Nederland Eldora Record: corrections and updates

Update: Under How the Board voted, added who is on the Board now: which current members took part in the decisions through January 2026, which…

2026-10-20T00:00:00Z

Under How the Board voted, added who is on the Board now: which current members took part in the decisions through January 2026, which joined later, and which members have since left.

Update: Above the Payment ledger, added a note that the earliest invoices, from January to July 2025, were paid from the Legal budget and moved…

2026-10-20T00:00:00Z

Above the Payment ledger, added a note that the earliest invoices, from January to July 2025, were paid from the Legal budget and moved into the account on Sept. 30, 2025, and that they are listed under Nov. 5, 2025.

Update: Under The acquisition in brief, the timeline now starts in November 2024, when the Town said it was pursuing the purchase and the Board…

2026-10-20T00:00:00Z

Under The acquisition in brief, the timeline now starts in November 2024, when the Town said it was pursuing the purchase and the Board first discussed it in open session (Nov. 19), and notes that closed sessions on purchasing property for recreational activities began Sept. 3, 2024.

Update: Under Questions and records requests from the public, added the July 2025 town hall, where residents asked how much had been spent on due…

2026-10-20T00:00:00Z

Under Questions and records requests from the public, added the July 2025 town hall, where residents asked how much had been spent on due diligence and whether the purchase would cost the Town money, and noted that FAQ 4.0 didn’t say how much had been spent.

Update: Under The running total was in the meeting packets, added that the minutes searched, from October 2025 through Oct.

2026-10-19T00:00:00Z

Under The running total was in the meeting packets, added that the minutes searched, from October 2025 through Oct. 6, 2026, record no discussion of the warrant lists or the “Due From” entries, each list having been approved with the consent agenda.

Update: Under Estimates compared with spending, the row for Res.

2026-10-19T00:00:00Z

Under Estimates compared with spending, the row for Res. 2025-03 now quotes what the Board was told at the Jan. 7, 2025, meeting, from the Town’s video, naming Trustee Luke Miller, who asked, and Town Administrator Jon Cain and Town Attorney Jennifer Madsen, who answered: that the Town would owe special counsel’s fees if no bonds were issued, that staff had “done some risk analysis,” and that bond counsel would also need to be paid if the deal didn’t close. Not in the records searched adds that risk analysis and the promised cost-estimate updates.

Update: Under Can the Town absorb it?, added Could the utility funds lend to the General Fund?.

2026-10-19T00:00:00Z

Under Can the Town absorb it?, added Could the utility funds lend to the General Fund?. It covers the utility funds’ past loans to the Downtown Development Authority, the cash the Town’s draft utility plans leave available, the questions the records leave open about voter approval, the sales tax set aside for the utilities, and the utilities’ loan terms, what would happen if no fund can lend (including staff or service cuts and sales of Town property), and what Colorado law says about municipal bankruptcy and dissolving a town. The funds table, the summary (which also points to the bankruptcy and dissolution paragraph), the opening paragraph, and the gaps table now point to it, and the deficit section adds the costs’ share of the General Fund’s 2026 operating budget. The note under the General Fund tables now explains that the balance result assumes the costs already paid are written off and the rest counted as 2026 spending, whenever the cash goes out, while the cash table assumes payment in 2026.

Update: Under Not in the records searched, noted that the only indenture posted is the January 2026 draft, which predates the sale-leaseback, and…

2026-10-18T00:00:00Z

Under Not in the records searched, noted that the only indenture posted is the January 2026 draft, which predates the sale-leaseback, and that Ordinance 885 said substantially final forms of the bond documents would be on file with the Town Clerk.

Update: Under Not in the records searched, added the amounts the bonds would have set aside at closing for capital projects, reserves, and early…

2026-10-18T00:00:00Z

Under Not in the records searched, added the amounts the bonds would have set aside at closing for capital projects, reserves, and early interest, which the draft Indenture of Trust leaves blank, and the sources and uses of funds that could show them.

Update: Added more from the Oct.

2026-10-17T00:00:00Z

Added more from the Oct. 20, 2026, Board packet. Under Questions and records requests, the four requests about the acquisition listed in the Town Clerk’s report. Under Where things stand, the Town Manager’s August 2026 resignation, the return of the Town’s previous Town Manager as interim manager, her contract term, and the timing of the permanent search. Under Decisions to watch, the interim manager’s stated budget priorities.

