Cirque Meadows by Adam Johnson




Monday, October 25, 2010





The Board of County Commissioners met at 3:00 p.m. with Matt Lafferty, Principal Planner.  Chair Johnson presided, and Commissioners Donnelly and Gaiter were present. Also present were:  Linda Hoffmann, Karin Madson, and Sean Wheeler, Planning Department; Chad Gray, Code Compliance; Eric Fried, and Jeff Goodell, Engineering Department;  Doug Ryan, Environmental Health Department; Jeanine Haag, County Attorney and Gael Cookman, Deputy Clerk.


Chair Johnson opened the meeting with the Pledge of Allegiance and asked for public comment on the County Budget and Land Use Code.  No one from the audience addressed the Board regarding these topics.


Chair Johnson explained that item #1 was on the consent agenda and would not be discussed unless requested by the Board, staff, or members of the audience:


1.      LEIGHTON ACCESSORY LIVING AREA/MINOR SPECIAL REVIEW LIVING, FILE #10-Z1820:  The applicant seeks Minor Special Review approval for an Accessory Living Area (ALA) in a detached barn.  There are no planned exterior modifications to the existing barn for the proposed ALA and all improvements will be made inside living space.  The site is a 10.45 acre residential lot located on the south side of West Trilby Road, between Loveland and Fort Collins.  Under the current regulations, the size of an ALA is limited to 800 square feet or no more than 40% of the primary residence, whichever is less.  The proposed interior modifications for the ALA will provide for approximately 639 square feet of living area.  The balance of the space in the barn will be used for animal stalls, hay and tack storage, etc.  The site and the surrounding area are zoned FA-1 Farming and located outside of a designated Growth Management Area.


The applicants held the required neighborhood meeting on August 26 2010.  Two neighbors attended and did not raise objections to the request.  One neighbor contacted Planning Staff by phone to inquire about the nature of the project.  Staff left a voice mail for the individual with the requested information, and did not hear back after that.  In addition, Staff has not received any concerns in writing or by email, and none of the reviewing agencies raised objections to approval of this request.  Comments from reviewing agencies are discussed below:



1.   Development Services Team:  Planning Staff support approval of the Minor Special Review use for the Accessory Living Area.  The County Engineering and Health Departments also reviewed the request and support approval.  The Engineering Department notes that the applicant will need to pay the Transportation Capital Expansion Fee, but did not indicate any other concerns.  Payment of all applicable fees is recommended as a condition of approval below.  The Health Department’s concerns relate to the provision of water and septic services.  Planning Staff sent a copy of the request to the Fort Collins-Loveland Water District for this review, and did not receive a reply.


      Staff is recommending a condition of approval that the applicant provide a letter of commitment from the Water District as part of the building permit application.  In addition, Staff will contact the District again prior to the public hearing to inquire about a letter and will provide an update at the hearing.  There are no other items of concern.


2.   Larimer County Building Department:  The County Lead Plans Examiner provided comments that describe building permit requirements if the use is approved.  The Building Department did not indicate any concerns with the applicant’s ability to meet these requirements.

3.   County Code Compliance Review:  The County’s Code Compliance Supervisor provided comments regarding outstanding building permits and inspections, along with building permits for the proposed use.  For health and safety reasons, all outstanding permits and inspections must be brought up to date, which is a recommended condition of approval below.


4.   Poudre Fire Authority (PFA):  PFA’s comments did not object to approval of the request and outlined standard requirements of the Fire Code.  Where these requirements exceed those of the Land Use Code, the County will only enforce the requirements in Section 8 at time of building permit application.  As noted in the comments from the Commercial Plans Examiner, the Building Code requires smoke and carbon monoxide detectors.  Staff recommends the applicant consider the Fire District’s other recommendations as part of the remodel plans.


Accessory Living Areas are intended to allow property owners the full benefit and use of their land, while maintaining the integrity and character of the single-family lot.  The proposed ALA will be inside of an existing barn with no external modifications required.  The request is compatible with existing and allowed uses in the Land Use Code and the intent and requirements of the County’s Master Plan.  The applicants are advised that approval will require them to obtain a building permit and that other fees (such as the transportation capital expansion fee and the Fort Collins-Loveland Water District Tap fee if required) will apply.  The Development Services Team does not anticipate any difficulties in these areas.  This request meets the requirements and intent of the Larimer County Land Use Code for the Minor Special Review.

