Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutWSHP Covered Arena & Associated Build-Out-Cle ElumAPPUCATION FOR TOURISM-RELATED,LARGE-SCALE, MUNICIPALITY-OWNEDCIP LISTING Applicant information: Name of Municipality:City of Cle Elum,WA Mailing Address:119 West First Street,Cle Elum,WA 98922 Contact Person and Title:Rob Omans,City Administrator Phone:(509)674-2262 Email:robert@cityofcleelum.com Project Title:Washington State Horse Park Covered Arena and Associated Build-Out Project Location:1202 Douglas Munro Blvd.,Cle Elum,WA 98922 Application Requirements: X 1.The project qualifies for lodging tax funds as a capital expenditure of a tourism- related facility owned or operated by a municipality. X 2.If this application is not from Kittitas County,the municipality's lodging tax advisory committee (or equivalent)has been informed of the project and endorsed it.A letter from the municipality is included. N/A 3.Lodging tax capital project funds are not being substituted for other funds that are already secured or applied for (if applicable). X 4.A completed project budget is included in the application. X 5.A detailed 8 1/2 X 11 vicinity map that clearly shows the location of the project is included. Tourism-Related,Large-Scale Municipality-Owned Capital Project Narrative 1 1.Project Description:Please describe the project in detail.Indicate the major work to be completed,any milestones that need to be overcome in order for the project to move forward,and include a comparison of existing and proposed conditions. The Washington State Horse Park Authority ("the Authority")is a 501(c)3 nonprofit corporation whose mission is to develop,promote,operate,manage and maintain a first-class horse park facility in accordance with RCW 79A.30 passed 1995 (recodified 67.18 ).The Authority obtained land and funding to develop the initial revenue-generating facilities for the Washington State Horse Park in Cle Elum,Kittitas County,Washington.The Park held its first event in 2010 and has been self-sustaining since that time.However,its ability to satisfy current customer needs and host larger and more diverse horse groups is limited because all of its existing riding facilities are outdoors while many event organizers require protection from the weather.This project seeks $1.5 million from the Kittitas County Lodging Tax to construct a $4.6 million Covered Arena and Associated Build-Out (covered arena,not an enclosed arena)at the Washington State Horse Park for the purpose of equine competitions and training events, recreational riding and other uses. Background:In 1995,the State legislature passed RCW 79A.30 (recodified 67.18 )to create the Washington State Horse Park Authority.The legislation directed the Authority to establish "3)a first-class horse park facility in Washington to meet the important needs of the state's horse industry,attract investment,enhance recreational opportunities,and bring new exhibitors and tourists to the state from throughout the region and beyond;and 4)A unique opportunity exists to form a partnership between state,county and private interest to create a major horse park facility that will provide public recreational opportunities and statewide economic and employment benefits."Upper Kittitas County was selected as the location for the Horse Park when suitable wooded acreage was donated by Suncadia LLC for the purpose of developing a horse park.The 112-acre site is conveniently located off I-90 at 1202 Douglas Munro Blvd in the city of Cle Elum.This location met requirements determined by earlier studies for a horse park facility,including good highway access and a dry climate.The City took ownership of the donated property and entered into a 99-year lease with the Authority. Legislative support continued with appropriation of $3.5 million in the 2007-2009 capital budget for Phase I construction of the Horse Park.That work included design,development, permitting and engineering components,as well as site clearing,road grading,utility improvements and initial arenas and stabling to begin hosting activities and generating revenues.Ground was broken in March 2010 and the first event took place in August of that year.In an Oct 12,2009 posting on houserepublicans.wa.gov,then Rep.Judy Warnick (now Sen.Judy Warnick,13th Legislative District)included in the list of reasons for her support:"Most of all,these facilities will help the local economy and provide much-needed jobs."This view by the legislators was reinforced by Senator Holmquist Newbry on April 22,2013 on the same website.Speaking to the importance of Senate Bill #5212,which increased the number of members on the Horse Park Authority from 7 to 11,she said,"This bill is about bringing in more tourism dollars to benefit the greater community that will lead to further private sector job creation."The bill passed both the House and Senate unanimously. Construction of the Horse Park has been divided into three phases.Phase I was completed when the Park opened for business.Its cost of $3.5 million to develop the initial infrastructure 2 and competition facilities was funded by the state legislature in the 2007-2009 capital budget. Phase II,which expands upon those basic amenities,has been ongoing since that time and includes acquisition of equipment,horse stalls,bleacher seating,electricity extensions,cattle pens,jumps and fencing,etc.as well as development of a fourth arena,cross country courses, competitive trail obstacle course,etc.The Park is now ready to initiate Phase III which includes this project (a covered arena)plus eventual expansion of stabling,parking and a final (sixth, uncovered)arena to attract and host major regional,national and international competitions. A Covered Arena was identified as a key facility as early as 1991 in the first Washington State Horse Park feasibility study,which was funded by the Washington State Department of Community Development.Recreation and Showing/Competition comprise 71%of US horse usage (source:AHCF 2005).This segment is different from the SCORP segment of equine activity,which is limited to trail riding. The Covered Arena itself will comprise the following features: 1.The competition arena is 150 feet x 300 feet. 2.A 25-foot wide "porch"wraps around the arena,resulting in a building that is 200 feet in width and 350 feet in length. 3.Features of the porch: •Floor level of the porch is the same as the competition arena,so gates can be placed to enter the arena at any location. •Portable seating can be placed at any location in the porch,depending on the needs of the event. •Judges stands can be placed at any location in the porch,depending on the needs of the event. •The porch can be used for competition warm up and to protect the horse and rider from adverse weather while waiting to compete. •The porch protects the competition space from direct sunlight and from rain. •Roll-down mesh screens can be installed at select locations at the outer wall of the porch (portions at north and west)to protect from wind.These can be motorized and controlled from a single location. •Eave height of the porch is 16 feet,so horses can enter at any location. •The porch can be used for storage of event equipment. •Vendors,concessionaries and hospitality areas can be conveniently staged within the porch area. 4.Lighting the Arena •The eave height around the entire structure is 16 feet so light arrives evenly from all sides. •A translucent panel skylight at the ridge balances the lighting for the arena. •Lighting would be provided for night events. 5.Gable Ends •The gable ends above the wraparound porch are solid,providing space on the outside for the arena logo and name and on the inside for scoreboards and advertising. •Air vents and/or mechanical circulation may be placed in the end gables if needed. 6.Structure and Materials 3 •The entire structure is prefabricated steel,including the porch. •Building footings are concrete with ties under the arena floor. •Roofing and siding materials are metal. Providing shade and weather protection for both participants and spectators will not only enhance the user experience,it will also expand the Horse Park's calendar by affording more months of operation and attracting more diversified equine activities,especially "A"rated equestrian competitions,thereby increasing revenues and visitor volumes.Currently these activities are hosted at fairgrounds and private venues across the State with covered or indoor arenas.Many equestrian event organizers have expressed their strong interest in holding large shows at more modern and conducive facilities as the Park represents. Below is an artist's rendering of the planned covered arena without the screens down.The arena is intended to be a bright and airy structure that will be inviting for horses and riders,and preserve the sense of place of the Park's woodland setting. The land where the covered arena will be built is currently lightly wooded,surrounded by graveled parking and roadways,and has utilities (water,electric and sewer)adjacent to it. There are no impediments to moving forward with the project once funding is secured. 2.Kittitas County Tourism Infrastructure Plan:Please explain how the project meets the Goals and Actions in the Kittitas County Tourism Infrastructure Plan aš adopted.Also, describe the specific county tourism infrastructure needs the project addresses and how the project directly increases tourism.Explain how the improvements will promote tourism in Kittitas County and indicate specifically how the improvements will directly increase economic activity resulting from tourists. 4 Based on input from show organizers,the Authority estimates that approximately 40 new and expanded medium-to-large size competitions could be hosted at the Horse Park once the covered arena is available.The chart on page 8 of this application demonstrates how those events will translate into additional tourism impacts and economic benefits. The covered arena has always been part of the Horse Park's development master plan,and the City of Cle Elum Master Plan.The project is cited as a high priority strategic objective of the Kittitas County Tourism Plan (Action 5:Recreational Tourism)and the Kittitas County Parks and Recreation Capital Improvement Plan (CIP)2016. The Washington State Horse Park Covered Arena promotes the following goals and priorities of the Kittitas County Tourism Plan: •Goal 1:Develop integrity of place-This project will enhance Kittitas County's character by developing and improving the venue in distinctive ways to differentiate Kittitas County from other areas and to engender local community pride.In addition to bringing international caliber competitions to the area,many equestrian event organizers have expressed their strong interest in moving some of their large shows to a different,more modern and conducive venue.This market opportunity represents approximately 40 new and expanded medium-to-large size competitions that potentially could be hosted at the Horse Park.Local economic impact is estimated at $4.5 to $5.5 million. •Goal 11:Interpret interactively-TheWA State Horse Park Covered Arena and Associated Build-out will attract and engage a unique segment of visitors,representing some 25-30,000 overnight stays.These visitors will learn about other recreational assets of Kittitas County, thereby gaining a richer experience and helping residents develop pride in their locale.The Park's beautiful woodland setting,system of trails,competition facilities and horse-specific operations make it a unique facility in the county and the state. 3.Real Property:If real property acquisition is a component of the project,please explain. Include any information of property already secured or evidence of the ability to secure the real property. The covered arena will be developed on land currently occupied by the Park's maintenance facilities,thus forcing them to be related.The covered arena also will attract more spectators and the need for expanded parking.The Authority has included in its plan the acquisition of up to 8 additional acres in the northeast corner of the site where it,ideally,can relocate the maintenance area and provide additional parking.However,if this acreage cannot be obtained, the project will move forward and alternative provisions for these needs will be made within the existing footprint. 4.Coordination:Please explain how this project has been coordinated with other jurisdictions as well as affected stakeholders.Please include letters of support from stakeholders. 5 The development of a covered arena was included in the Park's original master plan prepared with input from potential users groups and made publicly available to stakeholders.It was included in the Environmental Impact Study and Development Agreement approved by the City. As the Park's landlord,we partner closely with the Authority and have had several recent discussions about the covered arena project. Over the past 18 months,the Authority has solicited input from current and prospective user groups and coordinated with them on project design details.The covered arena project described in this application has generated much support and enthusiasm from throughout the horse community thanks to its scope and attention to details that make it highly functional and attractive.Letters of support from current and prospective user groups,the City,County,and other stakeholders are attached. 5.Studies:Please attach any feasibility or other studies that demonstrate linkages between the proposed project and the anticipated tourism impacts.Also please include your operations/maintenancestrategy and other plans for long-term project sustainability (how the facility or facilities will be operated and maintained over at least five years following completion). Attached is the Financial Feasibility and Economic Impact study conducted by professors at Central Washington University in 2006.The study is based on other major equine facilities the vast majority of which have covered and/or indoor competition space.Page 6 of the Addendum describes The Facility and states "the key facility on the site will be a 200 x 300 foot covered arena with a 175 x 300 foot open arena".Our current thinking on the dimensions has changed slightly,but the need remains central to the Park's operations and strategy. The Horse Park completed its sixth full season of operations in 2016,and has grown to host 40 events annually in a wide range of activities with up to 300 horses participating in shows running from one to seven days for English and western disciplines.People are drawn to the Park's first class facilities,convenient location and beautiful setting.Since its inception,the Park has sustained itself through operating revenue and an array of private and public support as summarized in the following chart: Source 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 j TOTAL state Capital Budget Grant $3.500,000 $3,500,000 Kittitas County &Municipalities Lodging Tax Grant:Marketing Operations $42,200 $20,000 $27 500 $20,000 $20,000 $20.000 $149,700 Kittitas County Lodging Tax Grant:Capital Project i 41.500 5 41,500 Kittitas County Distressed 5ales &Use Tax Funding(Rural Counties)I $60 000 $60,000 OperatingRevenues 5 16.000 $53.000 $167.300l$190200 $254.700\S29.300 $336.000 $L280400 bonations.MembershiosandSponsorships $15.800 $71.850 $88,900 $125.900 $99.oool$104,500 5155,000 $660,950 RestrictedDonations:Capitallmorovements $12.750 $55.900 $96.730 $243.855 $90.640 $14.600 $69.400 $583.875 InKind Donations $4.500 $16 100 $20_500 $28.100 $26.500 $10 500 $23.000 $129,200 Volunteerism $23,000 $51267 $25967 $21,367 $35,926 $26,725 $34,086 $47.650 $265,988 Other Grants S 3.500 5 3.500 TOTAL $3.523.000 $100.317 $265.017 $418.297 $651.481 $559.065 $466.986 $691.050 $6.675.213 The following chart summarizes the user metrics and economic impact of the Horse Park to date.The measurement process includes gathering zip codes from all Park users,on-site surveys,the Dean Runyan Report provided by Washington Tourism Alliance,and discussion 6 with event organizers.For Recreational Riders the visitor days and %non-local data is collected from day-user registration forms and seasonal passes;number of visitor overnights from stall rentals;reasonable estimate of number of people camping versus staying in a hotel (these numbers are conservative).For Events,the number and zip codes for all participants are supplied by each event organizer;this base data is then multiplied by 1.5 to 3 depending on the type of group to project total attendees [Central Washington University conducted an economic study in 2006 of over 40 horse parks across the country.The CWU findings estimate 3 people (including trainers,grooms,family,spectators,staff,volunteers,vendors,etc.)attend an event for each horse/participant,and that assumption seems reasonable for many groups based on our experience managing the Park to-date.] 2014 2015 2016 Recreational Riders Total #visitor days 733 1,470 1,140 Non-local %70%67%66% Non-local #513 985 753 Overnight #150 300 170 -expenditures @ $115/day avg.