Update: Added a separate page with the researcher’s opinions, linked from the statement at the top.

2026-10-17T00:00:00Z

Added a separate page with the researcher’s opinions, linked from the statement at the top. The opinions are kept off this page, which remains drawn only from Town records and official sources.

Update: Added this page’s calculation that if the Eldora sale fails in 2026, the Town’s General Fund would end the year about $1.9 million below zero, with the state budget and TABOR rules that a deficit would face.

2026-10-17T00:00:00Z

Under Could the Town pay the rest?, added two tables: the General Fund’s cash and its fund balance if the sale fails and the rest of the Town’s estimate is paid in 2026 (this page’s calculations, about −$1.4 million in cash before other 2026 activity and about −$1.9 million in fund balance at year-end). Added an explanation of why the fund balance can look healthier than the cash, and a new section, If the General Fund ends in deficit, quoting the Colorado budget law and TABOR provisions that would apply, the State Auditor’s fiscal-health benchmark for General Fund reserves, and the General Fund’s history in the audits as a lender to other funds, not a borrower. The opening paragraph and the findings now include the year-end figure, and the gaps table adds whether other funds could lend to the General Fund. The receivables explanation was moved, and the earlier −$1.5 million figure now points to the tables.

Update: Under Can the Town absorb it?, added Could the Town pay the rest?, which brings together what the records show, and don’t show, about…

2026-10-17T00:00:00Z

Under Can the Town absorb it?, added Could the Town pay the rest?, which brings together what the records show, and don’t show, about whether the Town could pay the roughly $1.3 million it would still owe if the sale fails. Passages it brings together were shortened in the findings and the CSAFE section. No figures changed.

Update: Shortened the page by removing repeated explanations.

2026-10-17T00:00:00Z

Shortened the page by removing repeated explanations. The opening paragraph now summarizes the whole page, and the findings no longer repeat one another. The coverage dates now appear in the independence note at the top; the researcher’s contact line moved under the statement; the gaps in the records and the records that could fill them are now one table; and explanations of the “Due From” account, the amounts added between warrant lists, and the audit’s receivables now appear once, with links. No facts or figures changed.

Update: Added the Oct. 20, 2026, Board packet’s Eldora update, which describes the proposed sale-leaseback, refers to outstanding obligations without listing them, and says staff will review Eldora costs at the Nov. 5 budget work session.

2026-10-16T00:00:00Z

Added records from the Oct. 20, 2026, Board packet. The revised plan now describes the proposed sale-leaseback from the Town’s Oct. 16 overview, and quotes a staff memo saying the Town is pursuing the purchase at $120 million and isn’t paying outside consultants for the current financing work. The findings and the Town’s statements now note that the memo refers to “outstanding financial obligations,” including contingent costs, without listing them, and that staff will review Eldora-related expenditures at the Nov. 5, 2026, budget work session. The packet also posts the 2026 ledger for account 10-00-1150, which matches the ledger released under CORA; it is now cited as a second source. The Oct. 20 warrant list adds a $200 Datasite invoice, bringing the total to $1,195,949.

Update: Added a statement from the researcher at the top of the page explaining why the page was made.

2026-10-15T00:00:00Z

Added a statement from the researcher at the top of the page explaining why the page was made. No figures or findings changed.

Update: The opening paragraph now says the Town expects to repay itself from revenue bonds if the purchase closes, that the purchase agreement…

2026-10-14T00:00:00Z

The opening paragraph now says the Town expects to repay itself from revenue bonds if the purchase closes, that the purchase agreement expired in April 2026 with no bonds sold and the Town pursuing a restructured deal, and that the Town estimates it would owe about $2.5 million if the sale doesn’t close, paid from CSAFE investments, without itemizing that estimate. It previously said only that no closing or bond sale appeared in the records searched. No figures changed.

Update: Added links to the Town’s video recordings of Board meetings.

2026-10-14T00:00:00Z

Added links to the Town’s video recordings of Board meetings. Each decision under How the Board voted now links to the moment it comes up in the recording, and a new list, Meetings where the acquisition’s costs came up, links to seven meetings where the acquisition’s costs were discussed. The descriptions name each agenda item; the recordings show what was said, and the minutes remain the official record. The times were found using machine transcripts and checked by viewing the recordings; the transcripts are not used as a source.

Update: The summary now notes that the Town hasn’t itemized its estimate of about $2.5 million owed if the sale doesn’t close, and the page now links to the Town’s meeting videos for each Board decision and for the meetings where the acquisition’s costs came up.

