales tax) from visitors, residents, and people in
the Eagle River Valley region who shop in Avon. We will strive to inventory the
major retail and restaurant business types and the amount of square feet in
each category.
• Spending inflow/outflow analysis: We will develop an analysis that quantifies
how much retail/restaurant spending potential is generated in the Town, and
how much of that spending is captured in Avon businesses. The spending
comes from residents, guests, and “inflow” (people who shop in Avon and live
elsewhere). This analysis will help us estimate how much of a factor each
demand group is in the Town’s economy, and how the tax revenues that fund
municipal services are related.
Draft Work Plan
Task 1. Kickoff and data collection
• Kickoff meeting with Town staff to discuss details of the work plan.
• Generate a data request from the Town, including sales tax, business licenses,
other relevant land use databases.
• Execute confidentiality agreements for sales tax data sharing. EPS will request
detailed business level sales tax data that EPS will analyze. EPS will ensure
that any information presented publicly does not disclose any individual
business information.
ATTACHMENT B
2
Task 2. Job/Economy Trends
• Compile and analyze job data by industry for the Town and Eagle. We will use
and update data already collected for the Eagle County Housing Needs
Assessment.
• Compile and analyze trends in key tax revenues including property tax, sales
tax, lodging tax, and real estate transfer taxes and fees.
Task 3. Bed base and tourism trends
• Inventory hotels from Town business license data; CoStar (a real estate data
subscription service); land use/parcel records; and other sources TBD.
• Inventory short-term rental properties from Town licensing records and other
sources such as AirDNA.
• Where possible, show trends in the change in the accommodations inventory
over time.
• Document important metrics such as annual occupancy rates and average
daily rental rates.
• Interview 2-3 major property managers for qualitative insight on Avon’s
market position, visitor and seasonal patterns, and strengths and weaknesses.
Task 4. Retail inventory
• Compile and clean data from town records to strive to develop a detailed
inventory or retail/restaurant businesses by major type. This will be subject to
the type and quality of the data available.
• Summarize the inventory and square footage into major categories such as
eating and drinking, comparison shoppers goods, clothing and outdoor
equipment, home improvement, convenience goods (grocery, drugstores,
beer/liquor), etc.
• Estimate retail sales by business category and align sales levels with the
business inventory to estimate sales per square foot, a measure of retail
health.
Task 5. Inflow/Outflow analysis
• Estimate spending from visitors and residents. Collect data and research
needed to estimate guest spending. Create a spending model for residents
using the US Census of Retail Trade.
• Estimate online spending from a literature search and any Town data that may
track non-store/out of Town sales.
• Compare spending levels to sales level category. The difference (sales minus
local spending) is inflow.
ATTACHMENT B Economic & Planning Systems
3
Task 6. Draft and Final Report
• Prepare a reader-friendly report to communicate the major findings.
Emphasize graphic display of data and key concepts.
• Prepare a draft report for Town review, followed by a final revised report. The
final report may follow a Town Council or other body presentation to
incorporate their comments.
Task 7. Presentation
• Present to Town Council or another body (e.g. Revenue Committee). The
budget assumes an in-person presentation.
Budget
The cost is not to exceed $39,910 as shown below. The cost and hours by task
are estimates. EPS may allocate hours and budget across tasks so long as the
total budget does not exceed the total unless the Client authorizes additional
budget.
Description Principal Associate
Research/
Support Total
Billing Rate (2025 rates)$255 $160 $120
Task 1. Kickoff and data collection 2 12 0 $2,430
Task 2. Job/Economy Trends 0 8 8 $2,240
Task 3. Bed base and tourism trends 2 16 16 $4,990
Task 4. Retail inventory 2 24 32 $8,190
Task 5. Inflow/Outflow analysis 6 32 8 $7,610
Task 6. Draft and Final Report 16 24 8 $8,880
Task 7. Presentation 8 12 3 $4,320
Total 36 128 75 $38,660
Expenses
Data acquisition $500
Travel $750
Total Cost $39,910
Source: Economic & Planning Systems
Z:\Shared\Proposals\DEN\243130-Avon Economic Study\[243130 Budget.xlsx]Sheet1
EPS