Steamboat 700 gives campaign $75K

Let’s Vote committee opposing annexation raises $11K


Campaign finance reports

Let’s Vote

Reporting period: Dec. 10, 2009 – Feb. 11, 2010

Monetary contributions

Carol H. Atha, $200; Hill Blackett, $500; Joan Borden, $50; Ken Brenner, $100; Pam Brenner, $100; Richard Buccino, $10; Omar Campbell, $50; Sean Colgan, $100; Cindy Constantine, $83.34; Kevin Daly, $250; Garrettson Dulin Jr., $100; D.J. Edwards, $150; Elk River Gunsmithing Inc., $250; Bob Enever, $1,000; James Ficke, $50; William Forbes, $133.34; Marlow and Rochelle Good, $40; Matt Good, $60; Julie Green, $250; Kent Holt, $1,500; Rebecca Lamb, $50; Henry Laughlin III, $250; Betty Leipold, $100; Bill Moser, $1,416.65; George Ojdrovich, $50; Lyman Orton, $1,000; John Pietig, $50; Sue Rife, $25; Stuart Roberts, $2,000; Rick Russo, $50; Blake Sander, $20; Ron Smith, $100; Ken Solomon, $200; Paul Stettner, $150; James Turner, $50; Kirk Wolff, $100; Jim Zulevich, $50

Total: $10,638.33

Non-monetary contributions

Bill Moser, $52, blank checks; Tim Rowse, $721.97, yard signs and bumper stickers

Total: $773.97


$254.47, postage, USPS; $1,028.47, printing, Northwest Graphics; $5,592*, ads, Steamboat Pilot & Today; $817.50, Web & data development, Lisa Sculthorpe; $465, legal fees, Paul Sachs; $21.66, cell phone, Wal-Mart

Total: $8,179.10

Good For Steamboat

Reporting period: Dec. 24, 2009 – Feb. 11, 2010

Monetary contributions

Bryan Ayer, $20; Marion Ayer, $20; Katherine Kolbe, $50; Scott Lewer, $20; Steamboat 700 LLC, $100; Steamboat 700 LLC, $5,000

Total: $5,210

Non-monetary contributions

(All non-monetary contributions are from Steamboat 700 LLC)

$152.42*, Bagel Works; $136.54, Safeway; $1,500, consulting, Kinghorn Productions; $4,400, Web consulting, Wireboard; $2,325, video consulting, Altera Group; $7,426.96, consulting, Curtis Church; $4,224.30, consulting, Tarsha Ebbern; $5,746.50, office, overhead costs; $18,658.86, consulting, direct mail, Kenney Group; $174.96, Backcountry Provisions; $1,168.51, printing, copies, PostNet; $4,704.20, ads, Steamboat Pilot & Today; $145.09, Steamboat Discount Liquors; $427.99, City Market; $243.63, Central Park Liquor; $231.38, Winona’s; $353.53, Egg & I; $44.93, yard sign materials, Ace at the Curve; $125, yard sign materials, Butcher Ranch; $4,081.07 , Campaign Products of the Rockies; $201.88, Tequila’s; $497.54, Gondola Pub & Grill; $1,890, ads, NRC Broadcasting; $51.24, Ski Haus Liquors; $10,000, consulting, CWJ Inc.; $568.75, graphic design, Lombardi Design; $25.97, office supplies, Staples; $314, ads, Steamboat Local

Total: $69,820.25

(Good For Steamboat reported expenditures totaling $69,850.25, but its itemized list added up to the above total.)


$110, total monetary contributions returned to four donors

  • Indicates the total cost of multiple purchases or payments.

Source: Campaign finance reports filed with Steamboat Springs City Clerk Julie Franklin

There’s a spending gap of nearly $62,000 between the campaigns for and against the proposed Steamboat 700 annexation.

Campaign finance reports filed Tuesday with Steamboat Springs City Clerk Julie Franklin show that the Good For Steamboat committee, supporting the annexation, received nearly $75,000 in total contributions from late December through Feb. 11. All of those funds were from Steamboat 700 LLC, developers of the project that would put 2,000 homes and 380,000 square feet of commercial space on a site just west of current city limits, during a 20- to 30-year time frame. City voters will decide the fate of the proposed annexation in a mail-only vote that ends March 9. Ballots are scheduled to be mailed to voters this week.

Good For Steamboat reported nearly $70,000 in spending and $5,100 on hand. More than $48,000 of that spending was for consultants or related services, and more than $11,000 was for advertising or campaign products. The rest was for food, beverages, office costs, graphic design and other expenses.

The Let’s Vote committee, opposing the annexation, spent nearly $8,200 of its total contributions of about $11,400. The committee reported about $2,400 on hand. The majority of Let’s Vote’s spending was for advertising and printing services.