$17,250 $34,500 $19,550 Other non-local (day use)#363 685 583 -expenditures @ $86/day $31,218 $58,910 $50,138 Estimated econom mpact:$48,468 $93,410 $69,688 Events 1-2-day Events:total #visitor days 2,903 1,830 1,695 3-6 day Events:total #visitor days 14,343 22,997 26,668 Total #visitor days 17,246 24,827 28,363 Non-local %93%88%95% Non-local #16,039 21,848 26,945 Overnight #11,469 13,351 16,193 -expenditures @ $120/day avg.$1,376,280 $1,602,120 $1 94 160 Other non-local (day use)#4,570 8,497 10,752 -expenditures @$86/day $393,001 $730,721 $924,659 Estimated economic impact:$1,769,281 $2,332,841 $2,867,819 Total Estimated Economic Impact $1,817,749 $2,426,251 $2,937,507 %Annual growth 33%21% This chart reflects strong but slowing growth without the Covered Arena,because the Park's largest shows have reached its capacity until more arena space is added,and inability to attract more large events without a covered competition arena. 7 The chart below projects the measurable objectives and economic impact of the Park,with significant increases expected to occur in 2020 and beyond due to completion of the Covered Arena and Associated Build-Out and the related growth in the number and size of competitions. 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Recreational Riders Total #visitor days 1,300 1,400 1,500 1,800 2,200 Non-local %70%70%70%67%65% Non-local #910 980 1,050 1,206 1,430 Overnight #310 330 ¾5 _ 400 572 -expenditures @ $115/day avg._ __ $35,650 $37,950 $39,675 $46,000 $65,780 Other non-local (day use)#600 650 705 806 858 -expenditures @ $86/day $51,600 $55,900 $60,630 $69,316 $73,780 Estimated economic impact:$87,250 $93,850 $100,305 $115.316 $139,560 Events 1-2-day Events:total #visitor days 1,800 1,900 2,200 2,300 2,600 3-6 day Events:total #visitor days 30,000 32,000 33,500 40,000 52,000 Total #visitor days 31,800 33,900 35,700 42,300 54,600 Non-local%95%95%95%92%90% Non-local #30,210 32,205 33,915 38 49,140 Overnight #21,147 22,544 23,741 26,852 32,924 -expenditures @ $120/day avg.$2,537,640 $2,705,220 $2,848,860 $3,222,245 $3,950,856 Other non-local (day use)#9,063 9,662 10,175 12,064 16,216 -expenditures @$86/day $779,418 $830,889 $875,007 $1,037,501 $1,394,593 Estimated economic impact:$3,317,058 $3,536,109 $3,723,867 $4,259,745 $5,345,449 Total Estimated Economic Impact $3,404,308 $3,629,959 $3,824,172 $4,375,061 $5,485,009 %Annual growth 16%7%_5%_14%25% The chart below reflects projected funding sources for ongoing maintenance and operations: Sources of Revenues for Ongoing Maintenance and Operations Projected income 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Revenues frorn events and shows $315,000 $330,000 $345,000 $360RO $400,000 $480,000 $550,000 $600,000 Private fundraising for operations $140,000 $145,000 $150,000 $155,000 $175,000 $185,000 $195,000 $205,000 Business sponsorships $15,000 $25,000 $35,000 $50,000 $65,000 $90,000 $100,000 $110,000 In-kind support $25,000 $25,000 $30,000 $35,000 $40,000 $45,000.$45,000 $50,000 Total $495,000.$525,000 $560,000 $600,000Ë $680,000 $800,000Ï $890,000 N $965,000 6.Project Readiness:Please provide a detailed project schedule,including milestones necessary for completion as mentioned in question 1 above.On the schedule,indicate items completed and exactly where in the schedule the project is at this time.Be sure to include expected completion date. 8 Est. Milestone Status Completion Obtain land,develop access for vehicles and Completed 2009-10 utilities Listed among 2018 Local and Community Projects,ProposedSecure$2.0MM State Capital Budget Grant Jul-17Senate2017-19 Capital Budget, Senate Ways &Means Comm. "Unbridled Evening"Capital Fundraising Campaign Initiated Nov 2016,raised $60k Jul-18 Secure $1.6MM County Lodge Tax Capital Grant Application submitted Jul-17 Grant awarded for $60k;applySecure$310k County Distressed Sales &Use Tax Jan-18forremaining$250k Apply for $10k/year set-aside forSecure$30k City of Cle Elum Lodging Tax Grant Jun-17threeyears Secure remaining private funding On-going Dec-19 Design and Engineering Preliminary 2016 Construction details Dec-17 ..Coordinate with existingOwnershipArrangementandIndemnification Dec-17documents Permitting Feb-18 Secure State Recreation and Conservation Office .Application 2018 Jan-19(RCO)Grant Groundbreaking Mar-18 Completion Dec-19 Note:construction will need to take place around the Park's activities during its busy April to October operating season. 7.Applicant Certification:Please sign below in agreement with the statement of certification. Certification is hereby given that the information provided is accurate and the applicable attachments are complete and included as part of the application package. I further certify that the application thresholds are met at the time of application. City Administrator,City of Cle Elum Signature of Official Representative Title Date 9 Tourism-Related,Large-Scale Municipality-OwnedCapital Project Budget All applicants must supply a detailed and complete project budget utilizing the following basic format: Funding Sources County Lodging Tax Funds Request $1,500,000 *Other Grant Funds (Listed by Source) Distressed Sales and Use Tax (.09)Funding Grant (secured)$60,000 Distressed Sales and Use Tax (.09)Funding Grant (proposed 2017)$_250,000 WA State 2017-19 Capital Budget (applied,included in Proposed Senate 2017-19 Capital Budget 3.28.2017 $2,000,000 State Recreation and Conservation Office (RCO)Grant,application 2018 _$200,000 *Other Local Government Funds City of Cle Elum Lodging Tax Funding (proposed)$30,000 in-Kind (design,engineering,construction services and materials)$160,000 *Private Funds "Unbridled Evening"/Other Private Donor Designated C_p__aital Funding $315.000 Corporate Sponsorship Campaign (launched)_$125,000 Total Available Funding $4,640,000 Project Expenses Real Property or "Right-of-Way"Acquisition Cost Capital Asset Cost Acquisition of 8-acre parcel from New Suncadia LLC for parking _.$150,000 Capital Asset Cost Construction Cost or "Hard"costs Site Preparation and drainage $65,000 Metal building ($28.50/sf x 60,000 sf)$1,710,000 Porch at gable ends ($24/sf x 9,600 sf)$230,400 Foundations $185,000 Mechanical 35,000 Electrical and engineering __$250,000 Fencing $50,000 Arena footing __ $200,000 Translucent panels (skylight).$450,000 Landscaping _$40,000 Portable bleachers __$60,000 Weather screens $55,000 Restrooms $200,000 Additional parking land-clearing and construction $75,000 Relocation of maintenance area (utilities,landclearing,development)$156,000 Subtotal $3,761,400 Contingency (5%)_$188,070 WSST (8%)$315,958 Total $4,265,428 Soft Cost 3%Administrative Cost on $2.0MM state funding $60,000 Project Management _L$__100,000 Permit Fees $15,000 Architectural and Structural Design Fees $50,000 Total $225,000 Total Project Costs $4,640,428 10 This project budget,being submitted as part of this application,will be considered an estimate. As the project progresses through the four-step process,applicants will be required to update the project budget as more information becomes available and at the time of funding award. *At the time funding awards are being considered (Steps 3 and 4),verifying documentation shall be required and attached to the final project budget.Verifying documentation may include award letters,letters of commitment,or loan approval documentation.If the funding source includes applicant funds,proof of available funding in the form of a letter of commitment from an authorized body or representative of the applicant is adequate. 11 DetailedVicinityMapFUTUREEXISTlNGWASHINGTONSTATEHORSEPARKCleElum,WashingtonARENAMasterPlanEF/#5.FuHBuildOutURSSETURLRSOBSTACLESOUULELASRÔMUNROMONUMENTSICNTOSLATTLEINTERSTATE90TO5POKANELEGENDARENASEmsaA.ParkEntrance#lFutureCoveredArena(150ftx300ft)ToaccesstheWestXCCourseexitB.SpectatorParking#2OutdoorArena(150ftx250ft)I-90atBullfrogRoadandturnC.TemporaryShowerBuilding#3OutdoorArena(150ftx250ft)ontoWoodDuckRoadD.MaintenanceandStorageArea#4OutdoorArena(150ftx310ft)E.RV,TrailerParkingwithHook-ups#5OutdoorArena(250ftx250ft)F.Stalls#6OutdoorArena(130ftx250ft)G.WashRacksH.LungingAreasPortableSpectatorSeating1.ShowOfficeandeBuaesonra0100500FTL.TentCampingAreaM.RVSanitationStationN.LivestockHoldingPensDAWSONASSOCIATESARCHITECTS/PLANNERSO.Restrooms/ShowerBuildingSIRFranklinAvenueEau.Seattle,WA98102TEL:(206)499-0903/FAX:(206)374-2649 KITTITAS COUNTY Kittitas County Lodging Tax Grant Program for Tourism-Related,Large-Scale Municipality-Owned Capital Projects Submission Deadline:April 14,2017 Kittitas County Commissioners 205 W 5th Avenue,Suite 108,Ellensburg,WA 98926 Phone:509-962-7508 Lodging Tax Grant Program for Tourism-Related,Large- Scale,Municipality-Owned Capital Projects Background Kittitas County imposes a lodging tax assessed on the sale or charge made for furnishings of lodging according to RCW 67.28.180 and RCW 67.28.181.In accordance with the tax and Washington State law,a Lodging Tax Advisory Committee (LTAC)has also been established. The committees'purpose is to advise and recommend to the Board of County Commissioners how excise taxes on lodging should be allocated to support tourism which in turn generates revenue. Uses According to Law: RCW 67.28.1816 states the following: Lodging tax revenues under this chapter may be used,directly by any municipality or indirectly through a convention and visitor bureau or destination marketing organization for:...(c) Supporting the operations and capital expenditures of tourism-related facilities owned or operated by a municipality... Definitions included in state law which should be considered in any application requesting funding include: 1.Tourism means economic activity resulting from tourists,which may include sales of overnight lodging,meals,tours,gifts,or souvenirs. 2.Tourism promotion means activities,operations,and expenditures designed to increase tourism,including but not limited to advertising,publicizing,or otherwise distributing information for the purpose of attracting and welcoming tourists; developing strategies to expand tourism;operating tourism promotion agencies; and funding marketing or the operation of special events and festivals designated to attract tourists. 3.Tourism-related facility means real or tangible personal property with a usable life of three or more years,or constructed with volunteer labor that is:(a)(i)owned by a public entity;...and (b)used to support tourism,performing arts,or to accommodate tourist activities. Grant Program Description This grant program is one component of an overall strategy to enhance the economic value of tourism in Kittitas County.The intent of the program is to develop and implement a Capital Improvement Plan (CIP)for developing tourism-related,large-scale municipality-owned projects throughout the County which contribute to that strategy. Kittitas County Tourism InfrastructurePlan: As the basis for developing this grant program and the CIP,the Board of County Commissioners (BOCC)adopted the Kittitas County Tourism Infrastructure Plan.The plan includes,among other things,an inventory of tourism-related facilities across the County,an evaluation of potential tourism opportunities,goals for guiding tourism development,and a list of prioritized actions for implementation.The plan was created with the assistance and input of various tourism-related interest groups from across the County through a process of open meetings, tourism surveys,open house events,focus group meetings and data research. Municipality Ownership: In order to be eligible for funding under this program,projects must be owned by a municipality in Kittitas County.Projects may be privately developed,but must be transferred to municipality ownership at completion.Proof of ownership and/or transfer agreements may be a requirement of any funding award and reimbursement request. Application Process: Projects seeking funding assistance within this grant program must complete each step of a four-step grant process. Figure A: The intent of the process is to create the CIP with potential projects which are eligible under state law for receiving lodging tax funds.The list will be prioritized based on criteria derived from the Kittitas County Tourism Infrastructure Plan.Projects must successfully navigate through each step of the process to remain in the CIP.The CIP will be updated through this application process at least once every five (5)years. The CIP is managed by the County's LTAC,with assistance from County staff and a Technical Review Team (TRT)and as approved by the BOCC,through the four-step process described above in Figure A.The TRT is an advisory body made up of 5 to 7 members to include volunteers with industry experience and technical knowledge in planning,design,and development of projects.Although the TRT may also include County staff,it is not intended to duplicate other county or city permitting,planning,or project compliance processes.Its scope is to assure that the CIP strategic intent is met,that information provided in the project application remains current and is accurate,and to advise the LTAC of the applicant's completion of each project requirement at each step.AII members of the TRT are appointed by the BOCC. Steps 1 and 2 determine a project's eligibility for funding consideration.Projects are eligible for funding consideration in Steps 3 and 4 of the process.However,it should be noted that completion of Steps 1,2,and/or 3 is not a guarantee of future funding.Projects which become eligible for funding consideration must compete with all other eligible projects as funds become available.All funding decisions are subject to recommendation of the LTAC and approval by the Board of County Commissioners.Awards may be authorized for projects which have completed Steps 1 and 2 annually as funding allows,and may include consideration of how a project ranks in priority with regard to all other eligible projects,project readiness,and other factors as determined by the LTAC.All eligible projects which have completed Steps 1 and 2 of this process will be notified each year when funding is available,the amount of funding,and the process for funding decisions.It is the intent of this process that project funding will be considered annually. It is not the intent of this process to be the sole funding source for any non-county owned project and some county-owned projects.Strict minimum matching fund commitments will be required from all non-county owned projects as well as from some county-owned projects (see page 7 "Matching Funds Requirements". Each step of the process is illustrated in figure 2 and further described as follows: Step 1 -Application for CIP Project List Applicants must first apply and be approved to be included in the program's CIP.In order to generate the program's CIP,the County will request project proposals at least once every five years.To facilitate this process,the County's LTAC will create an application form to use in evaluating proposals.Applicants must fill out the form and submit it to the LTAC.The LTAC will review the proposals and make recommendations for creating the list of projects for the program's CIP to the Board of County Commissioners.All applications will be rated and ranked according to the rating sheet included in this packet.The Board of County Commissioners will make the final decision to approve or reject the list. Step 2 -Feasibility Analysis Applicants whose projects are included in the program's capital improvement plan shall propose a scope of work to determine overall project feasibility.The scope of work will be included in a Step 2 agreement between the applicant and the County.The LTAC shall manage all agreements and will submit the proposed Step 2 agreement to the TRT for recommendation. The LTAC and the TRT may recommend modifications to the scope of work for project feasibility requirements as necessary.Feasibility requirement may include,but are not limited to,long term operations and management plan,site evaluations,funding mechanisms,market analysis, business plan development,etc.The LTAC's and TRT's recommendations shall be submitted to the Board of County Commissioners for final approval.No funding will be included in Step 2 agreements. Step 2 agreements will be reviewed at least annually by the LTAC and the TRT to assess progress and review compliance.The LTAC and the TRT may meet more frequently if needed and/or requested by the applicant.Applicants who do not meet Step 2 agreement requirements