The URL can be used to link to this page

TC Packet 04-23-2020_______________________________________________________________________________ MEETING AGENDAS AND PACKETS ARE FOUND AT: WWW.AVON.ORG AGENDAS 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 BRENDA TORRES AT 970-748-4001 OR EMAIL BTORRES@AVON.ORG WITH ANY SPECIAL REQUESTS. 1 AVON TOWN COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA THURSDAY, APRIL 23, 2020 MEETING BEGINS AT 5:00 PM (ALL START TIMES LISTED IN RED ARE APPROXIMATE) !! SETUP AS A VIRTUAL MEETING VIA ZOOM DUE TO COVID-19 AND TOWN HALL CLOSURE AVON TOWN COUNCIL R EGULAR MEETING BEGINS AT 5:00 PM 1. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 3. DISCLOSURE OF ANY CONFLICTS OF INTEREST RELATED TO AGENDA ITEMS 4. PUBLIC COMMENT – COMMENTS ARE WELCOME ON ITEMS NOT LISTED ON THE FOLLOWING AGENDA [AN INITIAL THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT ALLOWED TO EACH PERSON WISHING TO SPEAK. SPEAKER MAY REQUEST MORE TIME AT THE END OF THE THREE (3) MINUTES, WHICH MAY BE APPROVED BY A MAJORITY OF THE COUNCIL.] 5. BUSINESS ITEMS 5.1. REVIEW OF GLENNA GOODACRE’S BRONZE ART IN AVON (CASE MANAGER DANITA DEMPSEY) (10 MINUTES) 5:10 5.2. RESOLUTION TO AWARDING AVON COMMUNITY EMERGENCY RELIEF GRANTS IN RESPONSE TO COVID-19 PANDEMIC (COMMUNICATIONS MANAGER ELIZABETH WOOD) (20 MINUTES) 5:20 5.3. DISCUSSION OF AVON BUSINESS RELIEF (TOWN MANAGER ERIC HEIL) (30 MINUTES) 5:40 5.4. RESOLUTION 20-11 – WALKING MOUNTAINS SCIENCE CENTER COMMUNITY HOUSING – WAIVER OF TAXES AND FEES (TOWN ATTORNEY PAUL WISOR) (20 MINUTES) 6:10 5.5. DISCUSSION OF CULTURE, ARTS AND SPECIAL EVENTS COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS (CASE MANAGER DANITA DEMPSEY) (20 MINUTES) 6:30 5.6. DISCUSSION ON COUNCIL SUPPORT FOR LWCF FUNDING SIGN-ON LETTER (EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT TO THE TOWN MANAGER INEKE DE JONG) (10 MINUTES) 6:50 5.7. DISCUSSION ON REUSABLE GROCERY SHOPPING BAGS AND RISK OF SPREADING COVID-19 (TOWN MANAGER ERIC HEIL) (30 MINUTES) 7:00 5.8. APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM APRIL 14, 2020 REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING (TOWN CLERK BRENDA TORRES) (5 MINUTES) 7 :3 0 6. WRITTEN R EPORTS 6.1. UPPER EAGLE REGIONAL WATER AUTHORITY MARCH 26, 2020 MEETING SUMMARY (MAYOR SMITH HYMES) 7. MAYOR & COUNCIL COMMENTS & MEETING UPDATES (10 MINUTES) 7:35 8. ADJOURN 7:45 ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ *Public Comments: Council agendas shall include a general item labeled “Public Comment” near the beginning of all Council meetings. Members of the public who wish to provide comments to Council greater than three minutes are encouraged to schedule time in advance on the agenda and to provide written comments and other appropriate materials to the Council in advance of the Council meeting. The Mayor shall permit public comments for any action item or work session item and may permit public comment for any other agenda item, and may limit such public comment to three minutes per individual, which limitation may be waived or increased by a majority of the quorum present. Article VI. Public Comments, Avon Town Council Simplified Rules of Order, Adopted by Resolution No. 17-05. _______________________________________________________________________________ MEETING AGENDAS AND PACKETS ARE FOUND AT: WWW.AVON.ORG AGENDAS 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 BRENDA TORRES AT 970-748-4001 OR EMAIL BTORRES@AVON.ORG WITH ANY SPECIAL REQUESTS. 2 FUTURE COUNCIL MEETINGS o THURSDAY, APRIL 23 o TUESDAY, APRIL 28 o TUESDAY, MAY 12 o TUESDAY, MAY 26 Honoring Glenna Goodacre August 28, 1939 – April 13, 2020 Easily accessible from Intertate-70 and Highway 6Recreation on the Eagle River Ollie FamilyCEO Sidewalk Society Masterfully created by renowned artist and sculptor Glenna Goodacre. Avon’s collection includes five bronze sculptures together titled Sidewalk Society in 1992. ●Skateboarder a.k.a. Ollie ●CEO -Glenna’s daughter was the model for this work! ●Family ●Dance Day ●Contract Worker & Architect Dance Day Contractor Worker & Architect Avon Snapshot •Located in heart of the Vail Valley •Eagle River runs through Town •Easy access to I-70 and Hwy 6 which both run through Town •Abundant outdoor recreation •Pedestrian friendly Glenna Goodacre Glenna’s other works proudly displayed in Avon include: ●Pledge of Allegiance –friends of Glenna’s brought their children for models! ●Basket Dance –the most important of three harvest ceremonies the dance ritual is performed in the Pueblos by women ●Sacagawea & Jean Baptiste –daughter of a Shoshone Chief who helped the Lewis & Clarke Expeditions and her son Jean ●Spotted Tail –the last Chief of the Brule Lakota Tribe who negotiated treaties with three Presidents Basket DancePledge of Allegiance Sacagawea & Jean Baptiste Spotted Tail Thank you Glenna! Matt Suhre Photography (970) 748-4087 ewood@avon.org TO: Honorable Mayor Smith Hymes and Council members FROM: Elizabeth Wood, Communications & Marketing Manager RE: Community Relief Grants DATE: April 20, 2020 SUMMARY: Eagle County has allocated over $1.5 million to help the county and community respond to and recover from the COVID-19 outbreak. The commissioners have earmarked $250,000 to fund community partners, including the Salvation Army, Eagle Valley Community Foundation and several other nonprofit organizations. An additional $900,000 has been made available for Eagle County Disaster Emergency Assistance, helping residents with food and shelter assistance. That funding is currently only available to cover April expenses. A total of $502,803 has been distributed, with over $120,000 going to Avon residents—approximately 24%. The Swift Eagle Charitable Foundation, Catholic Charities and Salvation Army are all currently cooperating with Eagle County by sending all applications for relief to the County first so that they can assess what programs people might qualify for on the county level, including food assistance, Colorado Works Disaster Program and/or emergency assistance. After this initial assessment, the County refers individuals to the three nonprofits for further assistance. Thus far, Eagle County has received over 3,000 applications for Disaster Emergency Assistance. Of those applications, more than 550 have been approved at approximately $900 per application. Nearly 900 applicants have been referred to nonprofit organizations for additional support. BACKGROUND: On April 9, 2020, Council approved $250,000 in Community Relief Grant funding to aid the response to COVID-19 in Avon. Council agreed to fund a formal request from the Eagle Valley Community Foundation for $100,000 to support hunger relief efforts through The Community Market, which includes three “Pop Up Markets” in vulnerable Avon neighborhoods. An initial $50,000 payment has been initiated, with the remainder of the funding due later in the summer. Council agreed to fund an additional $50,000 in meal vouchers to Avon restaurants. The 2,000 vouchers have been distributed to residents of Eaglebend, Buffalo Ridge, the Aspens, and Kayak Crossing, as well as residents of the old Avon firehouse, and essential employees who are still working. A committee of Town staff and local community leaders was established to distribute the remainder of the funding with applications to be reviewed and funded on a rolling basis. The Community Relief Fund application was posted on Friday, April 10th and organizations were notified through a press release. The application is eligible to 501(c)(3) nonprofit organizations and asks for a detailed description of the program or service for which funding is being requested. Applicants are asked how many Avon residents will directly benefit from the program, in addition to how they will measure and report on the success of the program. The committee met for the first time on Thursday, April 16th to review applications from Swift Eagle Charitable Foundation ($25,000 request), Catholic Charities ($10,000 request), and the Salvation Army ($100,000 request). The priorities of the committee were to provide relief funding to Avon residen ts in the areas of shelter, food and utility assistance regardless of their immigration status. After reviewing the applications, the committee felt that the greatest impact would come from funding the Salvation Army’s $100,000 funding request. The Salvation Army provided a 2020 COVID-19 Emergency Response Budget that estimated a need of $125,000 in food and rental assistance over the next two Page 2 of 2 months. The estimated impact is 400 families, or 3,200 Avon residents. Additionally, the Salvation Army can track the number of clients residing in Avon through verbal, in-person confirmation when they receive food, and through lease paperwork when rental assistance is provided. A letter of agreement has been prepared to fund the Salvation Army’s $100,000 Community Relief Grant request. They will be required to submit a final report before the end of 2020 outlining the revenues and expenditures of the program, as well as how many Avon residents and families were directly impacted. Since the initial application review on April 16th, an additional application has been received from the Vail Valley Charitable Foundation requesting $25,000 and from the Vail Valley Soccer Club requesting $10,000. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approving Resolution 20-10, Concerning the Allocation of COVID-19 Grant Funding. PROPOSED MOTION: Motion to approve Resolution 20-10, Concerning the Allocation of COVID-19 Grant Funding. Thank you, Elizabeth Wood ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A: Resolution 20-10 Res 20-10 Allocation of COVD-19 Grant Funding Page 1 of 4 TOWN OF AVON RESOLUTION 20-10 CONCERNING THE ALLOCATION OF COVID-19 GRANT FUNDING WHEREAS, COVID-19 is a highly contagious virus that has spread throughout the United States, including the Town of Avon, Colorado (the “Town”); and WHEREAS, COVID-19 may cause serious illness and death, especially with respect to elderly persons or those with underlying health conditions; and WHEREAS, on January 30, 2020, the World Health Organization declared the worldwide outbreak of COVID-19 a public health emergency of international concern; and WHEREAS, on January 31, 2020, the United States Department of Health and Human Services declared COVID-19 a public health emergency; and WHEREAS, on March 6, 2020, Eagle County declared a local disaster; and WHEREAS, on March 10, 2020, in response to the spread of COVID-19, Governor Polis declared a state of emergency; and WHEREAS, on March 19, 2020, the Avon Town Manager declared a local disaster emergency, and Town Council extended such declaration on March 24, 2020; and WHEREAS, on March 25, 2020 Governor Polis issued Executive Order D 2020 017 wherein he ordered Coloradoans to stay at home due to the presence of COVID -19 in the state, subject to certain limited exceptions; and WHEREAS, since March 25, 2020 the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, has issued several Orders directed at the current coronavirus (COVID-19) public health emergency. Included within such Orders are provisions, with certain stated exceptions, requiring that: (i) all individuals currently living with the State of Colorado must stay at home whenever possible; (ii) individuals must comply with social distancing requirements; (iii) all public and private gatherings of any number of people occurring outside of a residence are prohibited; and (iv) travel by automobile or public transit is prohibited, except necessary travel as defined in the orders; and WHEREAS, although some of the governmental orders described above may have been updated since they were issued, the critical substantive provisions of such orders remain in effect as of the date of the adoption of this resolution; and Res 20-10 Allocation of COVD-19 Grant Funding Page 2 of 4 WHEREAS, the cumulative effect of the orders has been to effectively shut down most businesses, and the return of the tourist economy in the near term is in doubt; and WHEREAS, the Avon economy is largely tourist-based, and it is essential to both the short term and long term economic vitality of the Town that workers and small businesses receive financial and other means of support while businesses are closed; and WHEREAS, a loss of workers and businesses would have a devastating effect on the Avon economy as well as the Town’s financial and other resources; and WHEREAS, at its April 16, 2020 meeting, Town Council determined it was in the best interest of the Town to provide grants to certain organizations supporting local residents in need to due to the COVID-19 pandemic (the “Grant Program”), and directed the Town Manager and staff to form a committee (the “Committee”) to identify organizations supporting local residents in need due to the COVID-19 pandemic and to propose funding levels for such organizations. WHEREAS, the Committee has met and determined the Vail Valley Salvation Army and the Eagle Valley Community Foundation are, respectively, supporting Avon residents in need due to the COVID-19 pandemic, and both organizations are in need of additional financial support; and WHEREAS, in order to provide financial support to individual members of the Avon community as well as financial support to the Avon business community, the Committee has met and determined it is in the best interest of the Town and the Avon business communities to provide meal vouchers to certain Town employees as well as residents who may face food insecurity, with such vouchers being redeemable at Avon restaurants providing takeout service; and WHEREAS, the Committee has recommended allocating $100,000 to the Vail Valley Salvation Army; and WHEREAS, the Committee has recommended allocating $100,000 to the Eagle Valley Community Foundation; and WHEREAS, the Committee has recommended allocating $50,000 to provide meal vouchers to certain Town employees and Avon residents, which vouchers are redeemable at Avon restaurants currently providing takeout service; and WHEREAS, it is necessary and appropriate for the Town Council to adopt this resolution memorializing and confirming in all respects the establishment of the Grant Program and Committee, and ratifying and confirming all actions taken by the Town Manager and his staff in Res 20-10 Allocation of COVD-19 Grant Funding Page 3 of 4 establishing the Committee and its effort to identify qualified grant recipients, as directed by the Town Council. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF AVON, COLORADO: Section 1. The Town Council finds, determines, and declares that the Committee and the Grant Program has served and will continue to serve the following public purposes: A. Providing immediate critical financial resources to the non-profit organizations that provide needed support to the Avon community and have been impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. B. Providing immediate and critical financial resources to individuals, families and workers who contribute to the Avon community and economy and who have been impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. C. Enhancing the likelihood the individuals who comprise the Avon workforce will remain in Avon, thereby protecting and preserving the short term and long term economic vitality of Avon, and the financial health of the Town. Section 2. The Town Council further finds, determines, and declares that the public benefits to be derived from the Committee and the Grant Program are both significant and substantial, and justify the expenditure of the public funds necessary to establish and administer the Grant Program. The Town Council further finds, determines, and declares that the Town will receive adequate consideration for its financial contribution to the Grant Program in the form of the significant and substantial public benefits described above. Section 3. For the reasons set forth above, the Town Council finds, determines, and declares that Program will provide a public benefit and further a public purpose within the meaning of Article 11, Section 2 of the Colorado Constitution. Section 4. The Town Council hereby ratifies and adopts the actions of the Town Manager and the Committee and hereby directs the Committee to award grants to the Vail Valley Salvation Army and the Eagle Valley Community Foundation in the amounts of $100,000 and $100,000, respectively, and to establish a meal voucher program for certain Town employees and Avon residents in the amount of $50,000. Res 20-10 Allocation of COVD-19 Grant Funding Page 4 of 4 ADOPTED this 23rd day of April 2020. AVON TOWN COUNCIL By: _______________________________ Sarah Smith-Hymes, Mayor Attest: ________________________________ Brenda Torres, Town Clerk 970.748.4004 eric@avon.org TO: Honorable Mayor Smith Hymes and Council FROM: Eric Heil, Town Manager RE: Business Relief Programs DATE: April 21, 2020 SUMMARY: This report provides an overview of local business relief efforts that other communities in Colorado have adopted. Avon Town Council took action to approve $250,000 for Community Relief funds at the April 14th Council meeting. Community Relief funds have been set-up for non-profits. In addition, the Town of Avon implemented a meal voucher program whereby approximately 2,400 meal vouchers have been distributed to households with need and the meal vouchers are valid at participating Avon restaurants. A summary of Mountain Town COVID-19 Programs & Actions from Colorado Association of Ski Towns is attached to this report. STAY-AT-HOME ORDER: Governor Polis announced on Monday, April 20, 2020, that he would allow the current Stay-at-Home order to expire on April 27 and would allow non-essential businesses to re-open between April 28 and May 4, with restaurants potentially in mid-May and with bars, concert venues, sporting events, etc. probably not allowed for at least several more months. Nearly all businesses in Avon may be permitted to reopen by mid-May; however, a substantial decline in visitors is expected during the summer and fall season this year. SALES TAX DEFERRAL: Avon, Crested Butte, Telluride and Vail have all taken action to extend payment due dates for sales taxes. Avon extended the due date until June 20th. Crested Butte extended February payments until April, Vail extended until August and Telluride extended until September. BUSINESS RELIEF PROGRAMS: Breckenridge, Frisco and Silverthorne have each established business relief programs. Breckenridge provided $1M for rent support (requires landlord to also provide rent relief). The Breckenridge program was administered by their planning department. Frisco provided $500,000 for independently-owned businesses up to $5,000 per business. Frisco received over 100 applications in less than 2 days. Frisco had a team of 5 employees to review applications and award funds. Silverthorne provided $350,000 to assist with payroll, rent or mortgage, utilities and supplies. Short term rental owners and corporate-owned businesses are not eligible. Silverthorne set-up an on-line application using Laserfiche with a one week window and received 90 