The Development Services Team Findings are as follows:


1.   The proposed use is compatible with existing and allowed uses in the surrounding area and shall be in harmony with the neighborhood.  The detached Accessory Living Area shall be for the use of family or friends.  Approval of the request is not anticipated to have any impacts on other property.

2.   The proposed use is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Larimer County Master Plan as required by the Land Use Code and the recommendations of referral agencies have been considered.


The Development Services Team recommends approval of the Leighton Accessory Living Area Minor Special Review, File # 10-Z1820 subject to the following conditions:


1.   The Site shall be developed consistent with the approved plan and information contained in the Leighton Accessory Living Area Minor Special Review, File # 10-Z1820, except as modified by the conditions of approval or agreement of the County and applicant.  The application is subject to all other verbal or written representations and commitments of record for the Leighton Accessory Living Area Minor Special Review, File #10-Z1820.


2.   This application is approved without the requirement for a Development Agreement.  In the event the applicant fails to comply with any conditions of approval, or fails to use the property consistent with the approved Minor Special Review the applicant agrees that, in addition to all other remedies available to County, the County may withhold building permits; issue a written notice to applicant to appear and show cause why the Minor Special Review approval should not be revoked; and / or bring a court action for enforcement of the terms of the Minor Special Review.  All remedies are cumulative and the County’s election to use one shall not preclude use of another.  In the event County must retain legal counsel and / or pursue a court action to enforce the terms of this Minor Special Review approval, applicant agrees to pay all expenses incurred by County including, but not limited to, reasonable attorney’s fees.  County may conduct periodic inspections to the property and reviews of the status of the Minor Special Review as appropriate to monitor and enforce the terms of the Minor Special Review approval.


3.   The Findings and Resolution shall be a servitude running with the Property.  Those owners of the Property (or any portion of the Property) who obtain title subsequent to the date of recording of the Findings and Resolution, their heirs, successors, assigns or transferees and persons holding under applicants, shall comply with the terms and conditions of the Minor Special Review approval.


4.   The owner is responsible for obtaining all required building permits for the Accessory Living Area, and shall obtain building permits and inspections for previous work done in the existing barn, no later than March 31, 2011.


5.   The applicant shall pay all applicable fees, including permit fees and Transportation Capital Expansion Fees, and any applicable Water District tap fee, for this use no later than March 31, 2011.


6.   Prior to obtaining a building permit for the Accessory Living Area, the applicant shall provide a letter of commitment to serve the use from the Fort Collins-Loveland Water District.


7.   The square footage in the Accessory Living Area shall not exceed 650 square feet.


8.   This Minor Special Review approval will automatically expire without a public hearing if the use is not commenced within three years of the date of approval.




Commissioner Donnelly moved that the Board of County Commissioners Approve the Leighton Minor Special Review for an Accessory Living Area, File #10-Z1820 subject to the conditions of approval as recommended.


Motion carried 3-0.


2.   JONES/SLATTEN FAMILY TRUST APPEAL, FILE #10-G0202:  This is an appeal of the Planning Director’s determination that the RV Park/Campground was not legally permitted and is not a non-conforming use.


History of current planning department files:

·  Code Compliance case (file #10-CC0005) was initiated early in 2010 based on an anonymous complaint regarding RV's and camping in the floodplain. 

·  The property owner contacted Code Compliance in response to the code compliance case and indicated that they wished to obtain a determination of non-conformity regarding the Recreation Vehicle (RV) Park and Campground use of the property. 

·  A request for Non-conforming Use Determination was submitted to the Planning Department for review 6/4/2010.  Staff reviewed the information submitted, conducted additional research and prepared a draft determination for Planning Director review. 

·  On 8/6/2010, Linda Hoffmann, Planning Director, determined that the RV Park and Campground use of the property does not meet the test of non-conformity.  This determination is based on code requirements, staff research and the information submitted by the property owner.  A copy of the information submitted by the applicant and the determination are included with this staff report.

·  Appeal of Planning Director’s determination submitted 9/7/2010.


The determination of no non-conformity was based on the following code sections in consideration of the information submitted, the records of the planning department and information available on the website advertising the property.  The attached Nonconforming Use Determination (10-ZC0307) contains an analysis of the information provided along with supporting documentation that was reviewed in consideration of the request.