within the timeframe outlined in the agreement will not continue in this program or remain on the CIP. Step 2 agreement amendments,including the addition of requirements,modifications of existing requirements,or time extensions shall be reviewed by the LTAC and the TRT. Recommendations from the LTAC and the TRT shall be submitted to the Board of county Commissioners for final decision. Applicants must complete all Step 2 agreement requirements prior moving to Step 3 in this process.To be considered complete,an applicant must request a review for completeness from the LTAC and the TRT.The LTAC and the TRT shall review the Step 2 agreement requirements and submit a written recommendation to the Board of county Commissioners for approval. If a project is accepted as part of the County's CIP and at the time of acceptance it has completed feasibility analysis and requirements ,a Step 2 agreement may not be required. Applicants may be granted a waiver from the Step 2 agreement requirement by making request to the LTAC and the TRT for review of complete feasibility work and requirements.The LTAC and the TRT shall review the waiver request and supporting documentation and submit a recommendation to the BOCC.The BOCC shall have the final authority to accept or reject the recommendation. Step 3 -Design and Permitting Applicants whose projects meet all the requirements of their Step 2 agreement shall propose a scope of work for final project planning,design and permitting to the LTAC for approval.The scope of work will be included in a Step 3 agreement between the applicant and the County. The LTAC will submit the Step 3 agreement to the TRT for recommendation.The LTAC and the TRT may recommend modifications to the proposed scope of work for final project planning, design and permitting requirements necessary.The TRT shall limit its review to assuring completion of project design,planning and permitting requirements;its function is considered non-duplicative of other county and city permitting,planning,and project completion requirements and it shall have no authority to make recommendations or decisions with regard to funding. The LTAC shall consult annually with county financial staff as directed by the County Auditor and shall consider all eligible Step 3 and Step 4 agreements along with available funding resources.The LTAC shall provide a written recommendation for funding eligible Step 3 and Step 4 agreements to the Board of County Commissioners for consideration.The recommendation shall include which agreements to fund,the funding amount for each,and a written explanation for the recommendation.The recommendation shall also include a listing of the currently eligible projects requesting funding which are not included in the recommendation.Applicants will only be held to the timeframe requirements included in Step 3 and Step 4 agreements if adequate funding is awarded.The Board of county Commissioners shall either accept or reject the recommendation from the LTAC. Step 3 agreements will be reviewed at least annually by the LTAC and the TRT to assess progress and review compliance.The LTAC and the TRT may meet more frequently if needed and/or requested by the applicant.Applicants who do not meet Step 3 agreement requirements within the timeframe outlined in the agreement will not continue in this program or remain on the CIP.However,projects may reapply to be placed on the CIP during the next project application cycle. Step 3 agreement amendments shall be reviewed by the LTAC and the TRT Recommendations from the LTAC and the TRT for amendments shall be submitted to the Board of County Commissioners for final decision. Applicants must complete all Step 3 agreement requirements prior moving to Step 4 in this process.To be considered complete,an applicant must request a review for completeness from the LTAC and TRT.The LTAC and the TRT shall review the Step 3 agreement requirements and submit a written recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners for approval. If a project is accepted as part of the County's CIP and at the time of acceptance it has has completed design and permitting,a Step 3 agreement may not be required.Applicants may be granted a waiver from the Step 3 agreement requirement by making request to the LTAC and TRT for review of design and permitting work and requirements.The LTAC and TRT shall review the request and supporting documentation received and submit a recommendation to the BOCC.The BOCC shall have the final authority to accept or reject the recommendation. Step 4 -Project Construction and Closeout Reporting Applicants whose projects meet all the requirements of the Step 3 agreement shall propose a scope of work for a Step 4 agreement for project construction and closeout to the LTAC and TRT for approval.The LTAC will submit the step 4 agreement to the TRT for recommendation.The LTAC and the TRT may recommend modifications to the proposed agreement as necessary.The TRT shall limit its review to assuring completion of project construction and closeout;its function is considered non-duplicative of other county and city permitting,planning,and project completion requirements and it shall have no authority to make recommendations or decisions with regard to funding. The LTAC shall consult annually with county financial staff as directed by the County Auditor and shall consider all eligible Step 3 and Step 4 agreements along with available funding resources.The LTAC shall provide a written recommendation for funding eligible Step 3 and Step 4 agreements to the Board of County Commissioners for consideration.The recommendation shall include which agreements to fund,the funding amount for each,and a written explanation for the recommendation.The recommendation shall also include a listing of the currently eligible projects requesting funding which are not included in the recommendation.The Board of County Commissioners shall either accept or reject the recommendation from the LTAC. Step 4 agreements will be reviewed at least annually by the LTAC and the TRT to assess progress and review compliance.The LTAC and the TRT may meet more frequently if needed and/or requested by the applicant. Step 4 agreement amendments shall be reviewed by the LTAC and the TRT.Recommendations from the LTAC and the TRT shall be submitted to the Board of County Commissioners for final decision..Recommendations from the LTAC shall be submitted to the Board of County Commissioners for final decision. Upon project completion,all step 4 agreements must be submitted to the LTAC and TRT for a review of completeness.The LTAC and TRT shall meet as needed to review project completeness for Step 4 agreements.The LTAC and TRT shall submit a written recommendation regarding their finding of project completeness to the Board of County Commissioners for acceptance and final project closeout. Matching Funds Requirements: All non-county owned projects require matching funds of at least 50%of total projects costs. Matching funds may be in the form of cash or verifiable in-kind contributions.At the time of funding considerations (Step 3 and 4),applicants will be required to provide proof of matching funds. County-owned projects which are located within another municipality or are located on publicly-owned property which is owned by an entity other than Kittitas County shall also be subject to the same 50%matching funds requirements as described above.County-owned projects which are located in unincorporated lands and which are not located on land which is publicly-owned by an entity other than Kittitas County are not subject to any matching requirements. Figure 2 Tourism Capital Large-Scale Projects Grant Process •Conforms with Kittitas County Tourism Infrastructure Plan •Project can be completed within 5 years •Ranks among top ten project proposals submitted Agreement proposed by Matching funds secured, the appHcant and approved -Project budget approved by the TRT &BOCC ·Other requirements as determined Agreement proposed by •Project design completed the applicant and approved •Permits secured &site acquired by the LTAC,TRT &BOCC -Project budget&timeline approved •Other requirements as determined ® / II IB I ' Agreement proposed by .Project construction the applicant and approved .Ribbon-cutting/grand opening by the LTAC,TRT &BOCC ·Final reporting &grant closeout ·Other requirements as determined Application Definitions: Below is a list of terms and phrases which have a specific meaning within this application.It may be helpful for you to review these as you prepare responses so that a better understanding of the reviewer's expectations may be obtained. Capital Asset is any type of property that has a useful life longer than one year and is valued at over $5,000. Construction or "Hard"Costs are the direct contractor costs for labor,material, equipment and services;contractor's overhead and profit,and other direct construction costs.These costs do not include the compensation paid to architects,engineers,or consultants,the cost of land,rights-of-way,or other similar costs. Large-scale,as it relates to projects which may be eligible for being listed on the County's CIP for tourism infrastructure as well as potential funding through this grant process,are projects requesting funding of $50,000 or more. Matching Funds is the amount of funding your organization has secured and is contributing to the project.This includes both direct and indirect support.Direct funds can be in the form of cash funding from your organization or funding secured elsewhere but dedicated to the project such as other grants,loans,donations,etc.Indirect funding support includes in-kind support like labor,volunteer support,supplies,and services which directly relate to the project,including those supplied by your organization and others.A combination of direct and indirect support may be utilized as matching funds. Municipality is a city,county,or town. Real Property is fixed property,principally land and buildings. Soft Costs are cost items in addition to the direct construction cost.These generally include architectural and engineering,permits and fees,financing fees, construction interest and operating expenses,leasing and real estate commissions, advertising and promotion,and supervision. A Tourist is defined as a person traveling away from their place of residence or business and staying overnight in paid accommodations;to a place fifty miles or more one way from their place of residence or business for the day or staying overnight;or from another country or state outside of their place of residence or their business. SUBMITTALINSTRUCTIONS Please return ONE COPY of the entire original application and answers to narrative questions to: Kittitas County Commissioners Attn:Lodging Tax Grant Application 205 West 5th,Suite 108,Ellensburg,WA 98926 Applications must be received no later than 5:00 PM,TBD or postmarked no later than TBD. Incomplete and/or late applications will not be considered.Applications may not be changed or amended by the applicant after the deadline for submission Schedule: •Application deadline TBD Oral presentations of proposals to LTAC and LTAC recommendation TBD BOCC deliberation and decision TBD Project Management: As discussed in the grant process section of this application packet,successful applicants shall be required,as a condition of inclusion in the County's CIP for tourism infrastructure and any funding award (as available),to enter into a contract.The contract may include,but not be limited to,the specific conditions or deliverables the applicant must meet in order to continue to progress through each step of this process,the specific amount of any award if a project becomes eligible for funding and what it may be used for,all reporting requirements associated with this funding,payment terms,and any and all other appropriate terms of the funding.Kittitas County will,be the contracting agent for all approved projects. All funds awarded under this program will be available in the form of reimbursable grants.The funds for capital projects will be available for reimbursement as of the date of the contract and will remain available for the term defined in the contract.Any unexpended funds will be returned to the Lodging Tax account made available for re-appropriation.All requests for reimbursement shall be made to the Kittitas County Auditor's office at the following address: Kittitas County Auditor Attn:Lodging Tax Grant Funds Reimbursement 205 W 5th,Suite 105 Ellensburg,WA 98926 For specific information and requirements regarding the reimbursement process,please contact the Auditor's office at 509-962-7504. Project Reporting Requirements for Tourism-Related Facilities: State law requires that all recipients of Lodging Tax revenues must submit a report to the municipality describing the actual number of people traveling for business or pleasure on a trip: A.Away from their place of residence or business and staying overnight in paid accommodations; B.To a place fifty miles or more one way from their place of residence or business for the day or staying overnight;or C.From another country or state outside of their place of residence or their business. A report form will be provided as part of the contract for receiving funds.We ask that you provide this information within 60 days after your project is complete. Applicant Eligibility: This grant process for lodging tax funds is available only for large-scale tourism capital projects which are municipality-owned.All applicants must be a municipality in Kittitas County.One capital project is allowed per application.There is no limit to the number of applications a municipality may submit per cycle.Projects must be compatible with the Kittitas County Tourism Infrastructure Plan asa low, medium,or high priority to be eligible for inclusion in the CIP. Other Information: Insurance:As part of its contract for performance,a municipality may require contractors to maintain liability insurance in the amount of $1,000,000 or more and name the municipality as an additional insured on its liability insurance policy. Application Form:This packet will be available on Kittitas County's website as a word document and as a pdf.It can also be obtained directly as a hard copy or in digital format by contacting the Kittitas County Board of Commissioners office at 509-962-7508.Kittitas County's website address is: www.co.kittitas.wa.us. APPLICATION FOR TOURISM-RELATED,LARGE-SCALE MUNICIPALITY-OWNEDCIP LISTING Applicant Information Name of Municipality: Mailing Address: Contact Person and Title: Phone: Email: Project Title: Project Location: Application Requirements 1.The project qualifies for lodging tax funds as a capital expenditure of a tourism- related facility owned or operated by a municipality. 2.If this application is not from Kittitas County,the municipality's lodging tax advisory committee (or equivalent)has been informed of the project and endorsed it.A letter from the municipality is included. 3.Lodging tax capital project funds are not being substituted for other funds that are already secured or applied for (if applicable). 4.A completed project budget is included in the application. 5.A detailed 8 ½X 11vicinity map that clearly shows the location of the project is included. Tourism-Related,Large-Scale Municipality-Owned Capital Project Narrative 1.Project Description:Please describe the project in detail.Indicate the major work to be completed,any milestones that need to be overcome in order for the project to move forward, and include a comparison of e×isting and proposed conditions. 2.Kittitas County Tourism Infrastructure Plan:Please explain how the project meets the Goals and Actions in the Kittitas County Tourism Infrastructure Plan as adopted.Also,describe the specific county tourism infrastructure needs the project addresses and how the project directly increases tourism.Explain how the improvements will promote tourism in Kittitas County and indicate specifically how the improvements will directly increase economic activity resulting from tourists. 3.Real Property:If real property acquisition is a component of the project,please explain. Include any information of property already secured or evidence of the ability to secure the real property. 4.Coordination:Please explain how this project has been coordinated with other jurisdictions as well as affected stakeholders.Please include letters of support from stakeholders. 5.Studies:Please attach any feasibility or other studies that demonstrate linkages between the proposed project and the anticipated tourism impacts.Also please include your operations/maintenance strategy and other plans for long-term project sustainability (how the facility or facilities will be operated and maintained over at least five years following completion). 