applications. The program was administered by the Silverthorne Finance Department. The City of Arvada is offering $2.5 million in loans for local small businesses. The City of Louisville and the Louisville Urban Renewal Authority are offering a total of $350,000 for small business relief grants up to $5,000 per business. AVON PROGRAM: If Town Council desired to offer a business relief program, the following details are suggested for consideration: • Limit eligibility to Avon based small businesses. Define “small business” by number of employees and/or square footage of business. • Limit grants to $5,000 per business. Page 2 of 2 • Limit grants to only businesses that are either (1) not eligible to apply for federal assistance, or (2) have applied for federal assistance but have been denied. • Limit the window for submitting grant applications to one week. • Consider providing no interest loans rather than grants. AVON SMALL BUSINESS RELIEF FUNDING: Avon could consider funding a small business relief program from its General Fund (i.e. reserves), from the Real Estate Transfer Tax Fund by an emergency vote of Council, and from the Avon Urban Renewal Authority. ADMINISTRATION: Small Business Relief Applications would be processed by Staff in General Government. If Council is interested in proceeding Staff can establish grant (or loan) applications similar to Frisco and Silverthorne. FUNDING AMOUNT: It is difficult to offer a suggested amount based on circumstances, especially with the Governor’s decision on Monday to reopen businesses in the near term. If Council desired to appropriate $250,000 for Small Business Relief that would allow 50 grants (or loans) of $5,000 each. The $250,000 could come from a combination of the General Fund, Real Estate Transfer Tax fund and the Avon Urban Renewal Authority. NOTE that Avon Urban Renewal Authority funds could only be used for businesses situated with the Avon Urban Renewal Authority plan area (generally west of Avon Road). FEDERAL SMALL BUSINESS RELIEF: US Congress is currently considering a replenished Small Business Relief Program in the amount of $500 billion. Unemployment benefits for gig workers, self- employed and independent contractors are available starting this week. REQUESTED ACTION: Staff requests direction on whether to proceed with an Avon Small Business Relief program, gather more information, or defer action at this time. Thank you, Eric ATTACHMENTS: Mountain Town COVID-19 Programs & Actions Mountain Town COVID-19 Programs & Actions This is not an exhaustive list of CAST Member emergency relief efforts but rather a sampling of programs/orders. Send a summary of your local program, especially if it is unique, and it will be added to this document. Business Assistance Breckenridge: $1 million for the Small Business Relief Program to provide immediate rent support for the Town’s entrepreneurial small businesses. Intended to be a bridge grant allowing the business tenant to get through the next 30 days while other relief options are pursued. Funds will be distributed electronically to qualifying applicants’ landlord as a direct deposit. No checks can be issued. Details here. Frisco: $500,000 for the Business Assistance Program to help independently-owned businesses bridge the gap in funding while waiting for Federal and State assistance by providing immediate funds to pay for essential business-related expenses such as rent or mortgage payments, utilities, payroll, and other business expenses. Grant amounts of up to $5,000/business determined based on and not to exceed a business’s monthly rent or mortgage payment. In the event a business has no landlord and no mortgage, the maximum amount of any grant under this program shall be a reasonable estimate of the amount of rent that the business would pay for its space under prevailing market rents. Checks distributed by appointment. Details here. Silverthorne: Provided $350,000 to fund Sustain Silverthorne Business Emergency Relief Grant (SSBERG) to assist independently-owned businesses that have been closed or severely impacted. Intended for retailers and service providers to pay for essential business-related expenses like payroll, rent or mortgages, utilities and supplies. Short term rental owners and corporate-owned businesses were not eligible. Resident/Nonprofit Assistance Frisco: Residential Rental Assistance Program to support individuals working or living in Frisco. This $250,000 program will offer rent relief for qualifying individuals through the Family and Intercultural Resource Center (FIRC). Grants are up to $1,500 and may not exceed the amount equal to the individual’s monthly rent payment or their share of the monthly rent payment if they reside with others. Individuals contact FIRC to complete a needs assessment then FIRC contacts landlords. Details here. (Breckenridge, Dillon, Silverthorne and Summit County are also contributing to this program, at varying levels.) ATTACHMENT A: CAST COVID-19 Relief Survey Telluride: Up to one month’s rent forgiveness for all renters in Town-owned deed-restricted housing. Vail: Rent relief for residents of town-owned apartment complexes, home to about 500 year-round residents, to defer April rent until end of lease term, then reduce rent by 50% during the months of May and June. Vail: Vail Community Relief Fund is $500,000 toward food security, housing and health related needs. Fund is open to nonprofit 501c3 organizations that serve Eagle County residents. Details here. Estes Park: Allocated $250,000 in community relief funds to help fill critical needs in the form of food, housing and business/organizational support. Details here. Vail: Paying all municipal employees through the end of April regardless of if they can work remotely or not. Sales Tax Collection Deferral Vail: Extended payment due dates for sales tax returns. Beginning with February 2020 sales tax collections that were due in March, due dates for payment have been extended to August 2020. Returns must still be filed by their regular due date but need not be accompanied by a payment of the tax. Crested Butte: Deferring due date on unpaid February taxes until April 2020 for Town of Crested Butte sales tax only. Tax forms will still be due. If February taxes were already filed/paid, reimbursement is available. Avon: Deferral of sales tax collection until mid-June. Telluride: Relief from paying sales taxes for the months of March and April until businesses can get back on their feet, or until September 30, 2020. Penalties and interest for unpaid sales taxes waived for this period. They still have to report sales and taxes collected. Visitors/Second Homeowners Gunnison County: A public health order in Gunnison County prohibits all visitors, including non-resident homeowners from remaining in the county for the duration of the order. Click here for the full order. Summit County: All lodging businesses, including hotels, motels, timeshares and short-term rentals were required to close per a March 27, 020 Public Health Order. In effect through April 30, 2020, but subject to change. Failure to comply is subject to penalties including fines up to $5,000, up to 18 months of jail time, and revocation of the short term rental permit. The STR Complaint Hotline can be used to report violations. Telluride: Strengthened prohibition against short-term rentals through beefed up notification, and added that any owner and/or property management company caught renting short-term during the period of the emergency can result in the permanent loss of their business license. Redefined “Visitor” as someone not permanently residing in County. This allows people to still move within the county, including short-term rental, to facilitate a move during the stay-at-home period. Also redefined "short- term" as up to 90 days, again only during the restricted period, to prevent people from renting to "shelter-in-place" out-of-county people. ATTACHMENT A: CAST COVID-19 Relief Survey And from a non-CAST mountain town - Mammoth Lakes, CA set up a highway checkpoint to turn away tourists. “… the story isn’t really a road checkpoint,” Dr. Boo, Mono County’s public health officer wrote in a recent email. “It’s about a little mountain town and its little hospital on the verge of getting crushed.” Other Resources Summit County: Developed a chart to compare local orders to the Governor's orders to assist individuals and businesses in determining which provisions from each order apply to them. Estes Park: The broadband utility, Trailblazer Broadband is offering free WiFi zones, understanding that some in the community have little or no internet access. Regarding electric and water utilities, they are not shutting off accounts or assessing late penalties at this time and are working with individuals and businesses to establish payment plans if necessary. Estes Park: The Accelerated Recovery Team (ART) is one of four Town-led teams working on COVID-19 recovery. ART is focused on planning for a quick recovery after the end of physical distancing orders implemented by the State and County. The group is focused on sharing resources with each other and the business community; and strategizing specific ways to support a faster and more robust economic recovery. Members of the ART include: Town of Estes Park, Estes Park Economic Development Corporation (EDC), Estes Park Chamber of Commerce, Visit Estes Park, Rocky Mountain National Park, YMCA of the Rockies and the Estes Valley Area Lodging Association. Details here. Telluride: Exploring a Town-operated fund to help out least fortunate citizens who may not be in deed- restricted housing. Funded in part by a $25,000 Town donation out of General Operating Funds (mostly reduced training and travel), and encouraging donations from citizens who can afford to contribute. This came from a local couple who are donating their shares of the Federal payments to individuals. ATTACHMENT A: CAST COVID-19 Relief Survey 970-748-4413 mpielsticker@avon.org 970-300-4373 pwisor@garfieldhecht.com TO: Honorable Mayor Smith Hymes and Councilmembers FROM: Matt Pielsticker, Planning Director; Paul Wisor, Town Attorney RE: Resolution 20-11 – Walking Mountains Fee Waiver DATE: April 23, 2020 SUMMARY: Pursuant to Section 3.14 of the Avon Municipal Code (the “AMC”), the Town Council is authorized to waive certain taxes and fees to be imposed and assessed in connection with the construction of a Community Housing project, provided a deed restriction is placed on the benefitted project. The Walking Mountain Science Center has requested a waiver of certain fees and agreed to the deed restriction included in Resolution 20-11 as “Exhibit A.” BACKGROUND The Walking Mountains Science Center is a 501(c)(3) non-profit that provides scientific educational programs, including many youth programs, to members of the Avon and Eagle River Valley communities. In order to deliver its educational programming, the Walking Mountain Science Center employs graduate students and naturalists who live in Avon or Eagle County on a year round basis. With meaningful housing opportunities scarce in Avon and throughout the Valley, Walking Mountains Science Center intends to construct two Community Housing buildings in order to attract and retain these employees. Each building will contain six (6) dormitory style bedrooms to be used by its employees (the “Community Housing Project”). The community Housing Project will be located on Lot 2 of Walking Mountains Science Center’s campus (as depicted on Exhibit A of the Resolution). On April 3, 2020, the Walking Mountains Science Center submitted a fee waiver request explaining certain increases of construction cost and requesting a waiver of sales tax on construction materials, and a waiver and refund of building permit fees to defray portions of the increases in construction costs for its Community Housings Project. As noted above, Section 3.14 of the AMC permits Town Council to waive certain taxes and fees associated with a Community Housing Project, including sales taxes and building permit fees. Walking Mountains Science Center has paid building permit fees in the amount of $21,498.50 in connection with the Community Housing Project, and these fees would be refunded if the waiver were granted. It should be noted that in its request the Walking Mountain Science Center suggested a “buy back option” in the deed restriction. Such an option would allow the Walking Mountains Science Center to pay the Town a certain amount of money in the future to lift the covenant requiring the housing be used by Eagle County Employees. Staff rejected this proposal, but raises it here for Town Council’s consideration. PROPOSED RESOLUTION: Resolution 20-11 would waive sales tax applicable to the Community Housing Project, which waiver shall only apply to the purchase of construction materials and fixtures delivered to the Community Housing Project. All such purchases must be made on or before December 31, 2021 to qualify for the waiver. The waiver of sales tax will not exceed $25,000. Resolution 20-11 will also waive and refund building permit fees already collected in connection with the Community Housing Project in the amount of $21,498.50. FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS: In granting the waiver and refund, the Town will forego approximately $46,498.50. In exchange, the deed restriction assures twelve additional housing opportunities for Eagle County Employees. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of Resolution 20-11. Page 2 of 2 PROPOSED MOTION: “I move to approve Resolution 20-11, thereby authorizing the waiver of sales tax applicable to the Walking Mountains Science Center Community Housing Project and the waiver and refund of the Building Permit fee applicable to such project.” Thank you, Matt and Paul ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A – Resolution 20-11 Page 1 of 12 Town of Avon – Walking Mountains Resident Occupied Community Housing Deed Restriction TOWN OF AVON - RESIDENT OCCUPIED COMMUNITY HOUSING DEED RESTRICTION WALKING MOUNTAINS NON-PRICE CAPPED THIS DEED RESTRICTION (“Deed Restriction”) is made and executed on ___________________________________, 2020 by Walking Mountains, a Colorado nonprofit corporation (“Declarant”), for the benefit of the Town of Avon, a Colorado home rule municipality (“Town”). WHEREAS, the Declarant is a Colorado nonprofit organization providing region-wide environmental science education in the Eagle River Valley for K-12 students as well as opportunities to involve families and adults in the natural world; and WHEREAS, the Declarant provides year-round programing at the Walking Mountains campus located in Avon, Colorado (“Campus”); and WHEREAS, pursuant to Chapter 3.14 of the Avon Municipal Code (the “AMC”), Council may, in its sole discretion, elect to promote Community Housing through the use of Community Housing Incentives (as defined in the AMC), including the credit, exemption or waiver of taxes and/or fees which are otherwise applicable to residential development; and WHEREAS, under the AMC Community Housing means residential housing which is subject to a deed restriction that limits use to long-term residential use as a primary residence by qualified persons and which deed restriction may impose other restrictions and limitations and may include terms deemed appropriate in the Council's sole discretion, including but not limited to controls on the resale price of such residential property, and which deed restriction is enforceable by the Town; and WHEREAS, the value of any Community Housing Incentive approved by Council shall be less than or reasonably commensurate with the value of the proposed Community Housing, which shall be determined in Council's sole discretion; WHEREAS, the Declarant is constructing a Community Housing building containing six (6) bedrooms on that certain property owned by Declarant as described in Section 1 below and defined the “Property” in Section 1; WHEREAS, Declarant has requested certain Community Housing Incentives with respect to its construction of the Property from the Town in exchange for a deed restriction to be placed on the Property; and WHEREAS, Declarant and Town desire to enter into this Deed Restriction with respect to the Property. NOW, THEREFORE, for value received and in consideration of mutual promises Declarant does hereby declare and impose the following covenants on the Property (defined below), which Page 2 of 12 Town of Avon – Walking Mountains Resident Occupied Community Housing Deed Restriction covenants shall burden and run with the Property in perpetuity for the benefit of the Town until modified or released by the Town. COVENANTS 1. Property. The following real property is hereby burdened with the covenants and restrictions specified in this Deed Restriction: SEE EXHIBIT A ATTACHED HERETO AND INCORPORATED HEREIN (“Property”). The Town shall record this Deed Restriction against the Property at Declarant’s expense. The parties acknowledge and agree the Property is located on Lot 2A, Filing 3, Buck Creek Subdivision, as further described on Exhibit A (“Lot 2A”) but that Lot 2A currently consists of three building sites, as follows: (a) the Property (depicted as “Bldg. 1” on Exhibit A), (b) that Community Housing building located adjacent to the Property (depicted as “Bldg. 2” on Exhibit A) on which a separate and independent Deed Restriction is being recorded contemporaneously with the recording of this Deed Restriction (the “Adjacent Community Housing Site”), and (c) a building site located on the south end of Lot 2A (depicted as “Bldg. 3” on Exhibit A) that is currently undeveloped and on which no restriction is being placed (the “Undeveloped Site”). The parties agree that the recording of this Deed Restriction shall bind and burden the Property only and shall not in any manner be deemed to burden or restrict the Adjacent Community Housing Site, the Undeveloped Site or any other portion of Lot 2A (e.g., the area comprising the current parking lot serving the Campus). Declarant reserves the right at any time or from time to time to subdivide Lot 2A into separate parcels, including, without limitation, into parcels comprising the Property, the Adjacent Community Housing Site, the Undeveloped Site and the parking lot area, subject to applicable requirements of the AMC, and in such event this Deed Restriction shall attach and bind the subdivided parcel comprising the Property only, and the subdivided parcel(s) comprising any areas outside of the Property shall be deemed automatically and fully released from the terms of this Deed Restriction. The Town agrees to execute and deliver to Declarant in recordable form any reasonable document or instrument confirming or evidencing such release and discharge of the Adjacent Community Housing Site and the Undeveloped Site. 2. Definitions. The following definitions shall apply to terms used in the Deed Restriction: a. Eagle County Employee means: i. an employee of the Declarant; or ii. an employee working in Eagle County who works an average of at least thirty-two (32) hours per week for at least eight (8) months in each calendar year or earns