2026-10-14T00:00:00Z

The summary of findings now states that the Town hasn’t itemized its estimate of about $2.5 million owed if the sale doesn’t close: the Sept. 30, 2026, update gives no breakdown and doesn’t say whether the total includes what has already been paid, and the records searched don’t show which firms or contracts the remaining amount covers. The finding quotes FAQ 7.0 on contracts contingent on closing. The estimate’s breakdown was added to Not in the records searched and to the records request list. No figures changed.

Correction: The page said the 2025 audit carries the Eldora acquisition costs as a receivable and that they are not in the General Fund’s 2025 result.

2026-10-13T00:00:00Z

The page said the 2025 audit carries the Eldora acquisition costs as a receivable and that they are not in the General Fund’s 2025 result. No document searched says so: the audit mentions Eldora only as a planned bond financing and doesn’t itemize the General Fund’s $520,055 in “other receivables.” The page now says what the records show, that the Town records the costs in account 10-00-1150, “Due From,” which its ledger titles “Eldora - reimbursable expenses,” and labels the receivable treatment as this page’s reading under No budget and no dollar limits, The CSAFE investments and the Town’s funds, and The General Fund year by year. The summary no longer says the General Fund’s 2024 and 2025 results exclude the costs. How the audit reports them was added to Not in the records searched, and the 2025 trial balance to the records request list. Thanks to a reader for pointing this out.

Update: A review of the page for accuracy and sourcing.

2026-10-13T00:00:00Z

A review of the page for accuracy and sourcing. The summary now says residents asked for a breakdown of what is still owed in July 2026; the September 2026 comment asked for an update. Under The General Fund year by year, “operating deficits since 2023,” which relied on this page’s adjustment of the 2023 result, now reads that the balance fell in 2024 and 2025, and “would likely” was removed from this page’s write-off estimate. An unsourced statement that visitors pay part of the sales tax was replaced with sales tax’s share of budgeted General Fund revenue, from the budget summary. The capital-spending comparison now names the years it covers and links the budget summary, and the trustee appointment, the Great Outdoors Colorado letter, and the recall provision now have sources. The page’s description of its sources now includes records released in response to a public records request. Under If the sale doesn’t go through, “which never happened” now reads that the records searched don’t show the Town failing to close after every condition was met. Also added a proposed bond payment schedule to Not in the records searched, and SE Group’s pro forma and the bond payment schedule to the records request list. No figures changed.

Update: Added the Town’s ledger for the “Due From” account, released in response to a public records (CORA) request, which identifies the $106,743 the page had described as posted between warrant lists.

2026-10-13T00:00:00Z

Added the Town’s ledger for account 10-00-1150, “Due From,” released in its Sept. 25, 2026, response to a public records request and shared by the requester (ledger). It names the $106,743 that the page had described as posted between warrant lists, with payees not in the records searched: $56,743 in Widner Juran, Dickinson Wright, and Plante Moran invoices first paid from the Legal and Professional Services budget lines and later moved into the account, and a $50,000 POWDR invoice dated Jan. 6, 2026, that is on no warrant list. Those amounts are now in each firm’s total under Who was paid; POWDR’s total is $184,721. The request and the Town’s response are listed under Questions and records requests from the public.

Update: The fund table under The CSAFE investments and the Town’s funds now shows each fund’s cash and investments and the money owed between…

2026-10-12T00:00:00Z

The fund table under The CSAFE investments and the Town’s funds now shows each fund’s cash and investments and the money owed between funds exactly as the 2025 audit reports them, with totals. It had shown rounded figures and a General Fund figure netted by this page, so its rows didn’t add up. The General Fund’s position if those balances were settled, about $698,751, is now a separate note labeled as this page’s calculation, with the Eldora acquisition costs paid since year end. The summary of findings uses the same wording.

Update: The page now uses only the Town’s own records and website, and no longer relies on a BusinessDen article.

2026-10-12T00:00:00Z

The page now uses only the Town’s own records and website, and no longer relies on a BusinessDen article. That article was the only source attributing to POWDR a $50,000 posting between the Feb. 17 and March 3, 2026, warrant lists. No Town record names that payee, so the $50,000 is now counted with the other amounts posted between lists. POWDR’s total is now $134,721, its two warrant-list invoices; the amount posted between lists with no payee in the records searched is now $106,743; and firms named in Board documents total $533,304. The Ikon entry under If the sale doesn’t go through now describes only the draft agreement’s cost-sharing terms. The Town’s FAQ 7.0 still refers to the article, and that reference is quoted as the Town wrote it.