6.Project Readiness:Please provide a detailed project schedule,including milestones necessary for completion as mentioned in question 1 above.On the schedule,indicate items completed and exactly where in the schedule the project is at this time.Be sure to include expected completion date. 7.Applicant Certification:Please sign below in agreement with the statement of certification. Certification is hereby given that the information provided is accurate and the applicable attachments are complete and included as part of the application package. I further certify that the application thresholds are met at the time of application. Signature of Official Representative Title Date Tourism-Related,Large-Scale Municipality-Owned Capital Project Budget All applicants must supply a detailed and complete project budget utilizing the following basic format: Funding Sources Lodging Tax Funds Request *Other Grant Funds List By Source (indicate if secured or applied) *Other Local Government Funds List By Source (may include in-kind) *Private Funds List By Source (may include in-kind) Total Available Funding Project Expenses Real Property or "Right-of-Way"Acquisition Cost Capital Asset Cost Construction Cost or "Hard"Cost Include an itemized list of general costs For example:asset type and cost,site prep,building foundation and structure, mechanical work,finish work,site restoration,electrical work,technology,etc. Soft Cost Include an itemized list of soft costs For example:feasibility analysis,design fees,construction management fees, survey costs,engineering fees,permitting costs,special inspections,cultural resource surveys,etc. Total Project Costs This project budget,being submitted as part of this application,will be considered an estimate. As the project progresses through the four-step process,applicants will be required to update the project budget as more information becomes available and at the time of funding award. *At the time funding awards are being considered (Steps 3 and 4),verifying documentation shall be required and attached to the final project budget.Verifying documentation may include award letters,letters of commitment,or loan approval documentation.If the funding source includes applicant funds,proof of available funding in the form of a letter of commitment from an authorized body or representative of the applicant is adequate. Ratings criteria and Score Card Tourism-Related,Large-Scale,Municipality-Owned Capital Projects 1.Criteria:Kittitas County Tourism Infrastructure Plan Points Possible:60 Score Awarded: How closely dc es the application Up to 20 points Comments: meet the goals to further geotourism opportunities as Awarded: presented in Section 6 of the Plan? w closely related is the High =20 Comments: application to the high,moderate,Moderate =15 or low priority Action Tasks Low =10 contained in Section 7 of the Plan? Awarded: How effective will the project be Up to 20 Points Comments: in directly promoting tourism and increasing economic activity Awarded: resulting from tourists? 2.Criteria:Stakeholder Support Points Possible:10 Score Awarded: Has the applicant clearly described Up to 10 points Comments: how the project is being coordinated with other interested Awarded: parties?Are the stakeholders supportive? 3.Criteria:Project Readiness and Feasibility Points Possible:30 Score Awarded: Can the project be completed Yes =10 Comments: within 5 years?No =0 Awarded: Has the applicant clearly Up to 20 points Comments: articulated a feasible long term maintenance and operations Awarded: strategy for the project? Total Score Awarded: 4 Ste St-Telephone:(509)674-2262 119 West First Street Fax:(509)674-4097 Cle Elum,WA 98922 www.cityofcleelum.com April 11,2017 Kittitas County Commissioners Attn:Lodging Tax Grant Application 205 West 5th,Suite 108 Ellensburg,WA 98926 Dear Commissioners: The City of Cle Elum's Lodging Tax Advisory Committee is aware of and endorses the Washington State Horse Park's project to build a Covered Arena and Associated Build-out.We have reviewed the development and funding plan as described in the Application for Tourism- related,Large Scale,Municipality-owned CIP Listing,and we urge your support of this project. Sincerely, , ay McGowan Casa,deiIORSESilOW5 March 2,2017 Senator Jim Honeyford Way and Means,Vice-Chair capital Budget committee 112 Irv Newhouse Building PO Box 40415 Olympia,WA 98504 Re:Washington State Horse Park -Covered Arena Project Dear Senator Honeyford: I am a partner in Cascade Horse Shows,LLC,and can't emphasize enough that the facilities at the Washington State Horse Park are extremely important to our future growth.I urge you to support the Horse Park's application for $2.0 million in capital funding support for a Covered Arena and Associated Build-Out submitted by the WA State Horse Park Authority. Cascade Horse Shows organizes the Park's largest events;currently producing two weeklong shows (competitions)in June and another two shows in July.The challenge we are facing is that we are presently operatingat the Horse Park's capacity in terms of number of people we can serve and number of events we can hold.We are unable to accommodate a meaningful amount of the customer base who would like to attend our events.This results in Washington residents and others having to travel to out-of-state venues to spend their show dollars. Our horse shows draw participants and spectators from all over the western United States and Canada.Horse sports are unique in that they are enjoyed by people of all ages (6-70)and are one of the only sports where women and men compete equally.A particular feature of our brand of horse sport (show jumping)is it's a crowd pleaser being spectator friendly and wholesome family entertainment.It's also important to note the value of the horses participating,often costing six figures.This is relevant as weather conditions can adversely affect horses'performance and well-being making owners highly selective of the environmentsin which they expose their horses. A Covered Arena and Associated Build-Outwouldallow us increase the number of people attending the shows,increase the number of events we produce and enable us to ensure the most favorableconditions in which to compete.All leading to increased tourism dollars to the state and Kittitas county. Thank you for your consideration.I urge the State to fund this important project. Sincerely, Jessica Vania Partner,Cascade Horse Shows LLC 923 21st Ave East Seattle WA 98112 «www.CascadeHorseShows.com DIUVING EV£NTING ·DRESSAGE March 1,2017 Senator Jim Honeyford -Senator Judy Warnick Way and Means,Vice-Chair Capital Budget Committee Chair,Economic Development 112 Irv Newhouse Building Committee PO Box 40415 103 Irv Newhouse Building Olympia,WA 98504 PO Box 40413 Olympia,WA 98504 Dear Senators: Equestrians Institute is a 501(c)(3)not-for-profit organization founded in 1974 in Washiogton that serves the horse disciplines of Eventing,Dressage,Carriage Driving and Sport Horse Breeding.The Washington State Horse Park has enabled us to host a wide range of equestrian activitieg since it opened in 2010 including nationally recognized competitions which attract riders from California, Montana,Oregon,idaho and beyond.We also provide educational and competitive opportunities through our sponsorship of clinics,schooling shows and fun events for children and families.Outdoor recreation,skill development,camaraderie and support are fostered through the El network. El views the Covered Arena as indispensable to expanding our capacity in our Pacific Northwest climate. The scope of the proposed arena is impressive and essential for our disciplines to compete at a national level.We hold two US Eventing Association-recognized three day Horse Trials at WSHP each season but have reached the current capacity of the Horse Park for entries;we need more arena space to allow us to accept more competitors.In addition to competitors,these events bring families,friends and vendors from far afield who bring significant business to the local community for four or five days each event. The Covered Arena with its significant scope will allow the Horse Park to become a truly outstanding venue offering multiple benefits to El and the greater horse community:(1)increase capacity for more participants in events,(2)enable evening and educational activities when undercover (3)allow a longer "working year"and the ability to attract international clinicians and events and (4)attract more sponsors and vendors and,in turn,attract more visitors. WSHP is viewed as one of the first class venues in our area with quality facilities including stabling and arenas with excellent footing,which attract top trainers and horse people from all over our Region.El looks forward to continuing its close partnership with the Horse Park to serve the equestrian community of the Pacific Northwest.We urge you to support this important project;it is needed now. Sincerely, Diana Axness Meika Decher Penelope Leggott President Eventing Director Board Member At Large Northwest ReinedCowHorseAssociation o.a.J.°w"PR March 2,2017 Senator Jim Honeyford Ways and Means,Vice-Chair Capital Budget Committee 112 Irv Newhouse Building P.O.Box 40415 Olympia,WA 98504 Senator Judy WarnicK Chair,Economic Development Committee 103 Irv Newhouse Building P.O.Box 40413 Olympia,WA 98504 RE:Washington State Horse Park -Covered Arena Project Dear Senators, I am writing in behalf of the NW Reined Cow Horse Association.Our organization is the NW Affiliate as recognized by the National Reined Cow Horse Association based in Pilot Point,Texas.Our Association has hosted a show at the Washington State Horse Park for the last four years.Our membership loves to hold a show at this beautiful facility but we are limited to only having one summertime show a year there as weather is a major consideration for the safety of our horses and riders when competing.Rain is a deal breaker for our group.The NWRCHA would be open to expanding the number of shows and the duration of the shows we hold at the Horse Park if a covered arena was available.As the Show Chairperson of the NWRCHA,I see a terrific need for this covered facility.We have limited choices of equine facilities in our state for our equestrian competitions.This covered Arena at the Washington Horse Park in Cle Elum,would create options for multiple equestrian events. The NW Reined Cow Horse Association is asking you to support the Washington State Horse Park application for $2.0 million in capital funding for a Covered Arena and Associated Build-Out submitted by the Washington State Horse Park. The 112-acre Horse Park is a destination venue among equine enthusiasts that attracts 30 thousand visitors per year.Approximately 95%of these attendees are from outside the local area creating a $2.5 million in overnight stays.The total economic impact from the park is approximately $3.5 million. When the NWRCHA hosts its weekend show (covers three days,two nights)we have an average of 100 horse owners,riders and family that attends the event.A large percentage of these folks are staying in local motels,eating at local restaurants and getting fuel and supplies.The covered arena project at the Horse Park will create a more inviting environment for larger Equine Competitions to utilize and bring even more economic support into the Cle Elum/Ellensburg area. I encourage you to support the Washington State Horse Park's covered Arena Project. Sincerely, Diane A.Edwards NWRCHA Show Chair (206)390-0715 Cle Elum Roundup Association PO Box 971 Cle Elum,WA 98922 March 1,2017 Senator Jim Honeyford Ways and Means,Vice Chair Capital Budget Committee 112 Irv Newhouse Building P.O.Box 40415 Olympia WA.98504 Senator Judy Warnick Chair,Edonomic Development Committee 103 Irv NewhouseBuilding P.O.Box 40413 -- Olympia WA.98504 y y .à Dear Senators; The Cle Elum RoundupAspıeiation(CERA)Rodeo Board urges you to support the Project known as the Washington State Horsèfark (WSHP)CoveredArena.Our reasons are really simple.There's an abundance of use for the Proposed CoveredArena;the Horse Park,is surroundedby the economically depressed Cif¶of Cle Elum,yet the Park brings much needed eapital into the City whendverthere is an event held there. The CERA Rodeo is held the last weekend of July and this is our 46 year.Each year the Rodeo has gotten bigger,better and will grow exponentially even more as time goes on.From the onset the WSHP has been the reason the Rodeo has been successfïil,a facility designed and built for equine events,with all of the support any event cquld hope for.The CoveredArena will offer the CERA Rodeo another state of the art facility with whicheto have even more contestants perform.The Arena will allow the Rodeo to add even more events to make it one of the great tier two rodeos in the State of Washington,allowing our Rodeo to attract tlé best talent in the United States. During sport horse events and Rodeos the town fills with English discipline riders,cowboys,cowgirls and tourist,all coming because we have the Washington State Horse Park.The economic benefits of outdoor recreation in Washington State is over $20 Billion,of which horselactivities comprise over $150 Million.Taxes collected just for Kittitas County are well over $10 Million. The addition of a CoveredArena will create an environment that will place the Horse Park on the list of premier horse facilities in America.This is one of the most beautiful settings anywhere,sitting at the foot of the Cascades with a view of the Stuart Range mountains. Your support for this mgni 6ent ility is,and has been,what'gþeen important to its success.I Terri McFadden President CERA Rodeo Board March 2,2017 Natalie Shaw,Equestrian Business Owner Shaw Equestrian Education,LLC Ellensburg,WA 98926 406-599-7694 Senator Jim Honeyford Way and Means,Vice-Chair Capital Budget Committee 112 Irv Newhouse Building PO Box 40415 Olympia,WA 98504 Senator Judy Warnick Chair,Economic Development Committee 103 Irv Newhouse Building PO Box 40413 Olympia,WA 98504 Re:Washington State Horse Park -Covered Arena Project Dear Senators: As a local equestrian business owner and regional equine feed representative,a robust equineindustryinWashingtonStateiscriticalfinancially.As an avid equestrian,the availability ofequestrianfacilitiesinourstateisextremelyimportanttomepersonally.I urge you tosupporttheWashington(WA)State Horse Park appîication for $2.0 million in capital fundingsupportforaCoveredArenaandAssociatedBuild-Out submitted by the WA State Horse ParkAuthority. Shaw Equestrian Education,LLC has utilized the Washington State Horse Park sin¢e 2013 inordertoprovideahighqualityclinicexperienceforthree-day eventers training for theircompetitions.Each year,participants from every corner of Washington,as well as MontanaandOregon,attend this clinic-many of which return for the Equestrian Institute Horse Trials in May and September.From Spokane to Vancouver and Bellingham to Kennewick,the clinic fills with riders due in part to the quality of the facility.A covered arena will vastly increase the flexibility and viability of the WSHP as a venue for this event. As a local rider and trainer myself,I have used the park to condition my horses.Ìhe extensivetrailsystemprovidesaunique,safe,and accessible option for riders across maný disciplines.There are no other trail systems like it in the Kittitas County. Finally,the Washington divisions of the United States Pony Club,collectivelyover 500 members strong,have utilized this facility for clinics,camps and certifications.I am alifetimememberofthisorganizationandhavevestedinterestinthesuccessofitsyouth.The WSHP has provided a central venue for both regions of the USPC.The WSHP is one of only afewfacilitieswiththecapabilitiesandsafetyrequirementsneededforlargeregionalUSPCevents.The USPC Championships West were held there the summer of 2012. Thank you for your consideration.I urge the State to fund this important project. Sincerely, Natalie Shaw BS,PAS PO Box 864 Eatonville,WA 98328 Phone:206-734-6904 February 27,2017 Senator Jim Honeyford Way and Means,Vice-Chair Capital Budget Committee 112 Irv Newhouse Building PO Box 40415 Olympia,WA 98504 Senator Judy Warnick Chair,Economic Development Committee 103 Irv Newhouse Building PO Box 40413 Olympia,WA 98504 Dear Senators: Washington Cutting Horse Association (WCHA)has a long history of providing high qµality cow cutting horse events.We urge you to support the Washington (WA)State Horse Par application for $2.0 million in capital funding support for a CoveredArena and Associated Build-Out submitted by the WA State Horse Park Authority. Our goal is to make WA State Horse Park the new home for our future monthly horsè shows.To do that,we will need a covered arena to protect the footing and accommodate our s ectators, judges and competitors during our competitions.In the past,we have attracted "Wo Id Champions"such as Matt Gaines,Greg Smith and Lindy Burch as well as local trainerà like Josh Sleeman (NCHA Hall of Famer)and Joe Jones Jr.