seventy-five percent (75%) of his or her income and earnings by working in Eagle County; or a retired individual, sixty (60) years or older, who has worked a minimum of five (5) years in Eagle County for an average of at least thirty-two (32) hours per week for at least eight (8) months in each calendar year ; or a person who derives income from self - employment whose business is situated in Eagle County; or a person who works for an employer outside Eagle County if that person can demonstrate that such residence is the primary residence for that person. Page 3 of 12 Town of Avon – Walking Mountains Resident Occupied Community Housing Deed Restriction b. Owner means the Owner of the Property and may include either a Qualified Owner or Non- Qualified Owner, as the context requires. i. Qualified Owner means (1) a natural person who is an Eagle County Employee; or (2) an owner of a business, business entity or organization (including for profit, non-profit, public and governmental entities) with operations located within the boundaries of Eagle County who intends to rent or provide rent-free the Property to an employee (or employees) who is an Eagle County Employee, and in each case who possesses an ownership interest in the Property in compliance with the terms and provisions of this Deed Restriction and whose qualifications to own the Property have been certified by the Town at the time the Owner takes title to the Property. ii. Non-Qualified Owner means any person who does not meet the definition of Qualified Owner including persons who originally qualified as a Qualified Owner but whose circumstances change and who no longer meet the definition of Qualified Owner. c. Primary Residence means the occupation and use of a residence as the primary residence, which shall be determined by the Town Manager by taking into account the following circumstances: voter registration in Avon, Colorado (or signing an affidavit stating that the applicant is not registered to vote in any other place); stated address on Colorado driver’s license or Colorado identification card; stated address on motor vehicle registration; ownership or use of other residences not situated in Avon, Colorado; stated residence for income and tax purposes; an employee of the Declarant; and such other circumstances as well as such processes for verification and investigation deemed appropriate by the Town Manager to determine that the applicant is continuously occupying and using the residence as a primary residence. Primary residence status may be maintained if unforeseen circumstances arise that requires the resident Eagle County Employee to temporarily leave the residence for a period not to exceed nine (9) months with the intent to return, and the residence is leased to another Eagle County Employee(s) after receiving written approval from the Town Manager. d. Short Term Rental shall mean the rental or lease of the Property for a period of time that is fewer than thirty (30) days. e. Town shall include employees of the Town of Avon or subcontractors retained by the Town who are tasked with enforcing Deed Restriction agreements. 3. Ownership and Use of the Property. a. Ownership. Ownership of the Property shall be limited to a Qualified Owner (who may take title with such Qualified Owner’s spouse or civil union partner [if the Qualified Owner is a natural person who is an Eagle County Employee] and/or with a co-signor if the co- signor is signing for the sole purpose of facilitating the financing qualifications of the Qualified Owner and signs an affidavit that the co-signor is not a co-purchaser for investment or resale purposes). Page 4 of 12 Town of Avon – Walking Mountains Resident Occupied Community Housing Deed Restriction b. Occupancy and Use. Occupancy and use of the Property shall be limited to one or more Eagle County Employees for occupancy and use as a Primary Residence. Permitted occupancy and use shall include immediate family members of such Eagle County Employee or Employees and temporary invitees who do not provide compensation for temporary residence at the Property. Any lease of the Property by the Owner shall be to an Eagle County Employee or Employees for use as a Primary Residence for periods of thirty (30) days or longer. Use or lease of the Property for Short Term Rental is prohibited. Any use or lease of the Property which is not allowed or is prohibited by this Deed Restriction shall constitute a default and shall be subject to the enforcement provisions and remedies contained in this Deed Restriction. c. It shall not be deemed a violation of Sections 3.a or b. above if i. The resident Eagle County Employee becomes disabled and is no longer able to work as determined by the Town in its sole exclusive discretion; or ii. The resident Eagle County Employee has lost full-time employment and is actively seeking reemployment, not to exceed ninety (90) days after loss of employment; or iii. The Property is unoccupied and the Owner of the Property is actively seeking to sell or lease the Property to an Eagle County Employee, provided that the period of vacancy of the Property shall not exceed twelve (12) months. d. Owner covenants that the Owner shall not permit any occupancy, use or lease of the Property in violation of this Section 3. e. Owner covenants that any lease of the Property shall include a reference that such lease is subject to the terms and conditions of this Deed Restriction, including but not limited to restrictions on the use and occupancy of the Property and cooperation on providing required documentation for verification of Eagle County Employee and Primary Residence status. f. The Owner of the Property shall submit to the Town an annual certification setting forth evidence establishing that the Property’s occupancy and use complies with this Deed Restriction on a form provided by the Town. The Town shall provide a written request with at least thirty (30) days’ notice for verification of occupancy, which notice shall be sent to the address of record of the Owner according to the Eagle County Assessor’s Office. 4. Re-Sale Controls. Unless the Property is sold or otherwise transferred in connection with the sale or transfer to a Qualified Owner, the Property may not be sold or otherwise transferred. The Property may be sold or transferred only to a Qualified Owner in accordance with the procedures for prior verification contained in this Section 4, which Qualified Owner could be a purchaser or transferee of the entire Campus but is not obligated to be. Page 5 of 12 Town of Avon – Walking Mountains Resident Occupied Community Housing Deed Restriction a. Owner shall deliver to the Town a written notice of intent to sell the Property which notice shall include the name(s) of the buyer(s) and all information required to determine whether the buyer(s) meets the definition of Qualified Owner. b. Buyer(s) shall submit an administrative fee in the amount of TWO HUNDRED AND FIFTY DOLLARS ($250.00) to the Town to pay for the cost of reviewing and rendering a determination as to whether a prospective buyer(s) meets the definition of a Qualified Owner. The administrative fee may be increased by the Town Council over time by an amount equal to annual increases in the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers for the Denver-Aurora-Lakewood, Colo., metropolitan area as defined by the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics (or such other Consumer Price Index as may be adopted by the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics for Colorado) to cover the Town’s costs associated with processing the application. c. Once the Town has received complete information concerning the prospective buyers(s) and has received the administrative fee, the Town shall review the information and make a written determination as to whether the buyer(s) meets the definition of a Qualified Owner within a reasonable time and not to exceed thirty (30) days. d. The Town may require the buyer to reimburse the Town for any additional costs that are incurred in the review and determination of whether a buyer(s) meets the definition of a Qualified Owner, including but not limited to legal costs, title review costs, and investigation costs if reasonably required by the Town to complete its investigation. e. The Owner may sell and convey the Property to the buyer(s) that is determined in writing by the Town to be a Qualified Owner. 5. Default by Owner. If the Town has reasonable cause to believe that the occupancy or use of the Property is in violation of any provision of this Deed Restriction, the Town may inspect the Property between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, after providing the Owner and occupants with at least 24 hours written notice. Notice to the occupants may be given by posting notice on the door to the Property. This Deed Restriction shall constitute permission to enter the Property during such times upon such notice. A default by Owner shall include breach of the covenants set forth in this Deed Restriction, including without limitation any of the following: a. Transfer or conveyance of the Property to a person or entity that is not a Qualified Owner. b. Acceptance of the Property by a person or entity that is not a Qualified Owner. c. Transfer or conveyance of the Property to a person who is a Qualified Owner prior to obtaining certification from the Town that such person is a Qualified Owner. d. Any ownership, use or occupancy of the Property in violation of Section 3 above, including, without limitation, any lease of the Property to a person or entity that is not an Eagle County Employee. Page 6 of 12 Town of Avon – Walking Mountains Resident Occupied Community Housing Deed Restriction e. Failure to submit an annual certification of occupancy and use as described in Section 3.f above. f. Failure to make payments and comply with the terms of any deed of trust placed on the Property. g. Executing a deed of trust, lien or other encumbrance which encumbers the Property with an indebtedness or obligation that exceeds eighty-five (85%) of the loan to value ratio of the Property at the time of executing such deed of trust, lien or other encumbrance. h. Any action by the Owner to encumber the Property in a manner that conflicts with the terms of this Deed Restriction or renders compliance with the terms of this Deed Restriction impossible or impractical. i. Permitting the use of the Property as a Short Term Rental. 6. Notice and Cure. In the event a violation of this Deed Restriction is discovered, the Town shall send a written notice of default to the Owner detailing the nature of the default and providing sixty-five (65) days for the Owner to cure such default. Notwithstanding the foregoing or any other term of this Deed Restriction, a default for lease or use of the Property as a Short Term Rental shall be cured by the Owner immediately. The notice shall state that the Owner may request an appeal of the violation finding in writing within ten (10) days of such notice, in which event the Town shall administratively review the finding and, if the violation finding is upheld, the Owner may request in writing within ten (10) days of such administrative decision a hearing before the Town Council of the Town. A decision of the Town Council of the Town may only be judicially appealed in the District Court of Eagle County pursuant to C.R.C.P. 106. If no administrative or Town Council appeal is timely requested in writing and the violation is not cured within sixty-five (65) days of mailing the notice of default, the Owner shall be deemed to be in violation of this Deed Restriction. If an administrative or Town Council appeal is requested, the decision of the Town Council of the Town (or administrative decision if such decision is not timely appealed to the Town Council) shall be final for the purpose of determining if a violation has occurred and, if such violation is not cured within sixty-five (65) days of such final determination, the Owner shall be deemed to be violation of this Deed Restriction. If a decision of the Town Council of the Town is judicially appealed, an order of the Court confirming the violation shall be final for the purpose of determining if a violation has occurred and, if such violation is not cured within sixty-five (65) days of such final determination, the Owner shall be deemed to be violation of this Deed Restriction. In the event of any lease to a person who is not an Eagle County Employee or use of the Property as a Short Term Rental, any amounts collected or receipt of other things of value by the Owner or assigns under such leases shall be paid to the Town as a material requirement of curing the notice of default. 7. Remedies. In the event of violation, non-performance, default or breach of any term of this Deed Restriction by the Owner, Town shall have the right to enforce Owner’s obligations herein by an action for any equitable remedy, including injunction or specific performance, as well as Page 7 of 12 Town of Avon – Walking Mountains Resident Occupied Community Housing Deed Restriction pursue an action to recover damages. In addition, any amount due and owing to the Town shall bear interest at the rate of one and one half percent (1.5%) per month (eighteen percent [18%] per annum, compounded annually) until paid in full. The Town shall be entitled to recover any costs related to enforcement of this Deed Restriction, including but not limited attorney’s fees, court filing costs and county recording costs. In addition to any other remedy provided by law or equity, the Town may attach a lien for any amount due to the Town upon the Property and enforce the lien in the manner and according to the procedures set forth in Colorado Revised Statutes, Section 31- 20-105, and the Owner expressly waives any objection to the attachment of a lien for amounts due to the Town. In the event of a transfer or conveyance of the Property which violates the terms of this Deed Restrictions and constitutes a violation of this Deed Restriction, both the grantor and grantee shall be jointly and severally liable for any damages and costs due under this Deed Restriction. 8. Liquidated Damages. The parties acknowledge and agree that in the event of a violation of this Deed Restriction by the Owner, the determination of actual monetary damages would be difficult to ascertain. Therefore, the Town and Owner hereby agree that liquidated damages shall be calculated and applied in the amount of THREE HUNDRED DOLLARS ($300.00) per day for each day that the Owner is in violation of this Deed Restriction after having failed to timely cure the violation of this Deed Restriction. Liquidated damages shall be in addition to the Town’s ability to recover costs as stated in Section 7 above. Liquidated damages shall be in addition to the Town’s right to seek equitable remedies of injunction and/or specific performance. In the event of any lease or use of the Property as a Short Term Rental, any amounts collected or receipt of other things of value by the Owner or assigns under such leases shall be paid to the Town as liquated damages as demanded by the Town (in lieu of the $300 daily liquidated damages), including such amounts collected or received by Owner prior to receipt of a Notice of Default and prior expiration of a sixty-five (65) day period to cure, and such amounts shall be in addition to the right of the Town to recover costs and seek equitable remedies. 9. Release of Deed Restriction in Event of Foreclosure or Deed in Lieu. a. An Owner shall notify the Town, in writing, of any notification received from a lender of past due payments or defaults in payments or other obligations within five (5) days of receipt of such notification. b. An Owner shall immediately notify the Town, in writing, of any notice of foreclosure under the first deed of trust or any other subordinate security interest in the Property, or when any payment on any indebtedness encumbering the Property is required to avoid foreclosure of the first deed of trust or other subordinate security interest in the Property. c. Within sixty (60) days after receipt of any notice described herein, the Town may (but shall not be obligated to) proceed to make any payment required to avoid foreclosure. Upon making any such payment, the Town shall place a lien on the Property in the amount paid to cure the default and avoid foreclosure, including all fees and costs resulting from such foreclosure. d. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Deed Restriction (but subject to Section 9.f below), in the event of a foreclosure, acceptance of a deed-in-lieu of foreclosure, or Page 8 of 12 Town of Avon – Walking Mountains Resident Occupied Community Housing Deed Restriction assignment, this Deed Restriction shall remain in full force and effect, including without limitation Section 4 hereof, restricting Transfer of the Property. e. The Town shall have thirty (30) days after issuance of the public trustee’s deed or the acceptance of a deed in lieu of foreclosure by the holder in which to purchase by tendering to the holder, in cash or certified funds, an amount equal to the bid price or the redemption price paid by the holder, interest in the amount of eight (8) percent per annum from the date of the issuance of the public trustee’s deed or the recording of a deed in lieu of foreclosure through the date of the Town’s purchase. f. Notwithstanding Section 9.d above, in the event that the Property is encumbered by a mortgage or deed of trust insured by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”) and representing a purchase money first priority mortgage or deed of trust, this Deed Restriction shall automatically and permanently terminate upon foreclosure of such mortgage or deed of trust, upon acceptance of a deed in lieu of foreclosure of such mortgage or deed of trust, or upon assignment of such mortgage or deed of trust to HUD. 10. Option to Purchase. In the event of default by the Owner which is not cured, or upon receipt of a notice of foreclosure or other notice of default provided by the holder of a deed of trust , lien or other encumbrance as provided in Section 9 above (whichever is earlier), the Town shall have the option to purchase (“Option to Purchase”) the Property in accordance with the procedures and terms set forth as follows: a. The Town shall have an Option to Purchase for sixty-five (65) days (“Option Period”). b. The Town shall have right of entry onto and into the Property during the Option Period to inspect the Property. c. The Town shall have the right to purchase the Property for the amount due to the holders of any deeds of trust, liens or other encumbrances up to the maximum amount defined in Section 5.g. above (together with interest, fees and costs expressly chargeable under deed of trust, lien or other encumbrance instrument), which amounts shall be paid in order of priority of the holders of such deeds of trusts, liens or other encumbrances provided that this Deed Restriction shall remain in effect and burden the Property after acquisition by the Town and upon re-conveyance to a subsequent Qualified Owner. d. The Town shall have the right to assign the Town’s right to purchase the Property to any Qualified Owner provided that this Deed Restriction shall remain in effect and burden the Property. e. Upon payment by Town or assigns, Owner shall convey title to the Property by a special warranty deed in accordance with Colorado Revised Statute §38-30-115 and shall include the words, “and warrant title against all persons claiming under me.” f. Normal and customary closing costs shall be shared equally between the Owner and Town or Town’s assigns. The Town or assigns shall be responsible, at its cost, for any and all Page 9 of 12 Town of Avon – Walking Mountains Resident Occupied Community Housing Deed Restriction title insurance fees, document fees, and recording fees of the deed. Taxes shall be prorated based upon taxes for the calendar year immediately preceding closing. g. If the Town or assigns do not exercise the Option to Purchase during the Option Period, then the holder of a deed of trust shall nonetheless remain subject to this Deed Restriction as provided in Section 9.d above, subject, however, to Section 9.f above. In the event that Town’s Option to Purchase arises from a default by Owner and not a notice of foreclosure or notice of default submitted by the holder of a deed of trust to the Town, then the Town may unilaterally extend the Option Period until such time as Town, or assigns, exercise the Option to Purchase or the Owner cures any and all defaults. 