The Planning Director determination dated August 6, 2010, states the following:


The use of parcel # 15032-00-007, File #09-ZC0307, as specified herein is not determined to be a non-conforming Recreational Vehicle Park or Campground, based on the following:

    • The applicant has not submitted competent evidence to demonstrate non-conforming use status for a travel trailer/recreational vehicle park and/or campground from March 18, 1970 continuously until the present time. 
    • Records of Planning Department files do not indicate evidence of approval for a Recreational vehicle park/campground.  There are several references to this use being illegal.
    • The records of the Assessor do not describe any travel trailer/recreational vehicle park and/or campground use.
    • Absent additional evidence staff can not conclude that the use of the property as a recreational vehicle park/campground is non-conforming.
    • Use of the floodway area of the property as a recreational vehicle park/campground is not allowed under the current Land Use Code requirements.  Flood Plain Special Review approval would be required.


The following Land Use Code Sections are applicable:


    • Section 4.8.2.  Nonconforming use:

A nonconforming use is an existing use that does not comply with the requirements of this code but did conform to all applicable regulations in effect at the time the use commenced.

The Larimer County Mobile Home Resolution was adopted March 18, 1970.  The resolution included sections regulating travel trailer parks and campgrounds.  A campground or travel trailer/recreational vehicle park would need to have been established prior to March 18, 1970 to be non-conforming.  It would also have needed to be used continuously at the same level of activity until the present time.  The applicant’s submitted materials include a photograph from 1927 showing some tents.  Staff acknowledges that some level of camping has existed on the property at various times, but continuous use since 1970 has not been documented.  The request also states that the “number of sites represents the average number of campers that had been the norm for the area behind the post office.”  It is not known what level of camping occurred on the property at the time camping began.

·  Section 4.8.6. Discontinuance of a nonconforming use.

If a nonconforming use is discontinued for more than 12 consecutive months, the use may not be reestablished. If a question arises as to whether a nonconforming use has been discontinued, the property owner has the burden to show by competent evidence that the nonconforming use has not been discontinued. 

Evidence of continuous campground/ travel trailer park use since 1970 has not been submitted by the applicant.  From the materials submitted, it is clear that the portion of the property currently used as campground was flooded in 1976 and substantial efforts were required to re-establish the businesses operating on-site. No evidence has been submitted to document how the camping use was reestablished at the same as level as existed prior to 1970 within one-year of the flood event.  In addition, a determination from 1995 indicates that the use was likely discontinued from 1981 to 1983 when the parcels were owned by DeJesus.  It is the responsibility of the property owner to provide evidence to demonstrate that a use is nonconforming and that it has not been discontinued.  To this date information documenting continuous use has not been provided.


·  Section 4.8.10.  Extension, expansion, enlargement or change in character.

A. A nonconforming use or a building or structure that contains a nonconforming use cannot be extended, expanded, enlarged or changed in character without the approval of the county commissioners. 

If a level of continuous use can be established from 1970 to present, it may continue.  However, the use may not be extended, expanded, enlarged or changed in character without the approval of the county commissioners.  As stated above, continuous use of the property as a recreational vehicle park or campground since 1970 has not been documented.  The property owner did submit information indicating they had “improved” the camp sites, but no County approvals were secured in support of these improvements.


Ms. Hoffmann presented the history of the appeal, as outlined above.  Discussion ensued regarding the historical use of camping on site, and when gaps may have occurred, due to transfer of ownership of the property, and the Big Thompson flood.


William Kaufmann, attorney representing the applicant, presented the Board with numerous handouts, including a printout from the Assessor’s website indicating that there is a special purpose use associated with this property; and statements from two neighbors attesting to the fact that camping has always historically occurred on this property.  Mr. Kaufmann also presented case law that supports a 2-year lapse in use when damage is caused by flooding. 


Chair Johnson opened up the hearing for public comment and Bill Jones stated that he purchased the property with his wife to preserve the historic value it added to the area, which includes the use of camping on the property. 


There was no further public comment.


Mr. Kaufmann confirmed with the owner that there was a new connection made to the dump station within the past two years, and discussion ensued regarding whether or not it was properly permitted.   


Under discussion, the Board agreed it was clear that camping has historically prevailed on the property, and they supported the appeal. 