(NCHA Zane Schulte Award recipient)go our shows.With this new arena we hope to invite this prestigious group of professionals gnd many others to the WA State Horse Park for quality cow cutting events. Centrally located in Cle Elum,the 112-acre Horse Park is a destination venue among horse facilities in our state and will easily attract competitors to our events.The Park's ability to draw people from outside the local area uniquely characterizes the Park's impact and already generates $3.4 million in total economic impact.The Covered Arena will allow the Pàrk to attract more horse disciplines,host larger shows and extend its operating season from five to nine months,significantly increasing the size and number of events held at the Park. Thank you for your consideration.We urge the State to fund this important project. Sincerely, Jane Roundtree Director,WCHA PO n lu b. Where it all begins February 27,2017 Senator Jim Honeyford Way and Means,Vice-Chair Capital Budget Committee 112 Irv Newhouse Building PO Box 40415 Olympia,WA 98504 Senator Judy Warnick Chair,Economic Development Committee 103 Irv Newhouse Building PO Box 40418 Olympia,WA 98504 Re:Washington State Horse Park -Covered Arena Project Dear Senators: As Regional Supervisor for the inland Empire Pony Club,the Horse Park is extremely impprtant to us.I urge you to support the Washington (WA)State Horse Park application for $2.0 million in capital funding support for a CoveredArena and Associated Build-Out submitted by the WA State Horse Park Authority. The United States Pony Club is a National non-profit youth organization that organizes shows for youth development and competition.The Inland Empire Region encampasses Eastern Washington,Idaho, Oregon and Montana and our members utilize the Horse Park's facilities several times a year for a variety of activities.We would come more often if the Horse Park had a Covered Riding Arena to rent. We appreciate that the Horse Park is easy to access and centrally located in Cle Elum.The Park's ability to draw people from outside the local area uniquely characterizes the Park's impact.Total economic impact of the Park,including day visitors,is $3.4 million.The Covered Arena will allow the Park to attract more horse disciplines,host larger shows and extend the its operatin8 season from five to nine months, significantly increasing the size and number of events held at the Park. Moreover,the Park provides a permanent asset for our young people -a quality facility for outdoor recreation,a place they'll love to go to learn and compete for generations to come.Thank you for your consideration.I urge the State to fund this important project. Sincerely, Shelly Widmer Inland Empire Pony Club Regional Supervisor 509-750-9710 Joan Shelton Palelek,Manager Mid-Summer Classic Arabian Horse Show Inland Empire Arabian Horse Show 8930 W.Melville Rd. Cheney,WA 99004 206-972-2163 February 27,2017 Senator Jim Honeyford Ways and Means,Vice-Chair Capital Budget Committee 112 Irv Newhouse Building P.O.Box 40415 Olympia,WA 98504 Senator Judy WarnicK Chair,Economic Development Committee 103 Irv Newhouse Building P.O.Box 40413 Olympia,WA 98504 RE:Washington State Horse Park -Covered Arena Project Dear Senators, I am writing in behalf of the Mid-Summer Classic Arabian Horse Show,and the Inland Empire Ar bian Horse Show.As manager of these two United States Equestrian Federation and Arabian Horse Association comp titions,I see a terrific need for this covered facility.We have limited choices of equine facilities in our state for our eq estrian athletes to compete.This covered Arena at the Washington Horse Park in Cle Elum,would create options fo multiple equestrian competitions. Our Arabian community urges you to support the Washington State Horse Park application for $2.0 million in capital funding for a Covered Arena and Associated Build-Out submitted by the Washington State Horse Park. The Horse Park is located in Cle Elum and has been in operation for six years.The 112 acre Horse Park is a destination venue among equine enthusiasts that attracts 30 thousand visitors per year.95%of these attendees are from outside the local area creating a $2.5 million in overnight stays.The total economic impact from the park is approximately $3.5 million. The covered arena project at the Horse Park will create a more inviting environment for larger Equine Competitions to utilize. I encourage you to support the Washington State Horse Park's Covered Arena Project. Sincerely, Jouw ShektmePdelelo Joan Shelton-Palelek Date:February 28,2017 Senator Jim Honeyford Way and Means,Vice-Chair Capital Budget Committee 112 Irv Newhouse Building PO Box 40415 Olympia,WA 98504 Senator Judy Warnick Chair,Economic Development Committee 103 Irv Newhouse Building PO Box 40413 Olympia,WA 98504 Re:Washington State Horse Park --Covered Arena Project Dear Senators: As a horse owner and an office-holder/memberof various horse organizations,I gnowof the need to have a quality facility that horse enthusiasts can use.I have seen the progress that has been made on the Horse Park and feel that it is a one-of-a kind venue that can be the number one horse facility in Washington with the potential to attract horse enthusiasts and their families not only from the northwest,but the nation as well.The tourism econon y of our state is extremely important to us and the dollars generated by the horse industry's ush of the Horse Park can have a major positive effect on our state's economy.I urge you to suppdrt the Washington (WA)State Horse Park application for $2.0 million in capital funding upport for a Covered Arena and Associated Build-Out submitted by the WA State Horse Park uthority. Located in Cle Elum and in operation for 6 years,the 112-acre Horse Park is a destination venue among horse facilities in our state and already attracts over 30 thousand visitors per year,95 percent of whom are nonlocal.The Park's ability to draw people from outside the local area uniquely characterizes the Park's impact:over $2.5 million in overnight stays.Total economic impact of the Park,including day visitors,is $3.4 million.The Covered Arena will allow the Park to attract more horse disciplines,host larger shows and extend the its operating season from five to nine months,significantly increasing the size and number of events held at the Park. Cle Elum is in Kittitas County,where over 18 percent of jobs are in the Accommodations and Foodservice Sector (Kittitas County Profile,Meseck,regional labor economist, updated September 2016).The economic impact of the Park is considerable. Thank you for your consideration.I urge the State to fund this important project. Sincerely, Julie Karnath 4716 W.14th Kennewick,WA 99338 VVhere it all begins March 2,2017 Senator Jim Honeyford Senator Judy Warnick Way and Means,Vice-Chair Capital Budget Committee Chair,Economic Development Committee 112 Irv Newhouse Building 103 Irv Newhouse Building PO Box 40415 PO Box 40413 Olympia,WA 98504 Olympia,WA 98504 Re:Washington State Horse Park -Covered Arena Project Dear Senators: As Vice Regional Supervisor of United States Pony Club,Northwest Region,I urge you to support the Washington (WA)State Horse Park application for $2.0 million in capital funding support for a Covered ArenaandAssociatedBuild-Out submitted by the WA State Horse Park Authority. Pony Club is the largest equestrian educational organization in the world;most members are 18 years and younger.The cornerstones of our organization are education,safety,sportsmanship,stewardship and FUN. Members learn riding and the care of horses through mounted sports.The skills,habits and values instilled through horsemanship will apply to every part of a member's life. Many of our almost 400 members utilize the Horse Park at rallies (team equestrian competitions), championships,camps and clinics.A covered arena would make this venue even more desirable for these types functions in inclement weather. Thank you for your consideration.I urge the State to fund this important project. Sincerely, Jennifer Sweet,Vice Regional Supervisor United States Pony Club Northwest Region 200 Chehalis Valley Dr. Chehalis,WA 98532 WSHJA March 5,2017 Senator Jim Honeyford Way and Means,Vice-Chair Capital Budget Committee 112 Irv Newhouse Building PO Box 40415 Olympia,WA 98504 Senator Judy Warnick Chair,Economic Development Committee 103 Irv Newhouse Building PO Box 40413 Olympia,WA 98504 Re:Washington State Horse Park --Covered Arena Project Dear Senators: I urge you to support the Washington State Horse Park application for $2.0 million in cahital funding support for a Covered Arena and Associated Build-Out submitted by the Washington St te Horse Park Authority. As the Washington State Hunter Jumper Association,the strength of Washington's equestrian economy is of vital importance to us.Importantly,the equestrian economy helps to feed the State's tourism economy,within which the Washington State Horse Park plays a major role. The 112-acre horse park,located in Cle Elum,is one of Washington's premiere destination venues, attracting over 30 thousand visitors annually,95 percent of whom are nonlocal.The Park,due to its unique ability to draw people from outside the local and state area,garners over $2.5 million in overnight stays annually.Currently,the Park's economic impact is $3.4 million.With the.addition of the Covered Arena,the Park will be enabled to expand its operating season from five to nine months, broaden the size and scope of its equestrian events,and ultimately generate more tourism revenue not only for Cle Elum and Kittitas County,where over 18 percent of jobs are in the Accommodations and Foodservice Sector,but also for Washington State.The economic impact of enabling the Park to widen its services is considerable. The Washington State Hunter Jumper Association itself has been enabled,through the Washington State Horse Park,to support numerous top quality horse shows,benefitting its membership while also contributing to State travel and tourism.The Park is a unique location where WSHJA's members meet a diverse array of exhibitors and competitors who would not otherwise travel to Washington's horse shows or contribute to Washintgon's tourism economy.It is equally important to note that many of WSHJA's members also travel outside the State for months of the year in search of horse shows that provide a more weather-friendly experience.Expanding the Park's ability to extend its operating season will undoubtedly also help to recapture this opportunity income for the State. Thank you for your consideration of this great contribution.I urge the State to fund this important project. Sincerely, Shelly Kerron,President Washington State Hunter Jumper Association 11410 NE 124th St.PMB #535 Kirkland,WA 98034 PACIFIC NORTHWESTMORGAN HORSE ASSOCIATION Date 3/2/17 Senator Jim Honeyford Way and Means,Vice-Chair Capital Budget Committee 112 Irv Newhouse Building PO Box 40415 Olympia,WA 98504 Senator Judy Warnick Chair,Economic Development Committee 103 Irv Newhouse Building PO Box 40413 Olympia,WA 98504 Re:Washington State Horse Park -Covered Arena Project Dear Senators: As President of the Pacific Northwest Morgan Horse Association and manager of it's annual horse shows,the tourism economy of our state is extremely important to us.I urgé you to support the Washington (WA)State Horse Park application for $2.0 million in capital funding support for a Covered Arena and Associated Build-Out submitted by the WA State Horse Park Authority. Located in Cle Elum and in operation for 6 years,the 112-acre Horse Park is a destination venue among horse facilities in our state and already attracts over 30 thousand visitors per year,95 percent of whom are nonlocal.The Park's ability to draw people from outside the.local area uniquely characterizes the Park's impact:over $2.5 million in overnight stays.Total economic impact of the Park,including day visitors,is $3.4 million.The Covered Arena will allow the Park to attract more horse disciplines,host larger shows and extend the its operating season from five to nine months,significantly increasing the size and number of events held at the Park. Cle Elum is in Kittitas County,where over 18 percent of jobs are in the Accommodations and Foodservice Sector (Kittitas County Profile,Meseck,regional labor economist, updated September 2016).The economic impact of the Park is considerable. Our organization currently runs horse shows in a private venue.Expansion of the WA State Horse Park would enable us to conduct our events there to the significant benefit of the Horse Park,the local economy of that area and Washington State tourism overall.We attract over one hundred horses and their connections to our annual events.One of these is the oldest continuously held Morgan competition West of the Mississippi River.The Pacific Northwest Morgan Hdrse Association is a registered WA state charitable organization. Thank you for your consideration.I urge the State to fund this important project. Sincerely, Catherine Cloud 32209 24th Ave NW Stanwood,WA 98292 WASHINGTON STATEHORSEÆg March 2,2017 Senator Jim Honeyford Way and Means,Vice-Chair capital Budget Committee 112 Irv Newhouse Building PO Box 40415 Olympia,WA 98504 Senator Judy Warnick Chair,Economic Development Committee 103 Irv Newhouse Building PO Box 40413 Olympia,WA 98504 Dear Senators: The Washington State Horse Park Authority Board and Executive Director believe it is imperative for the Horse Park to add a well-designed and constructed Covered Arena to its facilities in order to adequately serve the State's diverse horse sport disciplines and achieve the Park's mission as set forth in the Authority's enabling legislation in 1995,RCW79A.30. Background The Authority was able to secure 112 acres of very suitable and beautiful land in central Washington as a donation from Suncadia resort,and to develop the Park's initial infrastructure thanks to a $3.5m grant from the State's 2006-07 capital budget.Since opening in 2010,the Park has added a 4th competition arena,80 more permanent stalls for a total of 160 today,and built two cross country courses and a competitive trail course.All these improvements and many other important amenities and equipment acquisitions have been made possible by significant private donations and volunteerism, as well as reinvestment of operating proceeds,business sponsorships and a County grant for bleachers. The horse community values and supports the Park,and is eager for it to continue develepment into the premier competition facility in the Pacific Northwest.The Park has developed a reputatiþn for quality facilities and excellent footing (sometimes referred to as "ground"in western disciplines)which is critical for horse safety and performance.We now hold 40 events during the April to Ocjober season, attracting over 30,000 visitors,and host some of the largest and most prestigious annual events in the State's English and Western disciplines. Despite these impressive accomplishments,the Park is unable to meet today's mark¢tplace requirements for protection from the weather and greater capacity.All of the Park's urrent facilities are outdoors;the only shelter is a 30x30'tent for people and stalls for horses.When c nditions are wet, participants and footing suffer.