11. Tax Sale. In the event of a tax sale this Deed Restriction shall remain in full force and effect, shall run with and burden the land, and shall constitute a condition of the subdivision and land use approval which shall survive and sale of the Property through a tax lien sale process. 12. General Provisions. a. Severability. If any term, provision, covenant or condition of this Deed Restriction is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, void or unenforceable, the remaining provisions of this Deed Restriction shall continue and remain in full force and effect. b. Counting Days. If the final day of any notice, default or other event falls on a Saturday, Sunday, legal holiday recognized by the State of Colorado or day upon which the Avon Town Hall is closed for any reason, then the final day shall be deemed to be the next day which is not a Saturday, Sunday, legal holiday or day that the Avon Town Hall is closed. c. Waiver. No waiver of one or more of the terms or provisions of this Deed Restriction shall be effective unless provided in writing. No waiver of any term or provision of this Deed Restriction in any instance shall constitute a waiver of such provision in any other instance. The Town Council may provide a waiver along with any conditions of the waiver with regard to any of the terms and provisions in this Deed Restriction where unusual or unforeseen circumstances exist and the Owner is diligently seeking to cure a default and such waiver, with conditions if any, supports the purpose and intention of this Deed Restriction. d. Amendment. This Deed Restriction may only be amended in writing by the mutual agreement of the Owner and the Town and recorded with the Clerk and Recorder’s Office of Eagle County, Colorado. e. Recording. The Owner shall record this Deed Restriction in the Property Records of Eagle County, Colorado and the original executed and record documents must be returned to the Town. f. Assignment. The Town may assign this Deed Restriction and all rights and obligations, without consent of the Owner, to any other public entity, non-profit corporation or other entity which is organized and exists for the purpose to provide and promote affordable housing for full time residents. Page 10 of 12 Town of Avon – Walking Mountains Resident Occupied Community Housing Deed Restriction g. No Third-Party Beneficiaries. Nothing contained in this Deed Restriction is intended to or shall create a contractual relationship with, cause of action in favor of, or claim for relief for, any third party. h. Choice of Law. This Deed Restriction shall be governed and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Colorado. Venue for any legal action arising from this Deed Restriction shall be in Eagle County, Colorado. i. Successors. Except as otherwise provided herein, the provisions and covenanted contained herein shall inure to and be binding upon the heirs, successors and assigns of the parties. The covenants shall be a burden upon and run with the Property for the benefit of the Town or the Town’s assigns, who may enforce the covenants and compel compliance therewith through the initiation of judicial proceedings for, but not limited to, specific performance, injunctive relief, reversion, eviction and damages. j. Section Headings. Paragraph or section headings within this Deed Restriction are inserted solely for convenience of reference and are not intended to and shall not govern, limit or aid in the construction of any terms or provisions contained herein. k. Gender and Number. Whenever the context so requires in this Deed Restriction, the neuter gender shall include any or all genders and vice versa and the use of the singular shall include the plural and vice versa. l. Notice. Any notice, consent or approval, which is required to be given hereunder, shall be given by either depositing in the U.S. Mail with first class postage pre-paid; mailing by certified mail with return receipt requested; sending by overnight delivery with a nationally recognized courier service that delivers to the physical address of the Property; or, by hand- delivering to the intended recipient. Notices shall be provided to the Town of Avon at P.O. Box 975, 100 Mikaela Way, Avon, CO 81620. Notices shall be provided to Owner at the address provided by the Eagle County Assessor’s office. [signature page follows] Page 11 of 12 Town of Avon – Walking Mountains Resident Occupied Community Housing Deed Restriction IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Owner and Town have executed this instrument on the day and the year first written above. OWNER: WALKING MOUNTAINS, a Colorado nonprofit corporation By:_________________________________ Name: ______________________________ Its: _________________________________ STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. COUNTY OF EAGLE ) The foregoing instrument was subscribed, sworn to and acknowledged before me this ___ day of____________________, 2020, by ___________________________________ as ___________________ of Walking Mountains, a Colorado nonprofit corporation, as the owner of the real property described above. Witness my hand and official seal. ______________________________ Notary Public My commission expires: ________________ Page 12 of 12 Town of Avon – Walking Mountains Resident Occupied Community Housing Deed Restriction TOWN OF AVON, CO: By:__________________________________ Attest:______________________________ Sarah Smith Hymes, Mayor Brenda Torres, Town Clerk STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. COUNTY OF EAGLE ) Subscribed before me this ______ day of _______________, 2020, by Sarah Smith Hymes, as Mayor, and Brenda Torres, as Town Clerk of the Town of Avon, a Colorado home rule municipal corporation. My commission expires: ___________________ __________________________________________ Notary Public Page 13 of 12 Town of Avon – Walking Mountains Resident Occupied Community Housing Deed Restriction EXHIBIT A DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY That portion of Lot 2A, Filing 3, Buck Creek Subdivision, according to the Final Plat recorded December 22, 2016, at Reception No. 201621979 in the Eagle County, Colorado real property records, that is depicted as “Bldg. 1” on the attached. TRACT BB BUCK C R E EK L=123.444,R=693.820 K-1151-GLABANCROFTBATHSACRYLIC K-1151-GLABANCROFTBATHSACRYLIC K-1151-GLABANCROFTBATHSACRYLIC K-1151-GLABANCROFTBATHSACRYLIC K-1151-GLABANCROFTBATHSACRYLIC K-1151-GLABANCROFTBATHSACRYLIC NO.ISSUEPROJECT:JOB NO.SHEET NO.JURISDICTION:1 inch = ft.( IN FEET )GRAPHIC SCALE03030301560C-1.aOVERALL SITE LAYOUTTOWN OF AVON, COBUCK CREEK P.U.D. LOT 2AWALKING MOUNTAINSRESIDENTIAL UNITS1802304.09.2020ISSUED FOR TOWN AGREEMENTEXISTINGPARKING LOTBUCK CREEK RO A D BLDG 1BLDG 2BLDG 3PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY L INE PROPERTY LINESTORM-WTRPONDSTREAM SETBACKPROPERTY LINEP RO P E R T Y L I N EBUCK CREEKBUCK CREEKPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY L INE PROPERTY LINELOT 2A BUCKCREEK PUDWA L K I NG MO U N T A I N S L A N E LOT 2B BUCKCREEK PUD Res 20-10 Walking Mountains Fee Waiver Page 1 of 4 TOWN OF AVON RESOLUTION 20-11 WAIVING SALES TAX, DEVELOPMENT CODE FEES, AVON TAP FEES AND BUILDING PERMIT FEES FOR WALKING MOUNTAINS SCIENCE CENTER WHEREAS, Walking Mountains Science Center acquired Lot 2, Buck Creek Subdivision, Avon, Colorado for the purposes of undeveloped open space, future educational buildings and community housing for staff; and WHEREAS, Walking Mountains Science Center is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization that exists for educational and science learning purposes; and WHEREAS, Walking Mountains Science Center serves Avon and the entire Eagle River Valley with a wide variety of valued educational programs, including many youth programs; and WHEREAS, the Avon Town Council adopted Ordinance 19-01 on June 25, 2019, an ordinance setting forth a process whereby the Avon Town Council may waive or reduce certain fees related to the development of Community Housing projects; and WHEREAS, Walking Mountain Science Center intends to construct Community Housing buildings, each containing six (6) dormitory style bedrooms, on Lot 2 (“Community Housing Project”) ; and WHEREAS, Walking Mountains Science Center submitted a written email request on April 3, 2020 explaining certain increases of construction cost and requesting a waiver of sales tax on construction materials, and a waiver and refund of building permit fees to defray portions of the increases in construction costs (“Waiver”) for its Community Housings Project; and WHEREAS, Walking Mountains Science Center has paid the Town Building Permit fees in the amount of $21,498.50 in connection with the Community Housing Project; and WHEREAS, in exchange for the Waiver, Walking Mountain Science Center has agreed to execute a deed restriction, attached hereto as Exhibit A (“Deed Restriction”), which deed restriction provides the Community Housing units to be constructed shall only be utilized for Eagle County Employees, as defined in the Deed Restriction; and WHEREAS, the Avon Town Council finds that the construction of the Community Housing Project will promote and support the provision of educational programs that benefit and enhance the Avon community; and, WHEREAS, the Avon Town Council finds that the promotion and support of Walking Mountains Science Center through the waiver of 1) sales tax on construction materials and fixtures delivered to the Community Housing Project; and 2) Plan Review and Building Permit fees that are required pursuant to Title 15 - Building Code will promote the health, safety and general welfare of the Avon community. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE TOWN OF AVON that the Avon Town Council hereby approves the request for the Waiver and execution of the Deed Restriction as follows: Res 20-10 Walking Mountains Fee Waiver Page 2 of 4 1. The Town Council hereby finds the Waiver is necessary to promote Community Housing that will meet the current and projected housing needs for the Avon community. 2. The Town Council hereby finds the public as a whole will benefit from the Community Housing Project. 3. The Town hereby grants a waiver of sales tax applicable to the Community Housing Project, which waiver shall only apply to the purchase of construction materials and fixtures delivered to the Community Housing Project which are purchased on or before December 31, 2021. The waiver of sales tax shall not exceed $25,000. 4. The Town hereby grants a waiver and refund of Plan Review and Building Permit fees applicable to the Community Housing Project that are required pursuant to Title 15 – Building Code. The waiver and refund of Building Permit Fees shall not exceed $21,498.50. 5. The Waiver provided herein shall only become effective upon execution of the Deed Restriction by Walking Mountains Science Center and the Town. 6. Walking Mountains Science Center shall provide records, receipts and documentation to the Town of the construction materials purchased on or prior December 31, 2021 and shall maintain such records as is required by the Chapter 3.12 Sales Tax of the Avon Municipal Code. ADOPTED April 23, 2020 by the AVON TOWN COUNCIL By:_______________________________ Attest:___________________________ Sarah Smith-Hymes, Mayor Brenda Torres, Town Clerk Res 20-10 Walking Mountains Fee Waiver Page 3 of 4 Exhibit A (Deed Restriction) This item will be discussed in the meeting 970.748.4013 idejong@avon.org TO: Honorable Mayor Smith Hymes and Council FROM: Ineke de Jong, Executive Assistant to the Town Manager RE: Council Consideration to Support Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) Funding Sign-on Letter DATE: April 20, 2020 SUMMARY: The Town of Avon was contacted by Anna Peterson, who is the Executive Director of The Mountain Pact. This group is asking about Avon's support to join onto the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) funding letter asking that LWCF be included in the next stimulus package. They believe that investing now in full funding for LWCF will help with a strong long-term recovery for gateway communities and states that rely on visitors to public lands. The current letter with over 30 signers from 9 out of the 11 western states is attached. They still need Washington and Wyoming signers. If council is interested in supporting this effort, staff could send the sample letter (attachment C) to express support and take other appropriate actions to show Avon’s support. SAMPLE MOTION: “I move to direct staff to send the sample letter in Attachment C to express Avon’s support in asking that LWCF be included in the next stimulus package”. AVAILABLE ACTIONS: 1. Approve the sample motion as drafted. 2. Approve the sample motion, with modifications. 3. Continue to April 28, 2020, or other meeting defined by Town Council. 4. Reject the motion if council is not interested in considering support. ATTACHMENTS: A. Huffman Quote LWCF Stimulus B. The Mountain Pact, LWCF in Stimulus Letter (with over 30 signers from 9 out of the 11 western states) C. Draft Town of Avon, LWCF in Stimulus Letter 4/14/2020 POLITICS: Stimulus priorities shift as pandemic worsens -- Monday, April 6, 2020 -- www.eenews.net https://www.eenews.net/eedaily/stories/1062798813/print 1/2 CONGRESS. LEGISLATION. POLITICS. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), flanked by (left) Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) and Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.), during an enrollment ceremony last month on the third coronavirus stimulus. Stefani Reynolds/UPI/Newsom Stimulus priorities shift as pandemic worsens Geof Koss, E&E News reporter • Published: Monday, April 6, 2020 The worsening health and economic fallout from the COVID-19 pandemic are upending the next phase of stimulus talks, with Democrats eyeing immediate further assistance to individuals and small businesses. Following Friday's record-high unemployment report, which showed 700,000 lost jobs in March, Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) told House members over the weekend that the next stimulus will echo the priorities Democrats fought for in the $2 trillion Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Economic Security (CARES) Act package signed into law just 10 days ago. "We must double down on the down-payment we made in the CARES Act by passing a CARES 2 package, which will extend and expand this bipartisan legislation to meet the needs of the American people," Pelosi wrote Saturday. "CARES 2 must go further in assisting small businesses including farmers, extending and strengthening unemployment benefits and giving families additional direct payments." The upcoming legislation, which Pelosi said she hopes to bring to the floor later this month, would also provide "desperately needed resources for our state and local governments, hospitals, community health centers, health systems and health workers, first responders and other providers on the frontlines of this crisis." Missing from the speaker's weekend "Dear Colleague" letter was any mention of infrastructure, which just four days earlier Pelosi had indicated would be a major focus of the fourth legislative response to COVID-19 (E&E News PM, April 1). That bill was to be modeled on the $760 billion infrastructure plan unveiled by House Democrats in January, which would have included tens of billions of dollars for water system and electric grid upgrades. In an appearance on CNBC on Friday, Pelosi signaled that items included in the broader infrastructure bill may need to wait for an even later COVID-19 stimulus bill. "While I'm very much in favor of doing some of the things that we need to do to meet the needs — clean water, more broadband and the rest of that — that may have to be for a bill beyond this," she said. The shift in tone in recent days suggests the next stimulus will revive the controversies of the first three COVID-19 emergency bills, including individual direct payments, unemployment benefits, more funds for health care and medical supplies, and oversight of the just-enacted $2 trillion package — the largest in U.S. history. That could again sideline broader economic aid for clean energy sectors and drinking water upgrades sought by many Democrats. Conservation and outdoor recreation groups also are working to get the "Great American Outdoors Act," S. 3422, included in a future coronavirus stimulus package. POLITICS Attachment A 4/14/2020 POLITICS: Stimulus priorities shift as pandemic worsens -- Monday, April 6, 2020 -- www.eenews.net https://www.eenews.net/eedaily/stories/1062798813/print 2/2 Advertisement "I know there is a real interest in broadening the next stimulus package," said Rep. Jared Huffman (D-Calif.), who leads the Natural Resources Subcommittee on Water, Oceans and Wildlife. "Our natural infrastructure has to be part of our broader national infrastructure initiative." The legislation would permanently fund the Land and Water Conservation Fund and make a $9.5 billion investment in fixing the country's ailing parks and public lands. "We may have a window of opportunity here," said Huffman, who added that there was momentum behind the bill even before the pandemic. Still, House Appropriations Chairwoman Nita Lowey (D-N.Y.) said this weekend that the next stimulus under construction will aim more broadly at infrastructure. "We can build a more resilient economy with robust investments in smart, safe infrastructure, including bringing clean water and the promise of high-speed broadband to every American community," Lowey said in the Democrats' weekly address. Green New Deal talk Republicans have been cool to Democrats' calls to quickly move more stimulus, noting that the ink is barely dry on the last one. House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) accused Pelosi of pushing sweeping policy changes that unnecessarily held up the last round of stimulus talks. "She wanted to deal with election law; she wanted to deal with Green New Deal," McCarthy told reporters last week. McCarthy called it premature to even talk of more stimulus, although he wouldn't rule out infrastructure in subsequent COVID-19 legislation (see related story). "I am for infrastructure in the future, but the one thing I do want to make sure is that it is targeted, that it works. I have been through the experience of what these shovel-ready projects are and saw the waste that was used. I do not think this is the time and place for that." However, McCarthy is among the GOP lawmakers from oil districts who have expressed support for President Trump's call to fill the Strategic Petroleum Reserve with private-sector crude. The administration unsuccessfully sought $3 billion to enable an SPR purchase in the last stimulus talks. In addition to the SPR funds, Senate Finance Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) told reporters last week that another provision in play during recent negotiations would have preempted state laws to build oil pipelines. Future negotiations on energy stimulus may be informed by President Trump's meeting on Friday with top oil executives (see related story). Oversight Meanwhile, the two parties and the White House are also increasingly at odds over congressional oversight of the $2 trillion CARES Act. Trump stoked controversy Friday by nominating a White House lawyer to be the special inspector general for pandemic recovery — a position created by the new law that was added at Democrats' insistence to facilitate Hill oversight of the more than $500 billion in federal loan authority contained in the measure. Trump's pick, Special Assistant to the President and White House Senior Associate Counsel Brian Miller, did little to assuage Democrats already unhappy with a Trump signing statement that said he may ignore parts of the law (Greenwire, March 30). Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) panned Trump's pick. "This oversight position, which will be responsible for overseeing hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars, requires complete independence from the president and any other interested party to assure the American people that all decisions are made without fear or favor," Schumer said in a statement. "To nominate a member of the president's own staff is exactly the wrong type of person to choose for this position," said Schumer. In the House, Democrats and Republicans are at odds over Pelosi's proposal to create a select committee to conduct oversight of the law, which top GOP leaders last week slammed as unnecessary and politically motivated (E&E News PM, April 2). House Majority Whip Jim Clyburn (D-S.C.), who will chair the panel, dismissed accusations that its work will be aimed at undermining Trump, calling it an appropriate instrument for Congress to oversee the massive law. "We're not going to be looking back on what the president may or may not have done back before this crisis hit," Clyburn said yesterday on CNN's "State of the Union." "The crisis is with us. The American people are now out of work, millions of them out of work. The question is whether or not the money that's appropriated will go to support them and their families, or whether or not this money will end up in the pockets of a few profiteers." Reporter Kellie Lunney contributed. Twitter: @geofkoss Email: gkoss@eenews.net The essential news for energy & environment professionals © 1996-2020 Environment & Energy Publishing, LLC Privacy and Data Practices Policy Site Map Contact Us Attachment A April XY, 2020 Dear Members of the U.S. Senate and U.S. House of Representatives, As Congress works on an economic stimulus package in this time of public health emergency, the below listed local elected officials hope you will invest in our parks, public lands, and outdoor recreation in recognition of their importance to our economy, and to our communities' well-being, through full funding of the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF). In the weeks and months to come, our nation’s parks, trails, and outdoor spaces will be integral to our nation's coping and recovery. Great parks and green spaces make stronger, healthier communities. Everyone deserves access to the outdoors and the countless benefits parks provide. America’s public lands bring us peace of mind and generate economic revenue - both will be critically needed to recover from the impact of the COVID-19 outbreak. Our national, state and local parks, trails and public lands are a critical economic driver for communities big and small, urban and rural, across the nation. Across the nation, the travel and tourism industries have been taking a hit in the current crisis. Investing now in full funding for LWCF will help with a strong long-term recovery for gateway communities and states that rely on visitors to public lands. Specifically: ●America’s outdoor recreation economy supports over 7.6 million jobs, contributes over $887 billion in annual economic output, and serves as the lifeblood for countless communities across the country. ●Every dollar spent on LWCF returns $4 in economic value from natural resource goods and services alone - over and above the economic benefit of the outdoor recreation economy and tourism. Broadly-supported, bipartisan LWCF legislation was already in the queue for Senate floor time before coronavirus upended the calendar—it is directly relevant, ready to go, and makes sense for Congress to include in a stimulus package if possible and appropriate. Investing in our public lands, and providing full, permanent funding for LWCF is a low-cost economic stimulus that will pay big dividends for communities across America. Please include full and permanent LWCF funding in the stimulus package. Sincerely, Attachment B Vice Mayor Adam Shimoni, City of Flagstaff, Arizona City Councilor John Wentworth, Town of Mammoth Lakes, California Mayor Jason Collin, City of South Lake Tahoe, California City Councilmember Devin Middlebrook, City of South Lake Tahoe, California City Councilor Ann Mullins, City of Aspen, Colorado Councillor William Infante, Town of Basalt, Colorado Mayor Dan Richardson, City of Carbondale, Colorado Mayor Pro Tem Dean Brookie, City of Durango, Colorado Chief County Commissioner Kathy Chandler-Henry, Eagle County, Colorado County Commissioner Matt Scherr, Eagle County, Colorado Trustee Wendy Miller, Town of Lyons, Colorado Mayor Pro Tem Lauren Koelliker, Town of Mt Crested Butte, Colorado Councilman Patrick Berry, Town of Mountain Village, Colorado Mayor Corinne Platt, Town of Ophir, Colorado Mayor John Clark, Town of Ridgway, Colorado Town Councilor Ninah Hunter, Town of Ridgway, Colorado Mayor DeLanie Young, Town of Telluride, Colorado Mayor Pro Tem Todd Brown, Town of Telluride, Colorado Councilperson Adrienne Christy, Town of Telluride, Colorado Mayor Hyrum Johnson, City of Driggs, Idaho Mayor Chris Mehl, City of Bozeman, Montana County Commissioner Juanita Vero, Missoula County, Montana City Councilor Devon Reese, City of Reno, Nevada Councilwoman Renee Villarreal, City of Santa Fe, New Mexico Mayor Pro Tem Nathaniel Evans Town of Taos, New Mexico City Councilor Rich Rosenthal, City of Ashland, Oregon City Councilor Tonya Graham, City of Ashland, Oregon City Councilor Barb Campbell, City of Bend, Oregon Mayor Emily Niehaus, City of Moab, Utah City Councilor Karen Guzman-Newton, City of Moab, Utah City Councilor Rani Derasary, City of Moab, Utah City Councilor Kalen Jones, City of Moab, Utah Attachment B Post Office Box 975 100 Mikaela Way Avon, CO 81620 April 20, 2020 Dear Members of the U.S. Senate and U.S. House of Representatives, As Congress works on an economic stimulus package in this time of public health emergency, the below listed local elected officials hope you will invest in our parks, public lands, and outdoor recreation in recognition of their importance to our economy, and to our communities' wellbeing, through full funding of the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF). In the weeks and months to come, our nation’s parks, trails, and outdoor spaces will be integral to our nation's coping and recovery. Great parks and green spaces make stronger, healthier communities. Everyone deserves access to the outdoors and the countless benefits parks provide. America’s public lands bring us peace of mind and generate economic revenue - both will be critically needed to recover from the impact of the COVID-19 outbreak. Our national, state and local parks, trails and public lands are a critical economic driver for communities big and small, urban and rural, across the nation. Across the nation, the travel and tourism industries have been taking a hit in the current crisis. Investing now in full funding for LWCF will help with a strong long-term recovery for gateway communities and states that rely on visitors to public lands. Specifically: ●America’s outdoor recreation economy supports over 7.6 million jobs, contributes over $887 billion in annual economic output, and serves as the lifeblood for countless communities across the country. ●Every dollar spent on LWCF returns $4 in economic value from natural resource goods and services alone - over and above the economic benefit of the outdoor recreation economy and tourism. Broadly-supported, bipartisan LWCF legislation was already in the queue for Senate floor time before coronavirus upended the calendar—it is directly relevant, ready to go, and makes sense for Congress to include in a stimulus package if possible and appropriate. Investing in our public lands, and providing full, permanent funding for LWCF is a low-cost economic stimulus that will pay big dividends for communities across America. Please include full and permanent LWCF funding in the stimulus package. Sincerely, Sarah Smith Hymes, Mayor Town of Avon Attachment C (970) 748-4061 cbishop@avon.org TO: Honorable Mayor Smith Hymes and Council members FROM: Charise Bishop, General Government Intern RE: Grocery Bags and COVID-19 DATE: April 7, 2020 SUMMARY: On March 26, 2020, Council received public comment expressing concerns that the usage of reusable grocery bags may contribute to the spread of COVID-19. Several articles were cited to support the proposition that customer usage of reusable grocery bags presents a risk of spreading viruses to grocery store employees and other grocery store customers. The manager at City Market contacted the Town Manager and expressed concerns on behalf of store clerks about handling reusable bags brought by customers and the potential transmission of COVID-19. City Market has adopted a policy whereby grocery clerks will no longer handle personal reusable bags. The Colorado Governor also issued a statewide request to suspend fees on single use grocery store bags. In response, the Town Manager issued an order on March 27 to suspend the 10 cent pe r bag fee on paper bags. This report discusses the articles that were cited, and other research conducted by Staff. BACKGROUND: In October 2017, Town Council passed Ordinance 17-08, Adopting a New Chapter 8.38 of Title 8 of the Avon Municipal Code Establishing Disposable Bag Requirements, Including a Paper Bag Fee and Providing for the Collection and Designation of Such Fee . This Ordinance required grocery and retail establishments to eliminate the use of disposable plastic bags and charge a $0.10 f ee per disposable paper bag used by May 2018. According to Chapter 8.38 of the Avon Municipal Code, “The purposes of this Chapter are to protect the public health, safety and welfare, to address the environmental problems associated with disposable bags, and to relieve the Town taxpayers of the costs imposed upon the Town associated with disposable bags. The intent of the Chapter is to encourage the use of reusable bags.” ANALYSIS: Public comment cited the study, Assessment of the Potential for Cross-contamination of Food Products by Reusable Shopping Bags, that was conducted by the University of Arizona and University School of Public Health, Loma Linda, CA in 2011 (“2011 Study”) [https://lluh.org/sites/medical- center.lomalindahealth.org/files/docs/LIVE-IT-Sinclair-Article-Cross-Contamination-Reusable-Shopping- Bags.pdf]. In the 2011 Study researchers found that large numbers of bacteria were found in almost all bags that were collected in the study and 8% of the bags were found to have E. Coli. The researchers found that 97% of participants did not wash their reusable bags. This correlates with the fact that so many bags were found to be harboring bacteria. The authors asserted that hand washing or putting reusable bags through the laundry reduced bacteria by more than 99.9%. The conclusion of this paper was that if reusable bags were not properly washed, it could result in the cross-contamination of food. The conclusion did not suggest halting the use of reusable bags, but instead to wash them. This project was supported in part by the American Chemistry Council. There has been no research on the life of viruses on reusable bags, only bacteria. During this pandemic, the plastic industry has used this as an opportunity to lobby governments to repeal bans on single use plastics. The Plastics Industry Association issued a letter to Alex Azar, the US Secretary of Health and Human Services, claiming that now more than ever the bans of single use plastic bags should be repealed because they are more hygienic than reusable bags and urged the Department to make a statement in their favor. Page 2 of 2 Allowing customers to use single-use grocery bags could alleviate grocery clerks’ concerns about exposure to coronavirus. Staff has found no science or medical articles, or social media articles, that suggest single use plastic bags are somehow better than single use paper bags in reducing the risk of spreading coronavirus. A study conducted by the National Institute of Health found that the virus could live on plastic surfaces for up to three days and cardboard for up to one day [https://www.nih.gov/news-events/news- releases/new-coronavirus-stable-hours-surfaces]. Another study conducted by the University of California and published in the Journal of Hospital Infection, found the virus could survive on plastic for up to nine days [https://www.journalofhospitalinfection.com/article/S0195-6701(20)30046-3/fulltext]. If a grocery store clerk handling single-use plastic bags was a carrier of the virus, it could potentially live on that plastic for three to nine days. RECOMMENDATION: Staff does not recommend any additional action or changes to Towns plastic bag prohibition. TOWN MANAGER RECOMMENDATION: Grocery store customers that use reusable bags should use the self-check out and handle and bag their groceries personally. Thank you, Charise ATTACHMENTS: Articles provided by Mr. Michael Cacioppo A. Dr Ryan Sinclair Reusable Shopping Bag Study | School of Public Health B. Plastic Bag Bans aren’t helping Fight Against Coronavirus C. Science shows it’s not really green to Ban Plastic Bags Articles provided by Mayor Pro Tem Amy Phillips D. The Guardian Article, Rightwing thinktanks use fear of COVID-19 to fight bans on plastic bags E. Johns Hopkins University, How long can the virus that causes COVID-19 live on surfaces? F. USA Today, Plastic bag bans reversed: States, Cities, Stores are suddenly banning reusable bags during coronavirus G. MPR News, States and Stores are banning reusable bags during COVID-19 pandemic. Is it safe to use them? H. Media Bias Chart 2018 I. Image of Reusable Bag Etiquette 4/9/20, 10:49 AMDr. Ryan Sinclair Reusable Shopping Bag Study | School of Public Health Page 1 of 3https://publichealth.llu.edu/about/blog/dr-ryan-sinclair-reusable-shopping-bag-study Coronavirus (COVID-19) Updates Exams continue as scheduled. Spring Quarter classes to be online. Full details ∠ (https://home.llu.edu/campus-and-spiritual-life/student-services/coronavirus-covid-19-updates#covid19_alert) By migramirez - October 17, 2013 Assessment of the Potential for Cross Contamination of Food Products by Reusable Shopping Bags Charles P. Gerba 1, David Williams 1 and Ryan G. Sinclair 2 1 Department of Soil, Water and Environmental Science, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ 2 School of Public Health, Loma Linda University, Loma Linda, CA SUMMARY Most food borne illnesses are believed to originate in the home. Reuse of bags creates an opportunity for cross contamination of foods. The purpose of this study was to assess the potential for cross contamination of food products from reusable bags used to carry groceries. Reusable bags were collected at random from consumers as they entered grocery stores in California and Arizona. In interviews it was found that reusable bags are seldom if ever washed and often used for multiple purposes. Large numbers of bacteria were found in almost all bags and coliform bacteria in half. Escherichia coli (E. Coli) were identified in 12% of the bags and a wide range of enteric bacteria, including several opportunistic pathogens. When meat juices were added to bags and stored in the trunks of cars for two hours the number of bacteria increased 10-fold indicating the potential for bacterial growth in the bags. Hand or machine washing was found to reduce the bacteria in bags by >99.9%. These results indicate that reusable bags can play a significant role in Dr. Ryan Sinclair Reusable Shopping Bag Study 4/9/20, 10:49 AMDr. Ryan Sinclair Reusable Shopping Bag Study | School of Public Health Page 2 of 3https://publichealth.llu.edu/about/blog/dr-ryan-sinclair-reusable-shopping-bag-study the cross contamination of foods if not properly washed on a regular basis. It is recommended that the public needs to be educated about the proper care of reusable bags by printed instructions on the bags or through public service announcements. DOWNLOAD THE FULL REPORT HERE (http://www.llu.edu/assets/publichealth/documents/grocery-bags-bacteria.pdf) [fblike][tweet][pinit][gplus] CATEGORIES: Research (/about/blog/research) Whole Communities (/about/blog/whole-communities) community resilience (/about/blog/community-resilience) Health Education (/about/blog/health-education) Add new comment YOUR NAMEYOUR NAME SUBJECTSUBJECT COMMENT COMMENT ** 4/9/20, 10:49 AMDr. Ryan Sinclair Reusable Shopping Bag Study | School of Public Health Page 3 of 3https://publichealth.llu.edu/about/blog/dr-ryan-sinclair-reusable-shopping-bag-study More information about text formats (/filter/tips) SAVE PREVIEW No HTML tags allowed. Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically. Lines and paragraphs break automatically. 