Commissioner Gaiter moved that the Board of County Commissioners uphold the appeal and reverse the determination made by the Planning and Building Services Division Director. The RV Park/Campground use on parcel number 15032-00-007 is a legal non-conforming use consisting of 12 campsites and allow for the expansion of the electrical and dump station, provided that proper permitting can be obtained for both.


Motion carried 3-0.


3.   SADDLE RIDGE ACRES PUD AMENDMENT OF CONDITION, FILE #10-G0201:  The applicant proposes to amend the conditions of approval for the Saddle Ridge Acres PUD to allow as an accessory use, outdoor testing of one of a kind robotic equipment that is designed and developed by SA Robotics, which business is situated on the building located on Lot 2-A.


Saddle Ridge Acres PUD was approved in 1997 as a commercial/office park consisting of 6 building sites on the 16 acre property, which is located at the northwest corner of Highways 287 and 60.  Since the 1997 approval three of the building sites have developed and three remain vacant.  When approved the PUD allowed mixed zoning with uses allowed on Lots 1-A and 1-B being similar to those in the County C (Commercial) zone district, while Lots 2-A, 2-B, 3-A and 3-B were to have uses similar to those uses found in the B (Business) zone district.  Based upon the existing PUD, outdoor activities associated with the existing businesses were not contemplated or allowed; therefore, this request is to consider allowing on a limited basis outdoor testing of research and development related products being designed and constructed in the building on Lot 2-A.  The testing would occur primarily on the Lot 2-B building pad and in portions of the parking areas surrounding Lot 2-A.


Lot 2-A is situated on the northern reaches of the property and is occupied by SA Robotics, Inc., which company designs, develops and builds one of a kind robotic systems.  Over the past few years SA Robotics has been awarded contracts to construct some relatively large automated equipment (large construction equipment), that would be utilized in the decommissioning of nuclear plants and the like.  Because the robotic apparatuses would be used in hostile environments they need to be built and tested before they are sent to their final destination.  To this point the company has on occasion built outdoor testing sites to mimic the environment the equipment would be utilized for and then tested the equipments to determine if it functions appropriately and is durable.  The area used for these test was on the building pad for Lot 2-B of the Saddle Ridge Acres PUD, which is adjacent to their design and build operation area.


Before the most recent testing occurred SA Robotics approached the County for permission, as well as, notified the neighboring residential property owners of this short term activity.  However, recognizing that this type of activity may occur again and generally occurs on a last minute basis with sensitive contracts, the company has chosen to seek permanent approval for such testing activities.  According to the information provided by the applicant their proposal would include provisions requiring continued notification of such activities to the adjoining neighbors when construction of testing areas and the testing itself is to occur, which would be during normal business hours.  Additionally, the applicant’s material indicates that fencing, signage and other typical safety measures would be adhered to during the times of outdoor activities and reclamation of the site would be conducted within a reasonable time after the tests are complete.  Finally, SA Robotics has agreed to establish a hotline for the neighbors to voice concerns about the outdoor testing so that mitigation efforts can be put into place to minimize negative effects on the residents and the use of their property.


According to the County Health Department there has been one documented complaint regarding noise resulting from previous outdoor activity at the site.  As such the Health Department has discussed with the applicant that the may want to develop as part of their company policy as noise mitigation plan the aims to mitigate noise issues associated with a wide variety of testing activities.  The applicant concurs with this advice and indicates that they will take such actions for future outdoor testing.


The Development Services Team recommends Approval of the amendment to the Saddle Ridge Acres PUD, File #10-G0201, subject to the following condition(s):


1.   Outdoor testing of the R&D equipment shall be allowed as an accessory use to the primary business on Lot 2-A and 2-B of the Saddle Ridge Acres PUD.


2.   Outdoor testing, construction and reclamation on Lots 2-A and 2-B shall be limited to the hours of 8 am to 5 pm, Monday through Friday, with the option to extend the operational hours to 7 p.m., on an as needed basis.


3.   Reclamation of the testing location to the original site conditions shall occur within 8 weeks of the end of the testing.


4.   The Site shall be utilized consistent with this approval and with the information contained in File #10-G0201, except as modified by the conditions of approval or agreement of the County and applicant.  The applicant shall be subject to all other verbal or written representations and commitments of record.