(For example,in 2016 rain in June caused many riders te cancel from one of our largest shows,and all three events booked for October cancelled due to weathed.)This hurts the Park's reputation and revenues,and strains our relationship with organizers.But equa y,when conditions get extremely sunny/hot/windy,participants,horses and cattle need protec ion.And finally, in today's competitive environment,many trainers and show organizers demand a con rolled atmosphere -free of outdoor distractions -to ensure a focused,positive experience fo their riders. Why should the State support this project with a $2m appropriation at this time?Th Park currently generates about $3m in economic benefits each season,but we are unable to increase that amount without growing our current biggest shows and adding more large multi-day events.Te latter category is generally controlled by experienced organizers who will not try a new venue unless t ey can manage risks such as weather impacts.We believe this $2m investment will enable us to build high quality covered arena,and add another $3m of annual economic impact in 5 years,which will r peat each year. In addition,this project will provide sustainable operating revenues for the Park and be ter serve the State's large and diverse horse community which is our mission. We believe the Horse Park has proven its value and ability to sustain itself.But in order to thrive,we need the covered arena.We strongly request and urge you to fund this important project,and are very grateful for support from the State for this very unique public-private partnership. Sincerely, Leslie M.Thurston Executive Director,on behalf of the Authority Board og de Eh Telephone:(509)674-2262119WestFirstStreetFax:(509)674-4097CleElum,WA 98922 ,www.cityofoleelum.com I OF Tgi February 27,2017 Senator Jim Honeyford Way and Means,Vice-Chair Capital Budget Committee 112 Irv Newhouse Building PO Box 40415 Olympia,WA 98504 Senator Judy Warnick Chair,Economic Development Committee 103 Irv Newhouse Building PO Box 40413 Olympia,WA 98504 Re:Washington State Horse Park -Covered Arena Project Dear Senators: As the Mayor of the City of Cle Elum,1 believe the tourism economy of our state isextremelyimportanttous.I urge you to support the Washington (WA)State Horse Parkapplicationfor$2,0 million in capital funding support for a Covered Arena and AssociatedBuild-Our submitted by the WA State Horse Park Authority. Located in Cle Elam and in operation for 6 years,the 1 12-acre Horse Park is adestinationvenueamonghorsefacilitiesinourstateandalreadyattractsover30thousandvisitorsperyear,95 percent of whom are nonlocaL Events held at the facility provide asignificantboosttoourcommunity.The Park's ability to draw people from outside the local area uniquely characterizes the Park's impact:over $2.5 milion in overnight stays.TotaleconomicimpactofthePark,including day visitors,is $3.4 million.The Covered Arena willallowtheParktoattractmorehorsedisciplines,host larger shows and extend the its operating season from five to nine months,significantly increasing the size and number of events held at the Park, Cle Elum is in Kittitas County,where over 18 percent of jobs are in the Accommodations and Foodservice Sector (Kittitas County Prqfile,Meseek,regional labor economist,updated September 2016).The economic impact of the Park is considerable. Thank you for your consideration.I urge the State to fund this important project. Sincerely, Jay cGowan Mayor City of Cle Elum Kittitas County,Washington BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS District One District Two District Three imwret wry Paul Jewell Laura Osiadacz Obie O'Brien February 27,2017 Senator Jim Honeyford 112 Irv Newhouse Building PO Box 40415 Olympia,WA 9804 Honorable Senator Honeyford: We are writing to you today to express our support for two Capital Budget requests for prd.jects in Kittitas County:the Kittitas Valley Event Center Facilities Upgrade (submitted by RepresentativeiManweller)and the Washington State Horse Park Covered Arena and Associated Build-Out (submitted by(Senator Warnick). Located in Cle Elum,the i12-acre Washington State Horse Park attracts over 30 thousand visitors per year,95 percent of whom are nonlocal -a statistic that uniquely characterizes the Park's impact:over $2.5millioninovernightstays.Total economic impact ofthe Park.including day visitors,is $3.4 milion.TheWashingtonStateHorseParkisavaluableeconomicassetinUpperKittitasCounty.We ntinue tosupportiteveryyearwithlocalfundingthathelpswithoperationalcostsandprojects.Fur her development of this facility will provide significant additional benefit in our rural county. The Kittitas Valley Event Center is located in Ellensburg and is the home of the World Famous Ellensburg Rodeo and Kittitas County Fair.For nearly one hundred years,this event has attracted tourists to KittítasCountyforseveraldaysoverLaborDayWeekend-nearly 60 thousand in 2016.This facility also operates year-round,providing facilities for a variety of events large and small that create s gnificanteconomicbenefittotheCityofEllensburgandthesurroundingKittitasCounty, in addition to the financial benefits of the Kittitas Valley Event Center and the Washington State Horse Park,both projects embody the vision ofour County's ComprehensivePlan.Agritourism and ruralrecreationopportunitiesplayanessentialroleinthisplanandfacilitiessuchasthesearecoþsistentwithpreservingtheagriculturalindustryaswellasruralcharacter. Thank you for your considerationof these important projects. Respectfully, Paul Jewell Laura Osiadacz Obie O'Brien Chairman Vice-Chairman Commissioner Cc:Senator Judy Warnick RepresentativeMatt Manweller RepresentativeTom Dent K1TflTAS COUNTY COURTHOUSE 205 WEST 5*,SUITE 108 EILENSBURG,WA 98926 (509)962-7508 FAX (509)962-7679 www.co.kittitas.wa.us SUNCADIA. RESORT COMMUNITV-LEGACY February 27,2017 Senator Jim Honeyford Ways and Means,Vice-Chair Capital Budget Committee 112 Irv Newhouse Building PO Box 40415 Olympia,WA 98504 Dear Senator Honeyford, As the Managing Director of Suncadia,the tourism economy of our state is extremely important to us.I urge you to support the Washington State (WS)Horse Park application for $2,0 million in capital funding support for a Covered Arena and Associated Build-Out submitte by the WSHorseParkAuthority,and sponsored by state Senator Judy Warnick. Located in Cle Elum,WA,the 112-acre WS Horse Park attracts over 30 thousand visitors peryear,95 percent of whom are nonlocal-a statistic that uniquely characterizes the Park'simpact:over $2.5 million in night stays.Total local economic impact of the park,including dayvisitors,is $3.4 million.The Covered Arena will extend the Park's season from five months toninemonths,significantly increasing the size and number of events held at the Pa k. Cle Elum is in Kittitas County,where over 18 percent of jobs are in the Accommod tions andFoodserviceSector(Kittitas County Profile,Meseck,regional labor economist,updated September 2016).The economic impact of the Park is considerable. The Washington State Horse Park has been a very positive impact on tourism for Suncadia andthesurroundingcommunity. Thank you for your consideration,I urge you to fund this important project. Sincerely, Roger Beck Managing Director CC:Senator Judy Warnick, chair,Economic Development Committee 103 Irv Newhouse Building P.O Box 40413 Olympia,WA 98504 770 Suncadia Trail |Cle Elum,WA 98922 |t 509.649.6400 f 509.649.6251 |www.suncadia.com MOUNTAING Presiden!Founding President Segefory Furidraísing Contmillee Choir 2/23/2017 Senator Jim Honeyford Ways and Means,Vice-Chair Capital Budget Committee 112 Irv Newhouse Building PO Box 40415 Olympia,WA 98504 Re:Support for 2017 Capital Budget Request -$2.0 million for Covered rena and Associated Build Out at the Washington State Horse Park Dear Senator Honeyford, Located in Cle Elum,WA,the 112 acre Washington State Horse Park attrac s more than 30,000 visitors per year.Ninety-five percent of those visitors travel more than 50 miles to participate in events and activities at the park,underscoring the wide demand for eques rian opportunities. Visitors to the Washington Horse Park also contribute positively to the loc I economy in upper Kittitas County,creating $3.4 million of economic activity. We urge you to support the Washington State Horse Park application for $2.0 million in capital funding support for a CoveredArena and Associated Buíld-Out submitted by the Washington State Horse Park Authority,and sponsored by State Senator Judy Warnick. The Covered Arena will extend the Park's season from five months to nine months,significantly increasing the size and number of events that can be held at the Park,with subsequent increases in Park visitation and associated economic activity in the local community. The Washington State Horse Park is an important regional asset within the Mountains to Sound Greenway.The Mountains to Sound Greenway Trust supports investment in parks and other public lands that enable people to enjoy the outdoors,contribute to local economies,and conserve the natural lands and waters that make communities like Cle Elum great places to live, work and play. Thank you for your consideration.I urge you to fund this important project. Sincerely, Jon Hoekstra Executive Director CC:Senator Judy Warnick, Chair,Economic Development Committee 103 Irv Newhouse Building P.O.Bo× 40413 Olympia,WA 98504 2701 FIRST AVENUE,SUITE 240,SEATTlE,WA 98121 206 382 5565 i II lict timew w oRG g) Don Hoch Director STATE OF WASHINGTON WASHINGTON STATE PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION 1111 israel Road S.W •P.O.Box 42650 •Olympia,WA 98504-2650 •(360)902-8500 TDD Telecommunications Device for the Deaf:800-833-6388 www.parks.state,wa.us February 22,2017 Leslie Thurston,Executive Director Washington State Horse Park Authority 1202 Douglas Munro Blvd. Cle Elum,WA 98922 Re:Washington State Horse Park Covered Arena Dear Horse Park Authority Board Members, Thank you for providing me information on your efforts to construct a covered arena at the Washington State Horse Park.It looks like an excellent project and a great next step as you continue to realizc the vision ofa facility that serves the needs of the equestrian community in Washington State. Thank you also for previously providing an informative tour of your grounds to me and thd State Parks and Recreation Commission.It was helpful for all of us to see the growth and dynamism f the Park first hand as well as talk about the challenges you face. Your covered arena proposal is consistent with your master plan and will provide a new lefel of service for equestrians.It will attract a wide variety of horse disciplines,dramatically extend youg operating season,give greater assurance of surface footing irrespective of the weather,and significantly increasing the size and number of events held at the Park.As an economic driver for the local community and the state,it will allow you to be both more consistent and more productive. I am particularly impressed with the diverse sources of support you have received and are ¢eeking to realize this project,including support from the private sector,philanthropists,park users,1dcal city and colmty sources as well as the state. Please consider this my letter of support for your continuing efforts to improve the Washington State Horse Park including construction of a covered arena. Re rds, Don Hoch Director Financial Feasibility and Economic Impact Of the Washington State Horse Park Contractor Report for The Washington State Horse Park Authority Timothy Dittmer,Ph.D. And Richard Mack,Ph.D. Central Washington University Ellensburg,Washington November 29,2006 TABLEOFCONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3 I INTRODUCTION 8 Il PREVIOUS FEASIBILITY AND IMPACT STUDIES W I lil EXISTING FACILITIES g  IV FlNANClAL FEASIBILITY ASSESSMENT:METHODOLOGY, APPLICATION AND FINDINGS þV B V IMPACT ANALYSIS:METHODOLOGY,APPLICATION,AND FINDINGS )LF N VI RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE þ g Vil CONCLUSlONSAND RECOMMENDATIONS MW Bibliography Appendix I ,Questions for Equestrian Organizations Appendix II:Survey Questions for Horse Parks Appendix III Development of the Washington State Horse Park Authority Ç Appendix IV Washington State Horse Park Request For Funds 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The primary objectives of this study were to determine the financial feasibility and potential economic impact of the Washington State Horse Park (WSHP)in its proposed location in Kittitas County,and to make recommendationsas to the organizational structure for managementof the facility.We cannot recommend unequivocally that the plans to raise funds for a Phase 1 facility proceed.As explained below,our analysis shows that like practically all public equestrian facilities,the Washington State Horse Park will most likely require annual operating cost subsidies in addition to waivers of propedy tax and capital repayment.Economic impacts of this facility and broad unquantifiablebenefits may justify its subsidization,as with other public facilities. Relativeto the capital commitrnent to the venture,the projected losses are minor.This study includes both financial feasibility and economic impact analysis.Key findings and recommendationsin terms of financial feasibility,economic impact and organizational structure are summarizedbelow: FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY We developed a relativelysophisticated financial model to determine economic feasibility.To gather inputs into this model we: Surveyed horse facility using organizationsin Washington State Validated our survey with the work of professional marketers Surveyed the developmentaland financial experiences of horse parks around the country Gathered anecdotalrecommendationsof potential users of the facility. 3 Worked with professional equestrian managementconsultantsto set parameters for the models Four scenarios of the model were developed;they differed as to assumptions of growth rates of:numbers and types of shows,entries,revenues,and costs.In Scenario 3, which we believe will be the most likely scenario,the park operatesat an eighty thousand dollar per year loss,despite assuming augmentedrevenues of $100,000 per year from non-equestrianevents.Scenario 2,which assumesa much higher and likely unrealisticrate of facility use,results in net revenues of approximatelyone hundred fifty thousand dollars per year.The key financial findings of these two scenarios are: *Maximum use of the facility is reached in the sixth year.Scenario 2 breaks even in the sixth year. *Accumulationof 1.4 million dollars in losses by the end of the tenth year in Scenario 3.Scenario 2 accumulates one million dollars in losses prior to break-even. *Net revenueslosses of $74,726 when the facility reaches maturity in year six for Scenario 3.Scenario 2 projects net revenues at maturity in year seven of $140,802. *For Scenario 3,annual revenues at maturity will be $549,316 and annual expenseswill be $724,042.For Scenario 2 these values are respectively: $915,527 and $774,725. *69,357 exhibitors and spectators will use the facility annually when the facility is at maturity. 4 *For either Scenario,it will be necessary to waive property taxes on the facility and to create a capital funding approach which requires no direct repayment from operating revenues. In one version of the model,we adjusted revenueper horse in order to avoid losses. Under the most likely assumptions,the facility rental fees required were too far above competinglevels.Survey results indicate that horse show organizers are very price sensitive,and the required rental fees would likely result in the facility being unused. Our findings are reflected in the national equestrianpark picture,where large and medium sized facilities are typically subsidized around 20%of operating revenues, Only two of twenty-fivehorse parks break even. The primary reasons for the lack of positive cash flows in our projections of the Washington State Horse Park are that: The climate and location limits the numberof open weeks per year. Recent local surveys showed that equestrian groups are very sensitive to price. The equestrian-dedicateddesign limits the size and nature of nonequestrian events. For full utilization a facility needs to serie large horse events,and there is a lack of growth in the number of large horse organizations in the region. Under these circumstances there are several major provisos that must be met before we can recommendthat the plans to raise funds for the facility proceed.The first two have already been stated,that capital repaymentnot be required and that property taxes be waived.Third is the requirement that in order to assure successful operation, 5 the Horse Park Authority must recruit a facility manager from the upper 90 percentile of managers and suppod that manager with top-notch review and assistance by professionalequestrian management professionals.Without an entrepreneurial manager,it is unlikely that the facility will generate the alternativerevenue built into the model.Finally,the facility will require subsidization from either private foundations or public coffers of approximately$80,000 per year. ECONOMIC IMPACTS One means by which other facilities justify operating grants is through their impacts upon local and regional economies.Therefore,an impact model based upon expendituresof the horse park participants and expenditures for horse park operations was developedto estimate financial flows to both the local and state economies and to local and state finances.Using the "most likely"Scenario 3 at year six maturity,the following impacts are projected: *The direct spending by exhibitors and spectators are estimated to be $7,334,838 when the facility reaches maturity in the sixth year of operations. *The total money flows attributableto the horse park in the si×th year,including indirect and induced effects,are $8,412,982 annually. *Using the employmentmultiplier of 17 jobs per million dollars of direct expendituresprojects,143 jobs will be created by the horse park after the direct, indirect and induced effects are factored in. *Starting at the sixth year,annual state impacts from out of state residents were found to be $5,164,360 of direct,indirect and induced spending. 