4/9/20, 10:45 AMPlastic bag bans aren't helping us ﬁght against coronavirus Page 1 of 4https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/plastic-bag-bans-arent-helping-us-ﬁght-against-coronavirus Plastic bag bans aren't helping us ﬁght against coronavirus by Angela Logomasini | March 18, 2020 03:42 PM Before the novel coronavirus pandemic hit, warnings about potential public health consequences of banning single-use plastics in the name of environmental protection fell on deaf ears. But now people are wisely calling on lawmakers in New York, California, and other states and localities to reverse bans and regulations on single-use plastic grocery bags. Reusable bags can contribute to the spread of COVID-19 and other pathogens. Research shows that reusable bags harbor dangerous microorganisms. In fact, the sanitary nature of single-use plastics is one of the key reasons these products have become so prevalent, in addition to the fact that they require less energy and make less pollution in production than alternatives. Problems related to plastics in the environment can and should be addressed by proper disposal policies and litter control, rather than through policies that undermine public health. Back in 2011, researchers at the University of Arizona and Loma Linda University examined a sample of reusable bags from shoppers and found “large numbers of bacteria,” including dangerous fecal 4/9/20, 10:45 AMPlastic bag bans aren't helping us ﬁght against coronavirus Page 2 of 4https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/plastic-bag-bans-arent-helping-us-ﬁght-against-coronavirus bacteria such as coliform, E. coli, and salmonella. Bacteria was found in 99% of the reusable bags, while no bacteria or viruses were found in a sample of disposable plastic bags and new reusable bags. Bacteria can easily be transferred from leaking meat packages as well as from fruits and vegetables, and the study found it grows in the bags that are stored in car trunks. Reusable bags also pick up bacteria and viruses from simply being held and carried around. A 2012 study found that nine members of a soccer team contracted the norovirus, a leading cause of food poisoning, from touching a reusable bag or eating food contained inside. The bag had been stored in a bathroom. That might seem like an outlier, but people cart these bags all over the place, touching surfaces on public transportation, taking them into public bathrooms, and other places, creating lots of opportunities for the bags to pick up bacteria and viruses. The pathogens on these reusable bags can also infect people in grocery stores who don’t even use them. A 2018 study assessed the probability of norovirus transmission from reusable grocery bags carried around in the supermarket using a similar, but not infectious, virus as a proxy. It found that the virus easily moved from the bag all around the store, with a high concentration found on the hands of both consumers and store checkout clerks. It’s feasible that these reusable bags could also carry the coronavirus, which is why Clemson University Professor Robert M. Kimmel, author of a 4/9/20, 10:45 AMPlastic bag bans aren't helping us ﬁght against coronavirus Page 3 of 4https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/plastic-bag-bans-arent-helping-us-ﬁght-against-coronavirus 2014 life-cycle study on plastics, has urged New York state to halt its ban at least until the coronavirus is under control. Kimmel explained that his research shows that reusable bags are “highly likely to be contaminated with bacteria and viruses and could transfer this contamination to people by contact with supermarket check-out conveyors, grocery carts, kitchen counters and other surfaces.” The reusable bags should be thoroughly washed after every use, says Kimmel. Yet only 3% of reusable bag consumers ever wash the bags according to a survey conducted by Charles P. Gerba and colleagues at the University of Arizona. Single-use plastic bags are not the only problem for environmental activists, who also want bans on all single-use plastics. They suggest we should all carry our own “to-go” set of reusable metal or wooden utensils, straws, and cups. But again, these are likely to harbor pathogens if not thoroughly cleaned between every use — and this includes their carrying cases. And cleaning a reusable straw isn’t exactly easy. A key reason that busy eateries rely on single-use utensils and containers is because they provide superior sanitary performance. Studies dating back to the 1970s showed that reusable utensils often contained dangerous levels of bacteria even after being washed, particularly in fast-paced restaurants where a high volume of people circulate in and out quickly. 4/9/20, 10:45 AMPlastic bag bans aren't helping us ﬁght against coronavirus Page 4 of 4https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/plastic-bag-bans-arent-helping-us-ﬁght-against-coronavirus That’s one very good reason why fast food eateries, school cafeterias, hospitals, nursing homes, and other medical facilities have relied on single-use plastic products: They reduce risks of disease transmission. Apparently, Starbucks and Dunkin’ ﬁnally got the message in the age of the coronavirus: Both announced that they will no longer allow their customers to get reﬁlls in reusable cups. Single-use plastic bans amount to bad public health policy, which is one reason why proper disposal, rather than bans, is the answer to litter problems. It’s time for lawmakers to wake up before more people get sick from dirty pathogen-laden reusable products. Angela Logomasini, Ph.D., is a senior fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, a free market think tank. 4/9/20, 10:43 AMScience shows that it’s not really green to ban plastic bags Page 1 of 3https://nypost.com/2019/01/20/science-shows-that-its-not-really-green-to-ban-plastic-bags/ January 20, 2019 | 9:26pm | OPINION Science shows that it’s not really green to ban plastic bags As if grocery shopping weren’t enough of a hassle, it’s about to become even more inconvenient in New York — for no good reason. State lawmakers may soon cave to the anti-plastic craze by passing a statewide plastic bag ban. In its zeal to jump on the anti-plastic bandwagon, the Legislature would force consumers to use alternatives that use up more resources and have been shown to endanger public health. What will New Yorkers gain after being forced to relinquish one of the most useful inventions of modern times? Alternatives include potentially disease-ridden reusable bags or those hard-to-carry, commuter-unfriendly paper bags that fall apart in the rain and use more By Angela Logomasini Shutterstock Updated 4/9/20, 10:43 AMScience shows that it’s not really green to ban plastic bags Page 2 of 3https://nypost.com/2019/01/20/science-shows-that-its-not-really-green-to-ban-plastic-bags/ energy in the production process than their plastic counterparts. First, consider the public health proﬁle of reusable cloth bags. A study conducted by researchers at the University of Arizona and California’s Loma Linda University in 2010 measured bacteria in a sample of reusable bags, ﬁnding many containing dangerous ones, such as coliform (found in half the bags) and E. coli (found in 12 percent of bags). Pathogens can develop from leaky meat packages as well as unwashed produce. And consumers reported that they rarely wash the bags, according to the study. The consequences of such contamination can be serious. After San Francisco banned plastic bags in 2007, the number of emergency room visits for bacterial related diseases increased, according to a study conducted ﬁve years later by legal scholars at George Mason University and the University of Pennsylvania. “ER visits spiked when the ban went into effect,” the study explained. “Relative to other counties, ER admissions increases by at least one fourth, and deaths exhibit a similar increase.” While correlation doesn’t prove causation, the jump in ER admissions in San Francisco was high enough to at least merit further examination by legislators and public health authorities in New York before they force reusable bags on residents. Reusable bags, moreover, require far more energy and other resources to make, and they may produce more landﬁll waste. A 2011 study by the UK government’s Environment Agency found that cotton bags would have to be used 131 times before they yield environmental beneﬁts. As for paper bags, they do work in many cases and break down easier if they become litter. But these have their trade-offs, as well. One study reports that plastic bags require 71 percent less energy to produce. Plastic bag production also uses less than 6 percent of the water needed to make paper bags. In addition, paper bags generate nearly ﬁve times the amount of solid waste. Still, many people are rightly concerned about plastics becoming part of the ocean pollution problem. But the answer to that real problem is much simpler: Ensure that products are disposed of properly so they never enter waterways. Although there is always room for improvement, the US does a pretty good job at keeping plastics out of the ocean. A 2017 study published in the journal Environmental Sciences & Technology reported that up to 95 percent of plastic waste enters oceans from just 10 rivers worldwide. Eight of the rivers are in Asia, and two are in Africa. None is in the US. A 2015 study in Science magazine estimated that the US contributes less than 1 percent of the plastic litter in the world’s oceans. The plastic bag crusade is part of a wider anti-plastics trend sweeping the green left. But like the equally misguided anti-straw campaigners, the plastic-bag scolds base their claims more on ideological commitment than on good science. They also give no consideration to the needs of people, not least the physically disabled, who are often dependent on both products. Let’s hope the New York Legislature doesn’t bend to unscientiﬁc hysteria, because the resulting policies are bad for people and the environment. Angela Logomasini is a senior fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute. FILED UNDER ALBANY , BANS , ENVIRONMENT , PLASTIC BAGS , 1/20/19 4/9/20, 10:43 AMScience shows that it’s not really green to ban plastic bags Page 3 of 3https://nypost.com/2019/01/20/science-shows-that-its-not-really-green-to-ban-plastic-bags/ 4/20/2020 Rightwing thinktanks use fear of Covid-19 to fight bans on plastic bags | Environment | The Guardian https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/mar/27/rightwing-thinktanks-use-fear-of-covid-19-to-fight-bans-on-plastic-bags 1/6 Rightwing thinktanks use fear of Covid19 to fight bans on plastic bags Karen McVeigh Seascape: the state of our oceans is supported by About this content Articles from conservative groups argue plastic bags are safer for coronavirus than reusable bags, misrepresenting recent studies Coronavirus latest updates See all our coronavirus coverage Fri 27 Mar 2020 04.00 EDT Your privacy We use cookies to improve your experience on our site and to show you personalised advertising. To find out more, read our privacy policy and cookie policy. I'm OK with thatOptions Information that may be used Purposes 4/20/2020 Rightwing thinktanks use fear of Covid-19 to fight bans on plastic bags | Environment | The Guardian https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/mar/27/rightwing-thinktanks-use-fear-of-covid-19-to-fight-bans-on-plastic-bags 2/6 The fight to ban plastic bags, many of which end up polluting oceans and rivers, has taken a step backward as conservative US think-tanks exploit the fear of Covid-19, campaigners have said. Articles warning that reusable tote bags are worse than plastic ones for spreading coronavirus have been linked to major rightwing nonprofits such as the Manhattan Institute, and contain misinformation aimed at defeating or repealing plastic bag bans, said Greenpeace USA. The effort “risks further confusion” amid a global public health crisis, it said. Recent studies have found that Covid-19 could be stable on plastic and steel for up to three days, compared with 24 hours for cardboard and four hours for copper. The studies have not examined how long the virus remained on tote bags and there is little scientific evidence comparing reusable bags with plastic. Last week a number of US states and cities nevertheless took the decision to roll back plastic bag bans, citing the coronavirus. Maine repealed its ban. The governor of New Hampshire went further by issuing an order banning reusable bags, saying they risk spreading coronavirus. The governor of Massachusetts banned reusable bags and lifted plastic bag bans. And New York state, which implemented its plastic bag ban on 1 March, will delay enforcement until June. The moves follow articles by researchers at the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) – a libertarian nonprofit instrumental in persuading the Trump administration to abandon the Paris climate agreement – suggesting reusable grocery bags are riskier than plastic, and in a journal published by the Manhattan Institute suggesting sustainable bags can c arry viruses for up to nine days. While nonprofits are not required to disclose their donors, both have reportedly received money from fossil fuel companies. Among the sponsors for a CEI gala last year were the Charles Koch Institute and the American Fuel and Petrochemic al Manufacturers association, the New York Times reported. Greenpeace USA criticised the Manhattan Institute and the CEI for a series of articles suggesting that reusable bags are a higher risk for transmitting coronavirus than plastic bags, misrepresenting recent research that shows the virus survives at least as long on plastic. Such misinformation is already being used to lobby state legislatures to defeat or repeal plastic bag ban legislation, it said. John Hocevar, Greenpeace USA’s oceans campaigner, condemned what he described as industry groups that have “seen the crisis as an opportunity to exploit people’s fears around Covid-19 to push their pro-pollution agendas”. “Even in the short term, plastic does not inherently make something clean and safe, and we should not confuse corporate public relations with factual medical research,” Hocevar said. Your privacy We use cookies to improve your experience on our site and to show you personalised advertising. To find out more, read our privacy policy and cookie policy. I'm OK with thatOptions Information that may be used Purposes 4/20/2020 Rightwing thinktanks use fear of Covid-19 to fight bans on plastic bags | Environment | The Guardian https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/mar/27/rightwing-thinktanks-use-fear-of-covid-19-to-fight-bans-on-plastic-bags 3/6 Similar moves are under way in Britain, where the environment secretary, George Eustice, has waived the 5p charge on plastic bags for supermarket shoppers online. Eustice said it was a temporary measure aimed at reducing potential cross-infection between delivery workers and those in isolation, and to speed up deliveries. Plans to further reduce single-use plastic, under the environment bill, have been put on hold due to Covid-19. The timing of the Welsh government’s plans to restrict single-use plastics is also under review, it told the Guardian. In the US, the misinformation campaign against reusable bags ramped up after two recent studies. The first, from the University of California, published last month in the Journal of Hospital Infection, reported that viruses similar to Covid-19 could remain on plastic for up to nine days. The second, published on 17 March in the New England Journal of Medicine, found that Covid-19 could be stable on plastic for up to three days. The viruses could be inactivated by disinfection. Neither study examined reusable bags. However, the day after the first study was published, the Plastics Industry Association wrote to the US Department for Health and Human Services, urging the government to make a pronouncement supporting single-use plastic. The association claimed “study after study” showed reusable bags to be a health risk. It did not mention the University of California study. Then on 12 March, the City Journal, published by the MI, ran an article claiming: “The ‘sustainable’ bags that environmentalists and politicians have been so eager to impose on the public … c an sustain the Covid-19 and flu viruses and spread the virus throughout the store.” The piece, headlined “Greening our way to infection” and written by John Tierney, cites unnamed research that Tierney claims showed viruses and bacteria can survive on tote bags for nine days. It offers no evidence to back this claim – in fact, it links to a study showing viruses can remain on plastic for nine days. The piece also quotes a 2018 study published in the Journal of Environmental Health where researchers found traces of a surrogate virus on surfaces and the hands of shoppers and store staff high enough “to risk transmission”. They recommended in-store hand hygiene and washing reuseable bags. They did not compare the risk of reusable bags with new plastic bags. New York was the third US state to outlaw non-biodegradable carrier bags, but the ban is yet to be enforced. Photograph: Timothy A Clary/AFP Your privacy We use cookies to improve your experience on our site and to show you personalised advertising. To find out more, read our privacy policy and cookie policy. I'm OK with thatOptions Information that may be used Purposes 4/20/2020 Rightwing thinktanks use fear of Covid-19 to fight bans on plastic bags | Environment | The Guardian https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/mar/27/rightwing-thinktanks-use-fear-of-covid-19-to-fight-bans-on-plastic-bags 4/6 Another piece by Tierney, with a similar argument, appeared in the New York Post entitled “Using tote bags instead of plastic could help spread coronavirus”. Meanwhile, the Washington Examiner published a piece by Angela Logomasini of the Competitive Enterprise Institute on 18 March, a day after the New England Journal of Medicine study, headlined: “Plastic bag bans aren’t helping us fight against coronavirus”. Logomasini quotes the same 2018 study as Tierney, as well as a 2011 study on reusable and plastic bags that looked at bacteria, not viruses, and was partly funded by the Americ an Chemistry Council. Ivy Schlegel, a researcher at Greenpeace USA, said: “This is a classic PR tactic. After new studies showing Covid-19 lasts longer on plastic, they have pulled back into their bag of tricks to redeploy old studies, linking them to legitimate public fear of the coronavirus.” Hocevar said: “The truth is that we don’t have all of the answers to this Covid-19 emergency yet, and for industry to use this as an opportunity to increase profits for the fossil fuel and plastics sectors is dangerous and irresponsible. “What we do know is that there is no substitute for strict hygiene. Just because a material is made from single-use plastic does not make it less likely to transmit viral infections during use; in fact, plastic surfaces appear to allow coronaviruses to remain infectious for particularly long periods compared to other materials.” “The decisions we make for our families in this health crisis should be based on science and the advice of medic al professionals, not lobbyists for the fossil fuel and plastics industries. Wherever reusables