Update: The summary of findings now states only what the records show.

2026-10-12T00:00:00Z

The summary of findings now states only what the records show. It says the General Fund's balance fell in 2024 and 2025 (the audits) instead of describing operating deficits since 2023, which relied on this page's adjustment of the 2023 result; it states the budget and dollar-limit facts directly; it notes that the running balance on the warrant lists also included about $107,000 posted between lists; it notes that the delegation resolutions let the Town Manager engage counsel and consultants; it adds that CSAFE holds pooled cash for all Town funds, with the General Fund's net share at the end of 2025; and it no longer repeats POWDR's total. No figures changed.

Update: Removed repeated text.

2026-10-12T00:00:00Z

Removed repeated text. The separate Votes and Underwriters sections repeated the summary and Who was paid, and an Estimates row repeated the fees owed only if the sale closes; all three were removed. Shorter passages that restated nearby text were trimmed under CSAFE, Cost information in Board documents, What the Town told the public, Questions and records requests, Get involved, and About these figures, and the Who was paid roles no longer repeat what the evidence label says. The same review removed wording that went beyond the documents: a sentence speculating about what makes up the difference between the Town’s $2.5 million estimate and the payments, a note that the minutes record no answer to residents’ July 2026 requests, a bare comparison of the estimate with the whole CSAFE investment, and this page’s interpretation of the Town’s statements about general funds, which now quotes FAQ 4.0 and FAQ 6.0 instead. No figures changed.

Update: The account where the Town records the acquisition costs is now identified by its number as well as its name, 10-00-1150, “Due From,” at…

2026-10-12T00:00:00Z

The account where the Town records the acquisition costs is now identified by its number as well as its name, 10-00-1150, “Due From,” at its first mention in each section and in the records request list. No figures changed.

Correction: A completeness check of the archive found that minutes for three special meetings were never posted as separate adopted minutes but appear…

2026-10-12T00:00:00Z

A completeness check of the archive found that minutes for three special meetings were never posted as separate adopted minutes but appear as drafts in the next meeting’s packet. The Oct. 21 and Oct. 30, 2025, drafts, which the Board approved on Nov. 5, 2025, and the Sept. 15, 2026, draft each record a unanimous vote to meet in executive session on the purchase. The closed-session count is now 30, not 27, and those dates moved off the list of noticed sessions without minutes. The list also wrongly included March 17, 2026; that special meeting’s agenda is marked canceled, and the page now says so. The remaining noticed sessions with no minutes found are Dec. 23, 2024; May 30, July 21, and July 29, 2025; and Oct. 6, 2026, whose minutes aren’t yet available. The line under the title now gives the date range of the records searched.

Update: Other wording made more neutral: removed a question about whether the accounting was proper and a reference to a routine “spending…

2026-10-12T00:00:00Z

Other wording made more neutral: removed a question about whether the accounting was proper and a reference to a routine “spending limitations” option in a staff memo; noted that cost updates or briefings given aloud or in executive session would not appear in the records searched; described Plante Moran’s and Bolder HR’s engagement by what Res. 2025-22 covers instead of “likely”; added that the costs charged to the General Fund are recorded as money owed back to the Town; labeled the write-off as this page’s reading; moved the Town’s “recurring budget shortfalls” statement to The acquisition in brief; and scoped three more statements to the records searched. No figures changed.

Correction: A further review for subjective or implying language.

2026-10-12T00:00:00Z

A further review for subjective or implying language. The summary said the Town had published no itemized accounting and that residents had asked for one since 2024; FAQ 7.0 points readers to the warrant lists for individual payments, and the earliest request for a breakdown in the records searched is from July 2026. The summary now says the Town hasn’t published a breakdown of what is still owed. A sentence saying the minutes recorded no answer to “any of these questions” was removed, since several items were records requests.

Update: Wording changes for clarity: “Eldora costs” and similar phrases now read “Eldora acquisition costs,” and “the Eldora account” now reads…

2026-10-12T00:00:00Z

Wording changes for clarity: “Eldora costs” and similar phrases now read “Eldora acquisition costs,” and “the Eldora account” now reads “the ‘Due From’ account.” The CSAFE heading now reads “The CSAFE investments and the Town’s funds.” Comparisons of SE Group’s and Plante Moran’s payments with their estimates were removed, along with the related items under Not in the records searched, because the proposals allowed changes to be authorized by Town staff, whose records weren’t searched. The Plante Moran entry now notes that Res. 2025-22 authorized the Town Manager to engage HR and finance consultants. The spreadsheet was updated to match, and its Estimates sheet no longer computes differences.