6 *Operationsof the facility would,at maturity,generate $1,199,279 in sales taxes, of which $98,668 would be apportioned to local governmentcoffers,and the remainder would go to the State. *The recreational services sectors will be the sectors (hotels,restaurants,etc.) most affected by Horse Park operations. For qualifications on the magnitude of these impacts,see section V. ORGANIZATIONALSTRUCTURE We recommendthat: *The Washington State Horse Park Authority Board of Directors set up the organizationto be run as a commercial operation by an experienced and successful professional manager. *The organization of the institution be that of a non-profit corporation,avoiding designationas a State governmentalentity and thus avoiding the labor and procurementprocedures required of State governmentalunits. *The Board focus its activities on obtaining funding commitmentsrequired for the constructionof improvementsand the first five years of operation. *That the Board actively work with existing equestrian organizations to promote the Horse Park project. 7 I INTRODUCTION OVERVIEW The horse industry is highly diverse,supporting a wide range of activities in each region of the country.A recent report prepared by the American Horse Council,"The Economic Impact of the U.S.Horse Industry in the United States"estimated that the horse industry contributes $40 billion annually to the gross domestic product and provides 460,000 full time equivalentjobs.In Washington State,horse ownership is woven into the fabric of the state's history and essence.In terms of horse ownership, Washington,with over 250,000 horses,ranks eleventh among the states in the nation in total number of horses and ranks among the top states in the number of horses per capita.Annually Washingtonfacilities host hundreds of small,medium and large scale events.The equestrian communityfinds that no satisfactory facilities exist to handle the highest quality or multi-stateevents.Most existing facilities offer limited capacity, older buildings and poor access (WSPRC Memo.) Horse shows and western events are basic parts of the horse industry.Shows vary by breed and type of event,each requiring specific facilities in which to conduct the activity.The shows range from small,one-day local shows to large,multi-day national and internationalexhibitions and activities.In the past decade,new facilities have been developed in many locations around the country:Virginia,Kentucky,North Carolina, Colorado,Arizona,Oklahoma,and New Jersey. National Trends We have three sources for Nation Trends in horse shows;the number of horses and horses involved in shows for 1996 and 2005 (American Horse Council Foundation), 2000-2005 United States Equestrian Federation (USEF)data (http://www.usef.org),and 8 2001-2005 American Quarter Horse Association data (http://www.aqha.com/association/wholstatistics.html).Data from these organizations is useful in analyzing underlying trends in the horse industry,and is presented in Table One. From 1996-2005 the number of horses and the numberof horses used primarily for competition have increased 33%and 37%respectively.The number of approved shows,as shown in the USEF and AQHA data,has increased at a much smallerrate. Over similar f¡ve year periods (half of the longer period),the rate of increase for approved shows was 2.57%and 11.56%for USEF and AQHA. While the number of approved shows has increased relativelyslowly,the number of total entries has increased at a high rate for USEF (39%),and a slow rate for AQHA (7%).Given USEF's slow increase in the number of shows,and rapid increase in the number of entries,the number of entries per show has increased more rapidly (35%) than for AQHA,which actually experienced a decline in the entries per show (-4%). These data support the idea that at the national level there is an increase in demand for horse shows.This increase has resulted in either a larger number of entries per show (USEF)or a larger number of shows (AQHA).Both increases are important in the economic feasibility of the WSHP,however as will be argued in Section 4,the number of small shows is not lacking;instead it is the numberof large shows (400 horses)that is important for the facility's financial success. Both public and private facilities have been developedacross the nation as the numbers of horses and horse owners have increased.The largest of these facilities tend to be publicly owned by state,county and municipal entities.The public ownership has come about through either the initial establishmentof the facility by the public sector,or by the purchase of a private sector facility by the public sector.Typically, 9 profitability of these facilities is inversely proportional to size.In our conversations with public sector horse facility managers,the generally agreed upon estimate of profitability is that costs exceed revenues in all but 8-10%of facilities.This is despite the fact that many of these facilities are not required to make capital payments,as the capital is held by the public entity.How are these losses justified?The construction of multi-million dollar horse parks and their continued operation is commonlyjustified on grounds of their generating economic impacts and unquantifiable benefits which extend beyond the accounting balances between revenuesand costs.These total impacts are of two types:direct impacts that reflect expenditures generated by horse park activities;and indirect impacts,which reflect the regenerative impacts of the initial spending.For this reason this feasibility study will be coupled with an impact analysis that will factor in the total effect of direct plus indirect impacts. This repod is an evaluationof feasibility and potential impact of a proposed state horse park that was authorized by the Washington State Legislature in 1997.The horse park is intended to be a first-class equestrianfacility serving a broad range of the recreational,competitiveand educationalneeds of Washington State horse owners.It will support community,youth and disabled riding programs and will foster physical fitness,responsibility,and achievement.Although the general concept for the proposed horse park is for a facility that is custom designed for equine events,it will also be attractive for some secondary types of uses such as company picnics,dog shows,motor vehicle shows,and trail bicycle events.To modify the design to accommodateother non-equestrianevents will require additional capital. This report is comprised of six sections.The remainder of this first section details the purpose of the study,states study parameters,summarizesthe history of the Washington State Horse Park,and provides a summary of the master plan.Section Il reviews previousstudies of horse park feasibility and impact.Section III examines existing facilities that were surveyed in the study.Section IV presents the methodology, 10 applications and findings of the financial model,and Section V does the same for the impact model.Conclusions and recommendations are presented in Section VI. PURPOSEOF THE STUDY The overall purpose of this study is to evaluate the feasibility and economic impact of the proposed state horse park.More specifically,this study meets the following objectives: 1.Evaluatethe demand for and economic viability of a high quality,multi-use compfe× designed to meet the needs of the diverse sectors of the State's substantialhorse industry. 2.Determine the feasibility of establishing a successful facility in Kittitas County which will meet the needs of national, regional and local shows,western events,and related equestrian activities. 3.Make specific recommendationsas to the appropriate organizational structure needed to acquire control of the site,solicit funds to construct improvementsand successfully operate the facility over the long term. 4.Summarize the economic impact to the State of Washington,generally,and Kittitas County,specifically,of the operation of the proposed Washington State Horse Park in Kittitas County. PARAMETERS: Objectivity-It should be noted that the authors have been completelyobjective and 11 unbiased in reaching their conclusions about the feasibility and impact of a major horse park in Washington State.The study team was ng directed to justify the creation of such a facility. Quality of the Facility -It is the intent of the Horse Park Authority that the facility be of high quality as to both functions and aesthetics.The consensus of the Horse Park Authority is that if such quality could not be provided,a facility should not be built. Purpose and Use of the Facility -The design and intended primary use of the facility should be for horse related activities;other complementary activities are also possible,but as a secondary priority.The facility should be designed and operated in such a fashion as to: -encourage use by all facets of the Washington State equestrian industry; -attract competitionsof a major regional,national or international level;and -promote tourism. -provide an educational function -serve the needs of equestrian activities of youth groups Cost of Operations-Land for the facility in upper KittitasCounty has already been donated by a private entity,Suncadia Resorts,of the Suncadia Real Estate Company.Capital costs will be raised primarily from the public sector;they may be augmentedby a concerted fund-raising program by the Washington State Horse Park Authority and the Washington State Horse Park Foundation. Public/PrivateCooperation -The horse park will encompasselements of both public 12 and private sector organization,extending to both the developmentand management/operationof the facility.Recommendations will be made as to how best to combine these elementsin order for the horse park to best accomplish its objectives. Impact on Existing Equestrian Facilities -The Authority plans to create a complex which will complementexisting equestrian operations,seeking out and satisfying unmet market needs.It is expected that over the long run the operations of the horse park will increase interest in equestrian eventsand activities throughoutthe state and accordingly create additional business for existing operators. Facility Summary: The vision of the horse park is that of a primarily equestrian facility to be located on property donated by Suncadia Resorts,located immediately off of l-90,near Cle Elum. For this public-private partnership,Suncadia Resorts has donated a 106 acre parcel of land,currently valued at approximatelyfive million dollars.It is proposed that this land be developedin two phases.The first is a planning,preparation,and initial site developmentphase that entails final planning,design,permitting approvals,and initial land improvements.A request of $3,900,000 will be made in 2007 to fund Phase I. Phase Il entails the construction of the remainder of the facility.Estimated costs for Phase II is $15,434,600 in current dollars.The WSHP Authority intends to request these funds from the State legislatureso that full project build-out will be completed in 2010.A detailed description of the facility and the funding request is included as Appendix Ill. 13 Il PREVIOUS FEASIBILITY AND IMPACT STUDIES Two categoriesof previous studies are relevant to this analysis:previous studies of the need for and economic feasibility of a horse park in Washington State,and studies of feasibility and impact of similar facilities in other states.The first category is particularly important,because considerable effort has already been invested in data gathering as to the need for such a facility in Washington State.Initially an impact study of locating a state equestrian center in Lewis County was developed in 1991 by Kay Crawford and Sue Roden.The study was funded by the Washington State Department of Community Development.When the Lewis County site was deemed non-feasible on grounds of the physical location,the horse park group \ooked to the east side of the State to take advantageof the drier weather.When the Trendwest/Suncadiaproperty negotiation with the Authority was completedin 1997,a second feasibility study was commissioned and completed in 1998 by Richard Mack and Gary Richardson,both of the Central Washington University College of Business.Each study is briefly summarized below. Lewis County Study The Lewis County study was comprised of four areas of primary research:surveying 37 existing horse parks,surveying 59 equestrian groups,surveying 100 individual equestrians,and holding public meetings to solicit local community input.From calculations based upon this primary data,conclusions were reached as to:the demand for a state equestriancenter,economic feasibility,the economic,employment and congestionimpacts upon the local community,the design and managementof the facility,and funding options.Briefly,findings of the study were that:(1)There is significantdemand for a first class,fully enclosed facility;(2)In the first year 61 events would take place,a number that would increase to 99 by the fifth year;(3)Attendees would range from 48,900 in the first year to 80,000 -in the fifth year;(4)The horse park would be economicallyfeasible on grounds of demand;even were the number of 14 projected events to be halved,the horse park would break even by the third year;(5)no negative community impacts were identified;(6)Recommendations were gathered as to horse park design;(7)A combination of government,private,corporate,foundation,and debt funding was recommended;(8)Annual expendituresand jobs were projected to be $3,655,146 and 116 in the first year and $5,939,714 and 190 jobs in the fifth year;(9) The study recommendedthat local communities begin planning efforts in order to capitalizeon horse park benefits. Three surveys were developed for the Lewis County analysis.The first was used to poll a cross section of equestrian sports disciplines to determinethe number size and potential mobility of their functions;59 equestrian groups were surveyed.The second survey was used to poll individual membersof the groups as to travel and spending plans.The goal of the third survey was to solicit specific opinions of existing facilities. Of the three surveys 162 were returned from the initial 200 sent out. Althoughthe study was methodologicallysound,significant demographic,climatological and economic differences between Western and Eastern Washington required that many elementsof the feasibility and impact segments of the study be redone for the 1998 feasibility study. The 1998 Feasibility Study For this study,representativesof thirteen public and private horse parks were queried as to:background,facilities,events,marketing,funding,staffing,and community involvement.In addition,information was solicited from several horse parks that were under considerationat the time.Representativesof 59 equestrian groups were also contacted to update the Lewis County marketing survey.Input was also solicited in depth from the Langer Equestrian Group,an equestrian consulting firm from Los Angeles. 15 Four scenarios of the model were developed and "run."They differed as to assumptionsof the following initial values and growth rates:numbers and types of shows,entries,revenues,and costs.Scenario 3,the "most likely"scenario,proved to be financiallyfeasible,as did the "optimistic"Scenario 4.Scenario 3 projected: *Attainment of break-even at the end of the fifth year of operations. *Accumulationof $715,372 in losses by the end of the fifth year. *Net revenues of $189,732 when the facility reached maturity in year six. *At maturity annual revenues to be $858,307 and annual expenses to be $668,575. *A total of 25,600 horses to be entered in shows annually when the facility is at maturity. *89,600 exhibitorsand spectators to use the facility annually when the facility is at maturity. *It would be necessary to create a capital funding approach which does not require direct repayment from operating revenues,because the facility will not be able to afford debt service. An impact model based upon expenditures of the horse park participants and expendituresfor horse park operations was developedto estimatefinancial flows to both the local and state economies and to local and state finances.Using the "most likely"scenario at year six maturity,the following impacts were projected: 16 *The direct spending by exhibitors and spectators were estimated to be $9,856,000 when the facility reached maturity in the sixth year of operations. *The total money flows attributableto the horse park in the sixth year,including indirect and induced effects,were $11,476,765 annually. *Using the employmentmultiplierof 16 jobs per million dollars of direct expendituresprojects,160 jobs would be created by the horse park after the direct,indirect and induced effects are factored in. *Starting at the sixth year,annual state impacts from out of state residents were found to be $7,685,884 of direct,indirect and induced spending. *Operationsof the facility would,at maturity,generate $758,912 in sales taxes,of which $204,429 would be apportioned to local governmentcoffers,and the remainderwould go to the State. As for organizationalstructure,the 1998 study recommendedthat: *The Washington State Horse Park Authority Board of Directors set up the organizationto be run by an experienced professional manageras a commercial operation. *The organizationof the institution be that of a non-profit corporation,avoiding designation as a State governmentalentity and thus avoidingthe labor and procurement procedures required of State governmental units. 