are an option, it is incumbent upon all of us to do our part to protect one another by washing them thoroughly after every use.” A spokesperson for the Manhattan Institute said: “A clear reading of Mr Tierney’s City Journal article shows support of his argument by multiple scientific studies on the use of reusable bags in supermarkets. We stand by the integrity of Mr Tierney’s journalism and will continue to publish articles that shed light on various aspects of this pandemic that we are all going through together.” Greenpeace USA have said reusables should continue to be used wherever they are an option. Photograph: Mary Altaffer/AP Your privacy We use cookies to improve your experience on our site and to show you personalised advertising. To find out more, read our privacy policy and cookie policy. I'm OK with thatOptions Information that may be used Purposes 4/20/2020 Rightwing thinktanks use fear of Covid-19 to fight bans on plastic bags | Environment | The Guardian https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/mar/27/rightwing-thinktanks-use-fear-of-covid-19-to-fight-bans-on-plastic-bags 5/6 In a response to the Guardian, Logomasini, a senior fellow at the CEI, defended her Washington Examiner article. She said: “Greenpeace’s assertions that promoting clean single-use plastic bags over reusable ones exploits Covid-19 fears and is part of a pro-pollution agenda are ridiculous. “It’s clearly helpful – not exploitative – for people to point out the relative risks associated with reusable grocery bags and single-use plastic bags. Greenpeace basically admits that the reusable bags can harbour dangerous pathogens, including Covid-19, by explaining that people should wash them after every use.” A CEI spokesperson said: “Angela Logomasini is a well-respected expert with 30 years of working on plastic issues. Her positions are developed independently and are not influenced by the views of our supporters. The Competitive Enterprise Institute is funded by thousands of individuals, businesses and foundations around the globe, and we respect their privacy.” • This article was amended on 31 March 2020 because an earlier version incorrectly referred to “reusable cloth bags”; to remove a reference to “a lobbying effort” in connection with the Manhattan Institute; to clarify that an article appeared in the City Journal which is published by the Manhattan Institute and was not “authored by” that organisation and to make it clear that it is the timing of the Welsh government’s plans that is affected. There's another global emergency... ... that the media c an’t afford to stop covering. Even as a pandemic terrorizes the world, the climate emergency continues to present a grave threat to the planet. The Guardian has long recognized that the climate crisis is the defining issue of our time. We need your help to keep it front and center. This week, the Guardian is joining forces with more than 400 news organizations from around the world as part of Covering Climate Now, a global initiative to increase nationwide media coverage of the climate emergency. We will be sharing our climate coverage with newsrooms all over the world in the hope that outlets without dedic ated environment desks will have the opportunity to provide in-depth reporting on this issue. By increasing the reach of our climate coverage, our goal is to spark action from our leaders, inspire citizens and point to systematic change. Earlier this year, we decided to renounce fossil fuel advertising, becoming the first major global news organisation to institute an outright ban on taking money from companies that extract fossil fuels. Even in a particularly challenging news environment, with advertising revenue plummeting fast, we will continue to be guided by our values. Our journalism relies on our readers’ generosity – your financial support has meant we can keep investigating, disentangling and interrogating. It has protected our independence, which has never been so critical. We are so grateful. We hope you will consider supporting us today. We need your support to keep delivering quality journalism that’s open and independent. Every reader contribution, however big or small, is so valuable. Support the Guardian from as little as $1 – and it only takes a minute. Thank you. Your privacy We use cookies to improve your experience on our site and to show you personalised advertising. To find out more, read our privacy policy and cookie policy. I'm OK with thatOptions Information that may be used Purposes 4/20/2020 Rightwing thinktanks use fear of Covid-19 to fight bans on plastic bags | Environment | The Guardian https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/mar/27/rightwing-thinktanks-use-fear-of-covid-19-to-fight-bans-on-plastic-bags 6/6 Support The Guardian Topics Plastic bags Seascape: the state of our oceans Greenpeace Plastics Waste news Your privacy We use cookies to improve your experience on our site and to show you personalised advertising. To find out more, read our privacy policy and cookie policy. I'm OK with thatOptions Information that may be used Purposes 4/20/2020 How long can the virus that causes COVID-19 live on surfaces? | Hub https://hub.jhu.edu/2020/03/20/sars-cov-2-survive-on-surfaces/1/4 COVID-19 information and resources for JHU Q +A HOW LONG CAN THE VIRUS THAT CAUSES COVID-19 LIVE ON SURFACES? Carolyn Machamer, a cell biologist who specializes in coronaviruses,discusses the latest research on the virus that causes COVID-19 Samuel Volkin /  March 20 According to a recent study published in the New England Journal of Medicine, SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, can live in the air and on surfaces between several hours and several days. The study found that the virus is viable for up to 72 hours on plastics, 48 hours on stainless steel, 24 hours on cardboard, and 4 hours on copper. It is also detectable in the air for three hours. 4/20/2020 How long can the virus that causes COVID-19 live on surfaces? | Hub https://hub.jhu.edu/2020/03/20/sars-cov-2-survive-on-surfaces/2/4 Carolyn Machamer, a professor of cell biology whose lab at the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine has studied the basic biology of coronaviruses for years, joined Johns Hopkins MPH/MBA candidate Samuel Volkin for a brief discussion of these findings and what they mean for efforts to protect against spread of the virus. The conversation has been edited for length and clarity. Volkin: According to this report, it sounds like the COVID-19 virus is potentially livingon surfaces for days. How worried should we be about our risk of becoming infectedsimply by touching something an infected person was in contact with days ago? Machamer: What's getting a lot of press and is presented out of context is that the virus can last on plastic for 72 hours—which sounds really scary. But what's more important is the amount of the virus that remains. It's less than 0.1% of the starting virus material. Infection is theoretically possible but unlikely at the levels remaining after a few days. People need to know this. While the New England Journal of Medicine study found that the COVID virus can be detected in the air for 3 hours, in nature, respiratory droplets sink to the ground faster than the aerosols produced in this study. The experimental aerosols used in labs are smaller than what comes out of a cough or sneeze, so they remain in the air at face-level longer than heavier particles would in nature. What is the best way I can protect myself, knowing that the virus that causes COVID-19lives on surfaces? You are more likely to catch the infection through the air if you are next to someone infected than off of a surface. Cleaning surfaces with disinfectant or soap is very effective because once the oily surface coat of the virus is disabled, there is no way the virus can infect a host cell. However, there cannot be an overabundance of caution. Nothing like this has ever happened before. The CDC guidelines on how to protect yourself include: There has been speculation that once the summer season arrives and the weatherwarms up, the virus won't survive, but we don't yet know if that is true. Does theweather or indoor temperature aect the survival of the COVID-19 virus on surfaces? W H A T Y O U N E E D T O K N O W COVID-19 information center Resources and updates for the Johns Hopkins community, including travel guidance, information on university operations, and tips for preventing the spread of illness Clean and disinfect surfaces that many people come in contact with. These include tables, doorknobs, light switches, countertops, handles, desks, phones, keyboards, toilets, faucets, and sinks. Avoid touching high-contact surfaces in public. Wash your hands often with soap and water for at least 20 seconds immediately when you return home from a public place such as the bank or grocery store. When in a public space, put a distance of six feet between yourself and others. Most importantly, stay home if you are sick and contact your doctor. 4/20/2020 How long can the virus that causes COVID-19 live on surfaces? | Hub https://hub.jhu.edu/2020/03/20/sars-cov-2-survive-on-surfaces/3/4 There is no evidence one way or the other. The virus's viability in exposure to heat or cold has not been studied. But it does bear pointing out that the New England Journal of Medicine study was performed at about room temperature, 21-23 degrees Celsius. How does the virus that causes COVID-19 compare with other coronaviruses, and whyare we seeing so many more cases? SARS-CoV-2 behaves like a typical respiratory coronavirus in the basic mechanisms of infection and replication. But several mutations allow it to bind tighter to its host receptor and increase its transmissibility, which is thought to make it more infectious. The New England Journal of Medicine study suggests that the stability of SARS-CoV-2 is very similar to that of SARS-CoV1, the virus that caused the 2002-2003 SARS global outbreak. But, researchers believe people can carry high viral loads of the SARS-CoV-2 in the upper respiratory tract without recognizing any symptoms, allowing them to shed and transmit the virus while asymptomatic. Posted in Health, Science+Technology Tagged q+a, cell biology, coronavirus COMMENTS Community guidelines Editor's note: We welcome your comments; all we ask is that you keep it civil and on-topic, and don't break any laws. We reserve the right to remove any inappropriate comments. Johns Hopkins responds to COVID-19 Coverage of how the COVID-19 pandemic is aecting operations at JHU and how Hopkins experts and scientists are responding to the outbreak 4/20/2020 Plastic bag bans reversed: Coronavirus leads to reusable bag bans https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2020/04/08/plastic-bag-bans-reversed-coronavirus-reusable-bags-covid-19/2967950001/1/3 MONEY Plastic bag bans reversed: States, cities, stores are suddenly banning reusable bags during coronavirus Nathan Bomey USA TODAY Published 10:48 a.m. ET Apr. 8, 2020 Updated 11:58 a.m. ET Apr. 8, 2020 Plastic bags – which had been subject to bans in certain cities, states and stores because of their environmental impact – are seeing a sudden resurgence during the coronavirus pandemic. Fearing the spread of the virus on reusable bags, lawmakers throughout the country have taken steps in recent weeks to usher plastic bags back into stores and ban reusable bags, at least temporarily. In recent years, California, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Maine, New York, Oregon, and Vermont have taken steps to ban single-use plastic bags in one form or another. Many local municipalities also have implemented bans or restrictions. But lawmakers are reconsidering those bans. Maine Gov. Janet Mills has delayed the state's ban on single-use plastic bags from going into effect until Jan. 15, 2021. It had been set to take effect on Earth Day, April 22. New Hampshire Gov. Chris Sununu has directed all retailers to use single-use bags and prevented them from using reusable bags for now. Oregon also has suspended its brand-new ban on plastic bags, and cities from Bellingham, Washington, to Albuquerque, New Mexico, have announced a hiatus on their bans. In San Francisco, one of the first cities in the US to ban the use of plastic bags, the Department of Public Health issued an order preventing businesses from "permitting customers to bring their own bags, mugs or other reusable items from home." 4/20/2020 Plastic bag bans reversed: Coronavirus leads to reusable bag bans https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2020/04/08/plastic-bag-bans-reversed-coronavirus-reusable-bags-covid-19/2967950001/2/3 In Massachusetts, Gov. Charlie Baker iordered 139 municipalities that had placed restrictions on single-use bags to overturn those laws, according to multiple reports. "From now on, reusable bags are prohibited and all regulations on plastic bag bans will be lifted," Baker said, according to WBUR. Coronavirus and shopping for supplies: Getting to the bottom of the toilet paper shortage Coronavirus reduces driving:Auto insurers including Allstate, Geico to give back millions “People are scared for their lives, their livelihood, the economy, feeding their loved ones, so the environment is taking a back seat,” Glen Quadros, owner of the Great American Diner & Bar in Seattle, told the Associated Press. The plastics industry is pressuring the federal government to step in, lobbying the Trump administration to overturn bans on single-use plastics and arguing that reusable bags are vectors for viruses. "We are asking that the Department of Health and Human Services investigate this issue and make a public statement on the health and safety benefits seen in single-use plastics," Plastics Industry Association CEO Tony Radoszewski wrote to Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar in a letter dated March 18 and provided to USA TODAY. "We ask that the department speak out against bans on these products as a public safety risk and help stop the rush to ban these products by environmentalists and elected officials that puts consumers and workers at risk." Environmental watchdogs are blasting the plastics industry for trying to take advantage of this crisis, saying industry-funded research on the safety of plastic bags cannot be trusted. Plastic bags, which are made from petrochemicals, don't biodegrade, are rarely recycled and can prove deadly to wildlife. "For years, the plastics industry has funded and promoted research to try to discredit the growing movement to end single-use plastic pollution," Greenpeace said in a blog post. "And when COVID-19 began to spread, they saw a chance to strike and activate their network of pro-plastic surrogates. Now more than ever, we need independent guidance from medical professionals to inform our decisions around hygiene and shopping. People’s safety should come before profits." 4/20/2020 Plastic bag bans reversed: Coronavirus leads to reusable bag bans https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2020/04/08/plastic-bag-bans-reversed-coronavirus-reusable-bags-covid-19/2967950001/3/3 Greenpeace cited studies suggesting that "plastics are among the surfaces that human coronaviruses may survive on for the longest." But politicians are concerned that reusable bags could bring in the coronavirus from home, while brand-new plastic bags may be less likely to carry the virus. Meanwhile, retailers are taking action as well. Some stores such as Trader Joe's and Target are letting customers use their own bags if they sack their groceries themselves, while others are banning them. Contributing: The Associated Press Follow USA TODAY reporter Nathan Bomey on Twitter @NathanBomey. 4/20/2020 States and stores are banning reusable bags during COVID-19 pandemic. Is it safe to use them? | MPR News https://www.mprnews.org/story/2020/03/18/states-and-stores-are-banning-reusable-bags-is-it-safe-to-use-them 1/4 Coronavirus What you need to know | Your questions answered | How to help COVID-19 States and stores are banning reusable bags during COVID-19 pandemic. Is it safe to use them? Dan Kraker Duluth March 27, 2020 3:15 p.m. The governors of Massachusetts and New Hampshire have temporarily ordered the use of disposable bags in stores around their states as a way to tamp down the spread of the coronavirus pandemic. And grocery stores around the country, including some in Minnesota, are putting restrictions on them. Eduardo Munoz Alvarez | Getty Images Last week, the Hy-Vee grocery chain temporarily banned reusable bags, saying it is difficult to monitor their cleanliness. This week, Target began to ask customers to bag their own purchases if they're using their own bags. And many grocery stores are doing the same thing. A yer posted at a checkout lane of a Super One grocery store in Duluth on Thursday asked shoppers to bag their own groceries if they are using reusable bags. Dan Kraker | MPR News The governors of Massachusetts and New Hampshire have temporarily ordered the use of disposable bags in stores around their states, as a way to tamp down the spread of the coronavirus pandemic. And the Minnesota Grocers Association has developed flyers for its stores to display at checkout lanes, saying reusable bags could be a carrier of the virus. The group cites a recent study that found the novel coronavirus can live on hard surfaces like plastic or stainless steel 4/20/2020 States and stores are banning reusable bags during COVID-19 pandemic. Is it safe to use them? | MPR News https://www.mprnews.org/story/2020/03/18/states-and-stores-are-banning-reusable-bags-is-it-safe-to-use-them 2/4 for up to 72 hours, and on cardboard for up to 24 hours. But the study did not specifically look at reusable bags — leaving shoppers with the question: What to do? As it turns out: It depends on which researcher you talk to. "I think, generally, the science doesn't support a need to ban the bags,” said Pete Raynor, an environmental health scientist at the University of Minnesota who studies airborne viruses. He said viruses are less likely to survive for long periods of time on porous surfaces, like fabrics, than on hard surfaces. "So if you're not making daily trips to the grocery store,” he said, “I think the science suggests that you're not going to have an infectious virus on the bag." Raynor recommends shoppers wash their hands when they get home from the store — and he added that the COVID-19 outbreak has not changed his own family's shopping-bag habits. "We're still using them, and I think it's the right decision,” he said. “I don't have any qualms about us taking groceries in reusable bags." Experts agree that the main mode of transmission for the coronavirus is through the air, from someone nearby coughing or sneezing. They say that touching an object that has the virus on it, and then touching your face, could be a secondary way the virus is spread. So many won’t rule out the possibility that shoppers could pick up the virus from a reusable bag that’s touched a surface that has the virus on it. A few years ago, researchers in California conducted a study in which they