Update: Statements throughout the page that something isn’t in the records, or isn’t public, now say “in the records searched.” The summary of…

2026-10-12T00:00:00Z

Statements throughout the page that something isn’t in the records, or isn’t public, now say “in the records searched.” The summary of findings is now titled “Summary of findings based on records searched” and names Hogan Lovells once, among the largest payees. The spreadsheet notes were updated to match.

Update: The page now states that a statement that something isn't in the records refers only to the records searched, and that the information may…

2026-10-12T00:00:00Z

The page now states that a statement that something isn't in the records refers only to the records searched, and that the information may be documented elsewhere, including in earlier records. "Not in the public record" is renamed Not in the records searched, the "No other record" rating is scoped to the Board documents searched, a note was added under the title, and How this research was done now gives the date range searched.

Update: In Who was paid, "no engagement record found" now reads "no engagement record in the Board documents searched," to state what was checked.

2026-10-12T00:00:00Z

In Who was paid, "no engagement record found" now reads "no engagement record in the Board documents searched," to state what was checked. A firm may have been engaged by staff under delegated authority without a Board document. Hogan Lovells' row now says its role is "not stated in the records searched."

Update: The summary of findings no longer singles out SE Group's payments or the Res.

2026-10-12T00:00:00Z

The summary of findings no longer singles out SE Group's payments or the Res. 2025-03 memo's statement about cost updates. Both remain, with their context, under Cost information in Board documents. The finding now states what the documents show directly: no budget line and no dollar limits in the delegations.

Update: A full-text search of the archive, the search index, and every CivicWeb document title confirmed that Hogan Lovells appears in the Town's…

2026-10-12T00:00:00Z

A full-text search of the archive, the search index, and every CivicWeb document title confirmed that Hogan Lovells appears in the Town's records only on the July 21 and Aug. 18, 2026, warrant lists. Its row in Who was paid and its entry under Not in the public record now name those two lists.

Update: A sentence-by-sentence review for subjective or implying language.

2026-10-12T00:00:00Z

A sentence-by-sentence review for subjective or implying language. Calculations and projections are now labeled as this page's (the years to rebuild $2.5 million, the effect of a write-off); the $1.3 million still owed is stated as depending on whether the Town's estimate includes what's paid; BusinessDen is named as the source for POWDR's $50,000 Ikon advance, and the purpose of POWDR's two invoices is described as not stated; "restricted" and "only unrestricted" fund descriptions now give the audit's allocations instead; underwriter fees are no longer listed as owed only at closing, since the current underwriters' terms aren't public; and phrases such as "small," "never," and "but" were removed. The time between invoices and payment was removed from Not in the public record and replaced with a note in About these figures. No figures changed.

Correction: A wording review of the reference sections found two inaccuracies.

2026-10-12T00:00:00Z

A wording review of the reference sections found two inaccuracies. The vote record said nine noticed executive sessions had no motion in any posted minutes; the draft Sept. 15, 2026, minutes do record one, so the list now refers to adopted minutes. The method section said the purpose of the POWDR payments came from BusinessDen; BusinessDen is the source only for the $50,000 advance and POWDR's January 6, 2026, letter, and the section now also notes the state statutes cited. Other wording was made more neutral: the Town's water-court filing is named as a statement of opposition, the executive-session motions are described rather than characterized, and "exposed" is now "found."

Update: Clarified the evidence ratings: "Named in Board documents" means a Board document states the firm's role in the Eldora acquisition, not…

2026-10-12T00:00:00Z

Clarified the evidence ratings: "Named in Board documents" means a Board document states the firm's role in the Eldora acquisition, not that it refers to the payments themselves. The summary of findings now says so.

Update: Removed all flag markers and highlighting, since choosing what to flag is subjective.