Mr. Lafferty explained the application, as outlined above, noting that the applicant has agreed to a noise mitigation system that the Health Department deems sufficient.


Steve Steinbicker, representing the applicant, addressed the Board.  He presented photos of the site and explained that this is a very unique research and development company, and that in the last seven years they have only performed four outdoor testing scenarios.  Mr. Steinbicker stated that they have been conducting outreach to the neighbors, and have held public meetings. 


Chair Johnson opened up the hearing for public comment. 


Ellen Lawson stated that she believes the noise will negatively affect her property and her neighborhood.  However, if the Board approves the outdoor testing, then she suggested they be required to construct a wall to buffer the noise, and she also requested the hours for outdoor testing be limited to 8 a.m. to 5 p.m.


David Morely stated that he is in charge of Quality and Safety at SA Robotics, and is very familiar with the testing process.  He stated that they have never done testing on a Saturday or Sunday, and that they are extremely sensitive to the surrounding neighbors and wish to be good neighbors.


Bob Dehn, landlord of the property in question, addressed the Board.  Mr. Dehn stated that he believes SA Robotics does a good job managing the operations and outdoor testing, and supports their efforts.  Mr. Dehn stated that he did not support constructing a buffer wall, as the outdoor testing projects do not meet the noise level that is generated by Highway 287 all day long.


There was no further public comment.


Under discussion, Commissioner Gaiter stated that with a total of only two complaints in 13 years of business, he does not see an issue with the company being responsible to the needs of the neighbors.  However, he recommended that the hours of operation be set at 8 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, with the exception to extend the operations to 7 p.m. on an as needed basis.


Commissioner Donnelly stated that he would support the conditions as written. 


Chair Johnson stated that he would agree to Commissioner Gaiter’s suggested hours, and the changes are reflected in the conditions above.




Commissioner Gaiter moved that the Board of County Commissioner approve the amendment to the Saddle Ridge Acres PUD, File #10-G0201, subject to the condition(s) as outlined and amended above.


Motion carried 3-0.




4.   ORDER AND ASSESSMENT FOR COSTS INCURRED PURSUANT TO RUBBISH ORDINANCE, FILE #08-CC0247:   Costs and expenses to remove and dispose of rubbish were incurred by the County pursuant to the County’s Rubbish Ordinance.  These costs and expenses were not paid by the property owner as requested.  Pursuant to the Rubbish Ordinance, unpaid costs incurred to remove and dispose of rubbish may be assessed as a lien against the property.  Staff is, therefore, requesting the Board of County Commissioners approve the attached Order and Assessment.




1.   A Notice of Rubbish Ordinance Violation was posted at the property and served on the property owner.


2.   The property owner did not remove the rubbish as required.


3.   An entry and seizure warrant was issued by the Larimer County Court authorizing the County to enter the property to remove and dispose of the rubbish.


4.   The County removed and disposed of the rubbish on October 4, 5 and 6, 2010.  Before and after photographs of the property will be available at the hearing of this matter.


5.   A Bill of Costs in the amount of $5,019.00 for the removal and disposal costs plus five (5%) percent for inspection and incidental expenses was posted at the property and mailed certified and regular mail to the owner of record on October 8, 2010 with the request the amount owing be paid to the County within fifteen (15) days.


6.   The owner has not paid the amount owing.


7.   Pursuant to the Rubbish Ordinance at paragraph 7.3:


“In the event that the bill [of costs] remains unpaid after 15 days, the costs may be assessed as a lien against the property until paid and shall have priority over all other liens except general taxes and prior special assessments.  If the costs remain unpaid after 90 days from the date of the bill [of costs] such costs together with a ten percent (10%) penalty for collection expenses shall be certified to the Larimer County Treasurer for collection in the same manner as other taxes are collected.”


Notice of this hearing was posted at the property and a copy was mailed certified and regular mail to the owner of record. 


Mr. Gray presented the facts of the case, as outlined above and requested the Board’s approval on the Order and Assessment.


There was no public comment on this item.




Commissioner Donnelly moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the Order and Assessment for the Ackard Land Company.


Motion carried 3-0.


The hearing ended at 5:30 p.m.