sprayed reusable bags with a kind of virus that doesn't infect people, before customers entered a grocery store. Then they followed shoppers through the store to see where the virus spread. They found that the virus spread to shopping carts, and all over the checkout lanes — and to store employees’ hands. "So there's the idea that you could bring [the virus] in [to the store], which is what we were testing,” said Ryan Sinclair, an environmental microbiology professor at Loma Linda University who led the study. “But … as I've been thinking about this since the coronavirus, it's also about bringing things out of the store,” he said. “Even if you have a clean, reusable grocery bag, I think anything that you're touching on those surfaces in the grocery store can also bring things out." Sinclair said he supports broader efforts to encourage the use of reusable bags, including California’s law that bans the use of single-use plastic bags. But he said right now, he feels it's safer for his family to use disposable ones. Most experts, though, say reusable bags are not going to be a major vehicle of spread for the coronavirus. "You’re going to see these types of reactions all over the country with specific household items that concern is raised over,” said Amesh Adalja, an infectious disease and critical care physician at the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security. “However, in the grand scheme of things, I don’t think it’s something that people should spend much time worrying about,” he said. “If you want to use a reusable bag, it's fine." Adalja said people can become overwhelmed if they start worrying about all the items that could potentially be vehicles for transmitting the virus. Instead, he said, people should focus on the basic advice public health officials everywhere have been stressing: "Social distancing, washing your hands, not touching your face, trying to avoid sick people if you can, and if you are sick, staying home so you don’t contaminate others," he said. But there are steps shoppers can take to make sure their reusable bags are not contaminated. Joseph Vinetz, a professor of infectious diseases at the Yale School of Medicine, said it's not a bad idea to spray reusable bags with an alcohol-based cleaning solution. Or wash them with soap and water. If they’re cloth bags, run them through the washing machine. And, if governments or stores want to ban reusable bags, Vinetz said, that's OK, as long as it’s for a short period of time. 4/20/2020 States and stores are banning reusable bags during COVID-19 pandemic. Is it safe to use them? | MPR News https://www.mprnews.org/story/2020/03/18/states-and-stores-are-banning-reusable-bags-is-it-safe-to-use-them 3/4 “I think that using billions of plastic bags a year is a bad thing for our environment,” he said. “But right now, it’s even worse for our environment to have an ongoing pandemic.” COVID-19 in Minnesota Health officials for weeks have been increasingly raising the alarm over the spread of the novel coronavirus in the United States. The disease is transmitted through respiratory droplets, coughs and sneezes, similar to the way the flu can spread. Government and medical leaders are urging people to wash their hands frequently and well, refrain from touching their faces, cover their coughs, disinfect surfaces and avoid large crowds, all in an effort to curb the virus’ rapid spread. The state of Minnesota has temporarily closed schools, while administrators work to determine next steps, and is requiring a temporary closure of all in-person dining at restaurants, bars and coffee shops, as well as theaters, gyms, yoga studios and other spaces in which people congregate in close proximity. Cases conrmed 2,470 Hospitalized 237 No iso 1 As of April 20 | Minnesota Department of Health Source: As of April 20 | Minnesota Department of Health G t th d t C t d ith D t Number of cases 1-2 3-5 6-20 21-50 50+ + – Click next to see the number of COVID-19 tests in Minn. Number of conrmed COVID-19 cases in Minnesota Replay March 5 March 14 March 23 April 1 April 10 April 19 0 cases 200 cases 400 cases 600 cases 800 cases 1000 cases 1200 cases 1400 cases 1600 cases 1800 cases 2000 cases 2200 cases 2400 cases 114New casesNew casesNew cases 2470Total casesTotal casesTotal cases Source: Minnesota Department of Health  1 of 3 4/20/2020 States and stores are banning reusable bags during COVID-19 pandemic. Is it safe to use them? | MPR News https://www.mprnews.org/story/2020/03/18/states-and-stores-are-banning-reusable-bags-is-it-safe-to-use-them 4/4 Before you go... MPR News is dedicated to bringing you clarity in coverage from our reporters across the state, stories that connect us, and conversations that provide perspectives when we need it most. We rely on your help to do this. Your donation has the power to keep MPR News strong and accessible to all during this crisis and beyond. Donate today. A gift of $25 makes a difference. Support MPR News © 2020 Minnesota Public Radio. All rights reserved. AVON REGULAR MEETING MINUTES THURSDAY APRIL 14, 2020 SETUP AS A VIRTUAL MEETING VIA ZOOM DUE TO COVID-19 AND TOWN HALL CLOSURE 1.CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL The meeting was hosted in a virtual format, using Zoom.us. Mayor Smith Hymes called the meeting to order at 4:00 p.m. A roll call was taken, and Council members present by video/audio were Amy Phillips, Tamra Underwood, Scott Prince, Jennie Fancher, and Jake Wolf. Councilor Chico Thuon was absent. Also present were Town Attorney Paul Wisor, Police Chief Greg Daly, Executive Assistant to the Town Manager Ineke de Jong, Town Manager Eric Heil, and Town Clerk Brenda Torres. 2.APPROVAL OF AGENDA Video Start Time: 00:00:34 Councilor Thuon joined the meeting by video/audio at 4:01 p.m. right after the Roll Call. Town Manager Eric Heil mentioned that material for item 5.3 was not included in the packet, but it could still be discussed as scheduled in the agenda. Councilor Fancher moved to approve the agenda as presented. Mayor Pro Tem Phillips seconded the motion and the motion passed on a vote of 6 to 1. Councilor Wolf voted no. 3.DISCLOSURE OF ANY CONFLICTS OF INTEREST RELATED TO AGENDA ITEMS Video Start Time: 00:02:10 No conflicts of interest were disclosed. 4.PUBLIC COMMENT Video Start Time: 00:02:20 Mayor Smith Hymes explained to the public how to participate via video/audio or via phone or via email for public comments. Michael Cacioppo asked two questions, why does Councilor Wolf always vote ‘Nay’ on the approving of the agenda and why the bag ban was not included in the agenda as he thought that Councilor Thuon requested it at the last meeting. Mayor Smith Hymes and Councilor Thuon responded to his comment and agreed this had not been made clear between the two of them and to put this item on the next agenda. Mr. Cacioppo said he ‘raised his hand’ during the approval of the agenda but he was not given the opportunity to speak. Town Attorney Paul Wisor pointed out that there is no obligation to have Public Comments and our Policies provide that we will allow Public Comments at the beginning of the meetings only. 5.BUSINESS ITEMS 5.1. NOTICE OF AWARD NOTTINGHAM PARK UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT (TOWN ENGINEER JUSTIN HILDRETH) Video Start Time: 00:08:12 Town Engineer Justin Hildreth presented and answered questions from Council. Councilor Fancher moved to authorize issuance of Notice of Award for the Nottingham Park Utility improvements Project contract to the low bidder, Solar Valley Enterprises, in the amount of $264,364 as approved in the Town of Avon 2020 Capital Projects Fund. Mayor Pro Tem Phillips seconded the motion and the motion passed by a vote of 6 to 1. Councilor Wolf voted no as he thinks this is not the right moment given the current situation with the pandemic. AVON REGULAR MEETING MINUTES THURSDAY APRIL 14, 2020 SETUP AS A VIRTUAL MEETING VIA ZOOM DUE TO COVID-19 AND TOWN HALL CLOSURE 5.2. WORK SESSION TO REVIEW 2020 AVON CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT PLAN AND FUND (TOWN MANAGER ERIC HEIL AND TOWN ENGINEER JUSTIN HILDRETH) Video Start Time: 00:25:55 Town Manager Eric Heil presented a review of the 2020 Avon Capital Improvements Project Plan to discuss with Council whether to proceed or defer with various planned capital improvements projects. Council gave direction for staff to move forward with various projects, including the Nottingham Park Pavilion floor replacement, restrooms- Nottingham Park old Town Hall site (Design), restrooms- Nottingham Lake (screening 3 porta-lets & schematic design new restrooms), Mall activation elements (music display), the I-70 Interchange Pedestrian Enhancement (design), East Stormwater Vault (Design and Installation), West Stormwater Vault (design), and prioritize for this year calendar Avon Road pedestrian safety improvements. Council also gave direction to staff to defer the restoration and remodel of Nottingham Park Cabin (Design). Mayor Smith Hymes asked for Public Comment and no Public Comments were made. 5.3. DISCUSSION OF AVON BUSINESS RELIEF (TOWN MANAGER ERIC HEIL) Video Start Time: 02:27:51 Town Manager Eric Heil talked about the Avon Business Relief. He said a report on what other communities are doing for business assistance will be presented, along with the reusable bags item, at the next Council meetings on Thursday April 23, 2020. Councilor Wolf mentioned that the Cultural, Arts and Special Events committee meeting will be held on Thursday April 16, 2020. He asked Council and members of the community for input on new ideas to be shared at the meeting. Alex Bolla made a Public Comment about his company, InfraHeat, Co’s, products. They could help projects like some of the ones presented on the Avon Capital Improvements plan. He will send more information on the different products they have and how they can be used in different areas. 5.4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM APRIL 9, 2020 REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING (TOWN CLERK BRENDA TORRES) Video Start Time: 02:40:21 Mayor Smith Hymes made a minor amendment. Councilor Underwood requested, as a general protocol during virtual meetings, to make a notation every time a Council member drops-off due to technical difficulties. Councilor Underwood moved to approve the minutes from April 9, 2020 as amended and adding her notation. Councilor Fancher seconded the motion and the motion passed on a vote of 6 to 1. Councilor Wolf voted no. 6. MAYOR & C OUNCIL COMMENTS & MEETING UPDATES Video Start Time: 02:43:44 Councilor Thuon mentioned he went to Northside Kitchen to use one of the Avon Meal Vouchers and the restaurant and Staff were very appreciative. He said he watched staff in the process of making his food and he felt very comfortable and the floor is very well marked for social distancing. He wants to send the word AVON REGULAR MEETING MINUTES THURSDAY APRIL 14, 2020 SETUP AS A VIRTUAL MEETING VIA ZOOM DUE TO COVID-19 AND TOWN HALL CLOSURE out to support the restaurants that are open and for their great efforts. He closed his comments saying that Pavalici’s Pizza is outstanding. Mayor Pro Tem Phillips seconded the Pavalici’s Pizza endorsement and commented about the Avon In- Deed program. She said this is a really good way to make it easier for people that live and work here to buy a place. Councilor Thuon requested to put it in the agenda to be discussed. She said it would be great if Council comes to a resolution and had it in place by the end of May. Councilor Wolf agreed on the Pavalici’s Pizza comments. He thanked Arjun Kale and High Five Media for the incredible job they are doing during these virtual meetings and keeping the community connected. He also thanked Town Staff. Councilor Wolf requested to have Chief Daly unmuted. Chief Daly answered several questions from Council. Councilor Wolf asked him about crimes and police reports received under the given situation. Chief Daly compared calls for service from last year in relation to the same period this year (March 1-April 14) and reported there is approximately a 58% increase, including Domestic violence incident reports that were doubled from 4 in 2019 to 8 in 2020. He said that overall our community is doing good with social distancing and provided information for help centers for people to reach out, including Non-emergency Vail Dispatch number, (970) 479-2201, to get in touch with an officer and/or the Hope Center. Mayor Smith Hymes asked Chief Daly if any call of the increased calls had been COVID-19 related. He said some of them have, but the protocol has changed, and they have been working in collaboration with other departments. Councilor Underwood asked Chief Daly clarification about social distancing in the park, as the signage looks confusing to her. Chief Daly said the park itself is open to exercise, per the public order, but areas considered ‘high-touch’ are closed, like the fitness courts, picnic and playground areas. The lake is also closed. Councilor Underwood asked Staff to update signage to make clear what activities are allowed. Councilor Wolf mentioned Council received a message that the testing in Eagle County has caught up. He said more information on the list of testing centers is available on their website and mentioned that they are encouraging people to get properly tested as soon as they have symptoms. Councilor Thuon thanked Town of Avon essential workers. Mayor Smith Hymes thanked Councilor Underwood for her hard work on the food security and rent relief. She said that she and the Town Manager Eric Heil were part of a call set up by the Vail Valley Foundation and it was mentioned that the rate of testing positive this week went down from 35% to 7% of the people that are tested and 4.5% of the population has been tested; hospitals are in good shape and some of our urgent care nurses have been sent to Denver to help. She mentioned a comment from Vail Health CEO Will Cook made on the call, that “more people are going to get poor than they are going to get sick.” She said that liaison people contacting communities for healthy meals distribution mentioned that the message they are getting back is that the food piece is getting solved, but rent relief is the real pressing need. Councilor Underwood asked Mayor Smith Hymes about the anti-body testing. She responded that this was addressed in the call and it is her understanding that is not available yet. AVON REGULAR MEETING MINUTES THURSDAY APRIL 14, 2020 SETUP AS A VIRTUAL MEETING VIA ZOOM DUE TO COVID-19 AND TOWN HALL CLOSURE Mayor Smith Hymes pointed out that the MIRA bus had gone to do free COVID-19 testing at The Aspens and Eaglebend Apartments. They did 100 tests 3 weeks ago, down to 50 last week and 25 this week, and the infection rate has been under 15% for that population. 7. ADJOURN There being no further business before Council, Mayor Smith Hymes moved to adjourn the regular meeting. The time was 7:19 p.m. These minutes are 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, and the video of the meeting, which is available at www.highfivemedia.org. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED: Brenda Torres, Town Clerk APPROVED: Sarah Smith Hymes ___________________________________ Amy Phillips Jake Wolf Chico Thuon Jennie Fancher Scott Prince Tamra Underwood M E M O R A N D U M TO: Board of Directors FROM: Catherine Hayes, Board Secretary DATE: March 30, 2020 RE: Summary of Authority’s March 26, 2020, virtual Board Meeting The following is a summary of items discussed at the March 26, 2020, Authority Board Meeting: Board members present and acting included: Chair George Gregory, Secretary Kim Bell Williams, Treasurer Geoff Dreyer, Sarah Smith Hymes, Mick Woodworth, and Pam Elsner. Roll Call Secretary Hayes noted this was the Authority’s first virtual meeting and took roll call. The virtual meeting complied with the Eagle County public health order related to the COVID-19 pandemic and to prevent the spread of the coronavirus within the community. Virtual meeting information was posted on the uerwa.org website and anyone interested in attending virtually could request Skype or dial-in information for the meeting. Emergency Declaration The board ratified its March 17 approval to extend a joint resolution with the Eagle River Water & Sanitation District to declare an emergency related to the coronavirus pandemic, making the entities eligible for any state and federal funding that is available for pandemic response purposes. COVID-19 Update and Operations Report Linn Brooks and Siri Roman summarized the Authority and District’s response to the pandemic. Linn outlined the initial planning stages, which began when the virus was spreading in China earlier in the year. Operations priorities and risks were identified to ensure staff could continue to provide drinking water and treat wastewater and meet all applicable regulations. Operations continue to be stable and operations staff of each department are following department-specific protocols to ensure sufficient backup/depth in their areas of focus, regular and routine sanitization of work areas, and that social distancing requirements of six feet are met, and that unnecessary traffic in and out of facilities is minimized. All non- essential employees who are able were required to work from home beginning on March 16. Various policies to support staff and ensure health and safety were outlined. Siri noted staff is experiencing some anxiety and stress, and there are many resources for employees. Managers and supervisors are checking in with staff frequently as well. Pando Feeder Canal Protest Glenn Porzak discussed the protest letter he filed on behalf of the Authority and District regarding the recent diligence application for the Pando Feeder Canal water right. The letter was filed on behalf of the District, Authority, and Vail Resorts and is protesting an inclusion in the diligence finding that would unduly restrict the ability to obtain an absolute decree for a future enlargement of Eagle Park Reservoir. Glenn also recently filed an opposition to the state and division engineers’ motion to intervene. The case was set for a phone status conference with the judge. Eagle Park Reservoir Diligence Application Glenn Porzak reported the diligence application for remaining portions of conditional Eagle Park Reservoir water rights was filed; this was a joint application of all the Company’s shareholders. No statements of opposition were filed. Summary of Authority’s March 26, 2020, virtual Board Meeting Page 2 of 2 Policies related to COVID-19 The board unanimously approved a policy to enact a waiver period for customers during which finance charges on late fees would not be incurred; current and past due accounts would not incur additional finance charges; no water shut-offs for non- payment; and no mailing of delinquent notices. The waiver period is from 04/02/2020 to 05/04/2020 and can be extended by motion of the board. Such a policy supports the community during this time when many are experiencing financial hardship due to the shutdown of businesses to prevent the spread of coronavirus.