2026-10-12T00:00:00Z

Removed all flag markers and highlighting, since choosing what to flag is subjective. The Open questions box is now Not in the public record, a plain list of what the reviewed records don't show, followed by the records that could fill each gap. The questions about the revised plan, which came from how such deals generally work rather than from Town records, were removed. Other wording was made more conservative, and the spreadsheet's flag columns were removed. No figures changed. A further review replaced characterizing or speculative phrases (for example "probably," "likely," "very likely," "no backup plan," "point in different directions") with what the documents state, and renamed the "Accountability" and "What the Board was told" sections to neutral titles.

Correction: Several statements went further than the documents.

2026-10-12T00:00:00Z

Several statements went further than the documents. The summary said engagements were "ratified after they started"; the documents show agreements signed before Board ratification, which the Northland memo says follows the Town's purchasing policy, but not when work started, so the point was removed along with the list of routine ratification clauses. "Promised cost updates" referred to one sentence in a staff memo (Res. 2025-03), and "never appear in the public record" could not account for executive sessions; both now say what the memo states and what Board documents and minutes show. The underwriter paragraph now notes that Res. 2025-11 authorized the Town Administrator to engage underwriters. The running-total paragraph no longer suggests a conclusion about the trustees, and two phrases ("failed to close," "promised" meeting) now follow the documents' wording.

Update: Reviewed every statement about a vendor or payee so the page states only what the records show.

2026-10-12T00:00:00Z

Reviewed every statement about a vendor or payee so the page states only what the records show. The "Unexplained" markers now read "Open question," the open questions note that they concern the Town's records rather than the conduct of any firm, purposes are described as not stated "in the records," late payments are described by their dates, and two legal charges are described as the Town's account coding rather than the firms' billing. No figures changed.

Update: The Plante Moran item in Open questions now covers only the billing: all $160,804 in Eldora charges predate its April 21, 2026, contract,…

2026-10-12T00:00:00Z

The Plante Moran item in Open questions now covers only the billing: all $160,804 in Eldora charges predate its April 21, 2026, contract, which estimated $90,000 to $110,000, and the earlier work was likely under Res. 2025-22, which names no firm. Its role signing the Treasurer reports remains in Who was paid.

Update: Smaller wording fixes from the same check: the Sept.

2026-10-11T00:00:00Z

Smaller wording fixes from the same check: the Sept. 30 update gives no revenue or profit figures (not no figures); whether any of POWDR's advance could be returned depends on a letter that isn't public; Res. 2025-22 likely covered Plante Moran's and Bolder HR's earlier work but names no firm; no public record shows a breach claim; the Town's "no general funds" statements appear to refer to the purchase itself; and Northland's engagement was non-binding. FAQ Round 2 now links to its copy in the Board packet.

Correction: A check of the page's "no record" claims and paraphrases found four that were wrong or went too far.

2026-10-11T00:00:00Z

A check of the page's "no record" claims and paraphrases found four that were wrong or went too far. FAQ Round 2 was in the Jan. 7, 2025, Board packet, not only on the Town website. SE Group's proposal said fee increases and specialty experts would be submitted for written authorization; the page had stated this as a requirement and said no approval was "on record," when only the public records can be checked. The new underwriters were approved by the Board in Ordinance 885, which the page's wording contradicted. And Dickinson Wright's engagement letter gives no estimate; the page had quoted its boilerplate as if one existed.

Update: Who was paid now gives each firm's role as stated in Town records, how it was engaged, and when it last billed, and lists firms named in…

2026-10-11T00:00:00Z

Who was paid now gives each firm's role as stated in Town records, how it was engaged, and when it last billed, and lists firms named in the records but not paid, separating fees owed only if the sale closes from those whose terms aren't public. The underwriter discussion under What the Board was told was shortened to match, and current engagement letters were added to the records request list.

Update: Added the history of the Town's underwriters (Northland, J.P.

2026-10-11T00:00:00Z

Added the history of the Town's underwriters (Northland, J.P. Morgan, then RBC Capital Markets and Bank of America, approved in Ordinance 885) and Stifel's role as the Town's municipal advisor (Who was paid); that Stifel's agreement covers municipal leases; and the Town's statements about 303 Ski in FAQ 3.0 and FAQ 6.0.

Update: Added from the adopted resolutions and ordinances: underwriter and advisor fees contingent on a bond issue; the blanket ratifications of…

2026-10-11T00:00:00Z

Added from the adopted resolutions and ordinances: underwriter and advisor fees contingent on a bond issue; the blanket ratifications of prior actions in Res. 2025-17 and Ordinances 882 and 885; that Res. 2025-19 and 2025-22 name no firm or amount; SE Group's approved terms, including written approval for specialty experts; that Res. 2026-13 covered operating costs after a closing; Res. 2026-08 and 2026-09 and the Alterra confidentiality agreement in the vote record; the Ordinance 873 memo on surplus revenue; Stifel's extension; and the General Fund balance through July 2026. Thanks to a reader for several of these.