Good For Steamboat’s contributions from Steamboat 700 LLC are filed as “non-monetary contributions,” a designation Steamboat 700 attorney Bob Weiss said was done for practicality. Rather than contribute to Good For Steamboat, which would then pay for services, Steamboat 700 LLC simply bought services for the campaign itself.

Expenses “were paid directly by the developer — in other words, rather than contribute the money to the committee, they just paid for it directly,” Weiss said. “The developers paid for this.”

Let’s Vote spokesman Tim Rowse said Tuesday night that the source of Good For Steamboat’s funds sends a clear message. Let’s Vote received its contributions from about 40 donors, all in Steamboat Springs.

“It makes it pretty clear that we’re a citizen-led effort and they’re a corporation-led effort — no real surprises there,” Rowse said. “We’re not hiring marketing firms from out of town; we can’t afford to hire phone banks — (we’re) fighting at a financial disadvantage.”

Steamboat 700 LLC paid more than $18,000 to The Kenney Group, a Denver-based strategic communications firm.

Weiss was frank about Steamboat 700’s spending.

“This developer has a lot of money involved in this and has a real interest in trying to make sure the community has an understanding of the issues,” Weiss said. “We’ve spent a lot of time and money trying to do that.”

Good For Steamboat did receive a total $110 from four donors and returned those contributions.

“We had some people who wanted to donate some money, and we just decided they were doing so much work for us … that we couldn’t really take their money,” Weiss said. “There hasn’t been any effort to ask people in the community to pay for a campaign for a private developer.”

Both committees have received significant help from volunteers donating time and efforts in the weeks leading up to March 9.

The election’s remaining campaign finance reporting deadlines are March 5 and April 8.


freerider 7 years, 1 month ago

This shows that the only people that want this farce are local shop owners that will profit from population growth...greedy trolls....all that oppose this farce are long time locals that realize this crock will ruin Steamboat .....way to go Tim Rouse keep up the good work ....this reminds me of the jarhead corporate enforcer vs. the Navii in Avatar ....hopefully the local people will win this battle as well ...not the local greedy trolls....too many people in Steamboat already...Ski Corp. HAS ALREADY DONE ENOUGH DAMAGE


jk 7 years, 1 month ago

The good old American political machine at its finest!! "If you can't beat 'em buy 'em!!!"


Matthew Stoddard 7 years, 1 month ago

Corporate America buying votes? Supreme Court says it's okay, so I guess it's okay. I'm for the 700 and I have no real vested interest in whether it goes in or not. I can't vote on it, but it will be my neighbor. It will not affect me in any real degree that I haven't already seen. I already face traffic going home thru a bottleneck. According to the info in today's Today, the US 40 widening will start if it goes in after a certain saturation point, with other services going in at higher saturation points. Can't see why I'd want to blow having that happen.

As for starting over, it's been approximately 2 decades in the making for the West Stmbt plan. I guess starting over will only take a week or so, right? No, let's start over. Then, in 2 decades, when the plan is ready to implement, there will be completely different voting demographic in Steamboat...who will say it's time to start it over again. So, let's take that step forward...just to take 2 backwards my opinion.


Scott Wedel 7 years, 1 month ago

It is my understanding that the list of non-monetary contributions to Good For Steamboat is NO INDICATION THAT THOSE BUSINESSES SUPPORT IT.

It is simply a list of all the things bought by SB700 and where the money was spent. Thus, it does not mean Tequila's donated $201, but that SB 700 campaign had campaign meals and drinks there.

Kielbasa, SB 700 is most certainly not what was projected when the WSSAP was adopted 15 years ago. A great deal of thought was given to what was the desired sequence of annexations in the WSSAP because there was no expectation that it would all be annexed at once.

The expectation of the WSSAP was that there would be annexations fairly quickly and lots less than $100K. But the WSSAP had flaws in the annexation plan including basically required that the Brown's property be annexed first and the Browns did not sell until the local market completely changed.

The market has so changed that west side housing is no longer exclusively for locals, but could now be marketed as competitively priced second and vacation homes. Thus, SB 700 is not going to be exclusively housing for locals, but will have a significant number of second home buyers. And thus it will be creating the need for workforce housing even as it may be providing some workforce housing.

Personally, I would support the annexation if it was for 150 or so acres. Then we could see if the annexation and the annexation agreement worked well in 5 or 10 years before annexing another large parcel. I view this as an all-in bet for the next 30 years in which the reason it is an all-in bet is because SB700 wants it that way so that they have vested development rights even if the SB700 development becomes very unpopular with locals. If SB700 was done well and popular then they'd have no problems with subsequent annexations.


Requires free registration

Posting comments requires a free account and verification.