The Board of County Commissioners met at 9:00 a.m. with Frank Lancaster, County Manager.  Chair Pro Tem Donnelly presided, and Commissioner Gaiter was present. Also present were:  Donna Hart, and Deni LaRue, Commissioners’ Office; Mary Atchison, United Way; Marija Weeden-Osborn, Pathways Past Poverty; Laurel Kubin, and Alison Stoven O’Connor, Extension Office; Jeannine Haag, County Attorney’s Office; and Gael Cookman, Deputy Clerk. 


1.   PUBLIC COMMENT:    There was no public comment today.






Commissioner Gaiter moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the minutes for the weeks of October 11, 2010, and October 18, 2010, as presented.


Motion carried 2-0.


3.    REVIEW OF THE SCHEDULE FOR THE WEEK OF NOVEMBER 1, 2010:   Ms. Hart reviewed the upcoming schedule with the Board.






Commissioner Gaiter moved that the Board of County Commissioners approve the consent agenda, as listed below:


PETITIONS FOR ABATEMENT:   As recommended by the County Assessor, the following Petitions for Abatement are approved and/or partially approved:   Yoonlee, Inc; Judy Ward; Shelhill Investments LLC; Johnson Gill Enterprises LLC; Harmony Oaks LLC. 

The following abatements were denied:  Falcon Brook LLC (multiple parcels); Harmony Market, LLC. 
















MISCELLANEOUS:   Grandparent Guardianship Eligibility and Payment Standards; Department of Human Services Payments for September 2010; Letter of Support for Colorado State Trails Grant Application.


LIQUOR LICENSES:  The following liquor licenses were approved and/or issued: Fort Namaqua Liquors – Retail Liquor Store – Loveland; Best Western Crossroads - Transfer of Ownership with Temporary Permit – Loveland; Northern Colorado Potters Guild – Special Event Permit 6% - Fort Collins.


Motion carried 2-0.


5.  UPDATE ON PATHWAYS PAST POVERTY:    Ms. Atchison and Ms. Weeden-Osborn presented an update and handouts for the Board on the Pathways Past Poverty focus areas and statistics.  Ms. Atchison stated that a primary focus of the program is to create systematic change in order to assist individuals and better the community.  Ms. Weeden-Osborn explained that they strive to help folks have an income, build and income, and manage an income.  Some discussion ensued and the Board thanked Ms. Atchison and Ms. Weeden-Osborn for their presentation and efforts.


6.   UPDATE ON EXTENSION HORTICULTURE PROGRAM AND FARMER’S MARKET:   MS. Kubin and Ms. Stoven O’Connor gave an update for the Board regarding the outcome of the 2010 Farmer’s Market and its contribution to the local economy and vendors.  Ms. Stoven O’Connor presented the Board with a 5-year re-cap of statistics, and noted a 44.7% increase in gross sales from 2006 to 2010.  She also noted that Larimer County has the only Farmer’s Market that accepts food stamps and that food stamp usage has increased 77% since its inception four years ago.   Finally, Ms. Stoven O’Connor reviewed the results of a customer survey with the Board.  The Board thanked Ms. Kubin, Ms. Stoven O’Connor, and the many volunteers that are associated with this program.


7.   PRESENTATION OF OCTOBER POLICY GOVERNANCE REPORT:  Mr. Lancaster presented the October Policy Governance Report, noting compliance in all areas, but with some explanation surrounding a few items, which he discussed with the Board.    This was purely informational in nature, and no action was taken.


8.   WORKSESSION:   Mr. Lancaster explained that the Sheriff has recommended lifting the fire restrictions for Larimer County in order to remain consistent with surrounding communities.




Commissioner Gaiter moved that the Board of County Commissioners remove the fire restrictions in Larimer County, effective immediately.


Motion carried 2-0.


9.   COMMISSIONER ACTIVITY REPORTS:   The Board discussed their activities at events during the past week.


10.  LEGAL MATTERS:   Ms. Haag requested that the Board go into Executive Session to discuss for conferences with an attorney for the purpose of receiving legal advice.





Commissioner Gaiter moved that the Board of County Commissioners go into Executive Session for the purpose of receiving confidential legal advice, as outlined in 24-6-402(4)(b) C.R.S.


Motion carried 2-0.


The Executive Session ended with no further action taken and the meeting adjourned at 10:45 a.m.















Gael M. Cookman, Deputy County Clerk

Background Image: Cirque Meadows by Adam Johnson. All rights reserved.