Correction: A reader's review and a full reading of the adopted resolutions found three errors.

2026-10-11T00:00:00Z

A reader's review and a full reading of the adopted resolutions found three errors. Res. 2025-16 does name a firm, Kline Alvarado Veio, which an earlier correction today had missed. Plante Moran's Eldora work (December 2025 to April 2026) predates its role signing the Town's Treasurer reports, which began in July 2026. And Ordinance 885 allows further Board authorization, so selling bonds would need a new or amended bond ordinance, not necessarily a new one.

Correction: A consistency review found statements that overreached.

2026-10-11T00:00:00Z

A consistency review found statements that overreached. The page said Hogan Lovells had no authorizing resolution; Res. 2025-16 gave general authority to hire acquisition counsel, which may cover it (Open questions). It said the Board approved each payment on a warrant list; about $107,000 was posted between lists (What the Board was told). It said the account balance matched the listed invoices exactly apart from the off-list postings; one invoice reached the balance a list early (About these figures). Smaller fixes: the bond authority is shown as lapsed rather than possibly lapsed, repayment from bonds is described as intended, and the March 17, 2026, approval was added to the running-total table.

Update: Reorganized the page into five parts (overview, the money, accountability, getting involved, and reference) and combined overlapping…

2026-10-11T00:00:00Z

Reorganized the page into five parts (overview, the money, accountability, getting involved, and reference) and combined overlapping sections. No figures changed.

Update: Added Get involved: decisions to watch, Board meetings and public comment, open records requests, and the petition and election rules,…

2026-10-11T00:00:00Z

Added Get involved: decisions to watch, Board meetings and public comment, open records requests, and the petition and election rules, with sources.

Update: Added the cost per household and whether the General Fund could absorb the costs, using the 2017–2025 audits (For scale); what the Town…

2026-10-11T00:00:00Z

Added the cost per household and whether the General Fund could absorb the costs, using the 2017–2025 audits (For scale); what the Town has projected about profit compared with the draft bond terms (Profit); and the Town's revised plan, with what isn't yet public (In brief). Also added a summary finding and two items to the records request list.

Correction: In For scale, the 2023 street equipment financing was shown as $600,000, the amount staff requested from lenders.

2026-10-11T00:00:00Z

In For scale, the 2023 street equipment financing was shown as $600,000, the amount staff requested from lenders. The lease-purchase agreement the Board approved (Ordinance 839, April 4, 2023) was for $511,000, as the July 2023 supplemental budget and the 2023 audit confirm. The chart now shows $511,000 and links to Ordinance 839.

Update: Added the page’s data as a spreadsheet (payments, payees, running balance, estimates, commitments, fund balances, comparisons, and Board…

2026-10-11T00:00:00Z

Added the page’s data as a spreadsheet (payments, payees, running balance, estimates, commitments, fund balances, comparisons, and Board votes) and a CSV of the payment ledger. Links are under Payment ledger and About these figures.

Update: Under Questions and records requests from the public, added the open records requests about the acquisition listed in the Town Clerk’s…

2026-10-11T00:00:00Z

Under Questions and records requests from the public, added the open records requests about the acquisition listed in the Town Clerk’s reports: three for emails and records (December 2024 to February 2025), one for bond-offering documents (May 2026), and one for contracts and payments (June 2026).

Update: Under If the sale doesn’t go through, added that selling bonds would require a new purchase agreement and a new bond ordinance, because…

2026-10-11T00:00:00Z

Under If the sale doesn’t go through, added that selling bonds would require a new purchase agreement and a new bond ordinance, because Ordinance 885’s authority to sell bonds lapsed on July 19, 2026. This clarifies the Town’s Sept. 30, 2026, statement that it expects to negotiate updated agreements “if the financing proceeds.”

Correction: Under If the sale doesn’t go through, the page said, in the present tense, that the Town could owe the seller’s costs.

2026-10-11T00:00:00Z

Under If the sale doesn’t go through, the page said, in the present tense, that the Town could owe the seller’s costs. That risk applied only while the purchase agreement was in force and ended when the agreement expired. The entry now says so, and it notes the terms that remain in effect.