17 Other Feasibility Studies Of studies done of feasibility and/or impact of other horse parks,six are of particular analytic merit:the feasibility and impact studies for the New Jersey,the Connecticut, the Texas,and the Maryland horse parks,and the impact studies done on the Virginia and the California horse park.Although the planned and actualized facilities for the New Jersey horse park are considerably smaller that those planned for Washington State,the general model of the study was considered substantive,as was the model for the Connecticutstudy.Both are "bottom-up"studies;that is,they begin with estimates of demand for the facility and estimatesof charges that can be made for horse park services and proceed to project revenues,costs,and profits.Both studies entailed surveys of regional facilities as a basis for estimating demand.It should be noted that the intent of the Connecticut group was to build a facility suitablefor nationalevents, whereas the New Jersey facility was intended primarily as a state and regional facility. As for the impact componentsof existing studies,all are based upon a tallying of direct impacts based upon counts of horseldays from which a number of measuresare derived:number of persons attending(grooms,exhibitors,and spectators.)Direct impacts are then calculated based upon the expenditures per day of participants.Some of the studies conducted surveys to determine attendance per horse and spending patterns,whereas others,given the close approximation of the survey results,chose to use existing estimates.A similar differentiation among impact studies can be found in the use of multipliersto estimate indirect iriipacts from direct impacts;indirect impacts result from secondary spending by the recipients of horse park payrolls,expenditures, expenditures by visitors,as well as from local linkages that provide inputs into the purchases by the horse park and its visitors.The Virginia,Texas,Maryland,and California studies used input-outputanalysis to derive these multipliers,whereas the other studies used existing estimatesof rnultipliers,or did not estimateindirect impacts. 18 III EXISTING FACILITIES In the preparation of this study and its two precursors the administrators of 45 horse parks were contacted and surveyed as to elementsof their operational,organizational and financial histories.The Lewis County horse park study was used as a basis of information on regional facilities,as the study concentrated upon deriving information from regional equestrian individuals,groups and facilities.The interviews conducted for this study concentrated upon facilities of comparable scale and purpose to the planned Washington State horse park.The purpose for this emphasis was multifold:first, financial and event data and growth rates from these facilities are a primary input into modeling the feasibility of a Washington State facility.Many of the findings of this survey process were corroborated in conversations with and information shared by the Langer Equestrian Group of Los Angeles. In addition to a number of horse park directors who were contacted for specific information,ten horse park directors/managers were interviewed systematically and in depth.These horse parks were selected because of their nature -they were primarily state level facilities that hosted local,regional and national events.Facilities contacted for the systematic interview were: Georgia International Horse Park Horse Park of New Jersey Hoosier Horse Park Kentucky Horse Park Los Angeles Equestrian Center Reno Livestock Events Center The State Fair of Oklahoma Virginia Horse Center WestWorld 19 Will Rogers Memorial Center Senator Bob Martin Eastern Agricultural Center Horse Facility,WiÍílamston,N.C. DelMar,San Diego CA. The Colorado Horse Park The Carolina Horse Park WestWorld,Scotsdale AZ. Gov.James B.Hunt,Jr.Horse Facility,Raleigh,NC. Salt Lake County Equestrian Center In addition to that which is obvious from the survey form in the appendices,the following data were requested from all horse parks:total events,equestrian events, nonequestrianevents,permanent stalls,temporarystalls,paved parking,unpaved parking,total acreage,organization chart,rental policies,and equestrian event priority. Of particular impodance were financial data.Generally,the following data were available:capitalization,operating revenues,operating expenses,number and size of events at start-up,growth rates of revenues,costs,events,average number of horses. Several horse parks provided data for a number of years. When this feasibility study was undenNay,we learned of two other horse parks under considerationin Washington State.The first involvesthe ceding of the Enumclaw Fairgrounds facility by King County to the City of Enumclaw.One of the recommended uses for the facility is an equestrian focused refurbishing of the fairgrounds,so that the facility would become primarily an equestrian facility.A feasibility study is currently underway;recommendationswill be fonwarded to the city in late December.The second equestrian facility under consideration is the SouthwestWashington Regional Equestrian Center in Centralia.It is envisioned as a larger ($80 million)multipurpose facility,of which horse-related activities will constitute about 25%of total revenues.The center has funded a feasibility study with a focus on equestrian activities. 20 Anecdotal Findings Although none of the facilities provide an ideal model of the intended Washington State facility,there appear to be a number of "truths"about horse park finances and managementthat were derived from our interview process: *The quality of managementis critical to financial success of the facility. *Managementmust be entrepreneurially,rather than bureaucratically spirited. *The critical managerialgoal is to capture show dates. *The major sources of revenue are:stall rentals,facility or ring rents,bedding sales,parking,concessions,and RV facilities. *It is important that procurement be done through private sector processes,rather than through state or municipal processes. *The vast majorityof facilities are public/private padnerships. *Estimatesof profitability are consistently about one in twelvefacilities.Hence, the vast majority of facilities are subsidized. *Public sector subsidies are typically in the range of 15%-25%of costs,although some range as high as 45%.They are justified on a basis of economic impact and/or "spillover benefits,"secondary economic benefits that accrue to the location or region. *A facility cannot make capital and interest payments and even dream of breaking even. *The vast majority of facilities have associated foundations to raise private sector funding for capital or to subsidize operations. *Private sector fund raising is far more difficult and far less successful than one would imagine. *It is better to concentrate fund raising on individuals rather than on foundations. *Launches usually run 5-8 years behind initially expected schedules. *Profitable facilities have typically had the same managing director for more than eight years. 21 *The largest facilities generally run the largest deficits. *The fatal flaw of large facility failures usually involves overly ambitious ancillary activities such as administration facilities,restaurants,meeting rooms,etc. *Converting to a year-round operation sometimesincreases costs without substantiallyincreasing revenues. #It is necessary to book multiple events. *Multi-day events should be targeted. *Equestrian events should be marketed in conjunction with other community attractions and activities. *Non-equestrian events pay higher fees and are critically important generators of revenue. #Non-equestrian events are far less labor intensive. *Horse groups are highly supportive in the formation process,but often balk at fees later on. *Most facilities make exclusive food concession contracts. *Retail concessions are generally left up to event promoters. *Managementwill tell event promoters security requirements,but do not require the use of the facility's security personnel. *Eight of the twelve facilities contacted use private contractors for disposal of manure and shavings. *The more successful facilities minimizefull time staff and rely on part-timers for events. *Eight of the ten facilities were multiple use. *Most facilities require a certificate of insurance with one million dollars bodily injury and 50 thousandto one million dollar damageminimums. *Public boarding often conflicts with show management. *Motels and restaurantsare primary among focal business beneficiaries. *Minimum stabling size is 400 horses. *There is a burgeoning of horse parks across the country.Most managers felt 22 that the new competitionwould outstripdemand.Several were concerned with the effects of a future recession. *Maintenance costs creep up over 5-9 years and are significant. *Clearly there is a learning curve that applies to operating expenditures. *Many costs were not incorporated in the initial plans. #Operating deficits drive significant cost-shaving efficiencies in the third or fourth year of operation. IV FINANCIALFEASIBILITYASSESSMENT:METHODOLOGY,APPLICATION AND FINDINGS Here we analyze the feasibility of the Washington State Horse Park by making projections as to its likely operating profits.We assume that the capital expenditure will be provided by other sources from the public and private sectors.In our projections we also assume a waiver of property taxes. Revenues Although there are many categories of revenues,there are four categories that,from the experience of other horse parks,comprise 85-91%of all revenues.Stall rentals are the most significant source of revenues at an average of 51%.Bedding is the next highest source at 18%.Together,stalls and bedding account for over 2/3rds of revenuesand these are critical areas in the success of any equestrian park.In addition to these principal sources,arenas contribute 10%,camping facilities 9%,miscellaneous utilities and equipment4%and other sources 2%.The revenue flow from these functions is remarkably consistent across horse parks. Note that these revenue sources are proportional to the numberof horses using the 23 facility.When modeling changing revenue over time,we focus on the number of horse days (one horse using the facility one day)and the average revenue per horse.This ignores non-equestriansources of revenue,which we will address below. The numberof horse days,and therefore revenue,depends on the number of events hosted by the Horse Park,and the number of horses per event.While examining the experience of other horse parks may be informative,demand for a facility may vary dramaticallyfrom location to location,depending on such factors as the horse populationdensity of the area surrounding the park,the numberand quality of competing parks,and the length of the season.Obviously the factors that make demand large in such a location as Los Angeles may or may not apply in Washington. Given this,we estimateddemand several ways,using differing methodsand assumptions.The demand estimate from the 1998 version of this study simply multipliedthe number of stalls (400)times the number of weekenddays the facility would be open (64 days or 32 weekends),for a total number of horse days of 25,600. This underestimateddemand because it ignored the fact that most events will run from three to five days.But it significantly overestimateddemand,for it assumed that most events will include the maximumnumberof horses (400).It also assumes full capacity for 32 weekends.A 26 weekendseason runs from April through the end of September; 32 weekends requires 6 weekendsdivided between March and October,which we view as infeasible on grounds of the length of the horse show season and weather/travelconditions.However,in one scenario described below we do assume 25,600 horse days,but this number is excessivelyoptimistic. In order to develop a more fact based demand model,we asked a local horse enthusiast,Steve Busick,to perform a market survey.Mr.Busick called the officials of most Washington equestrian organizations,and recorded the number of events conducted by each organization per year,and the number of horses in each event.He 24 also asked questions related to the how many of these events are likely to be moved to the Washington Horse Park,as well as the likelihood of organizing new events. Most organizationshave two types of events.The first category is small events, involvinga single day and a small portion of the organization's membership.These tend to be more frequent,but involve much smaller numbers of horses per event (averaging 65 in our sample).These events are usually spread out among multiple facilities,often local fairgrounds.We estimated that very few of these events would be held at the WSHP -we assumedone per organization.This resulted in 260 horse days from four events. The other category of event involves a larger number of horses (averaging 150 in our sample)and multipledays.In assessing potential demand,we included one major event for each organization,unless the organization official indicated that all events were held at one other location and a new venue was desired (e.g.WSHJA,with five events at Monroe which could all switch).In the case of one organization using Oregon fairgrounds (AMHA Region 8),we concluded it was unlikely the WSHP will acquire any business.In calculatinghorse days for multiple day events,we added one day to each event.It is our understandingthat most competitorsarrive the day before major events, resulting in another day of stall rentals.This overstatesdemand,for while stall,feed and shavings will be purchased,other revenuesources such as arena rentals or food concessionswill not occur.Based on these assumptions,surveyed demand was 10,630 horse days from 11 multiple day events.The survey included 24 multiple day events at all locations,so our assumptions result in approximatelyhalf of surveyed multiple day events switching to the WSHP.We will consider this number,10,630,as our conservativeestimate of demand. Our survey did not contact all Washington equestrian organizations,although it is likely that we contactedthe majority of the larger organization.There may also be 25 organizations from other states that are willing to switch to the WSHP,although our survey does include organizations using Oregon facilities.If we assume that we only contacted 60%of potentialclient organizations,and that the remaining organizations are similar in character to the surveyed organizations,they we may scale up our surveyed demand as follows: 10,630 x 60%=17,717 This results in a true total number of 17,717 horse days from 18 large events and 7 small events.While the previous feasibility study estimateda 32 weekend season,a six month or 26 weekend season seems more likely given Northwest weather conditionsand the length of the show season.While some of the small events may be double booked for the same day or same weekend,there are few weekendsremaining for larger organizations.This is our optimistic forecast of horse day demand. As another measure of potential demand,we note that in our sample the average number of horses at multipleday eventsis exactly 150.The average number of days in multiple day events is 3.45.Multiplying these,we have 518 horse days per multipleday event.If we assume a 29 week season -every weekendApril through September and three weekends divided between March and October -this results in 29 times 518 or 15,027 horse days.For the total numberof horse days to be larger than this,horse organizationsoutside of our survey must hold substantiallylarger shows.Given that we contactedthe larger organizations,this seems unlikely.Our assumption of 29 events per season is also somewhatheroic. In discussing this point with an industry consultant,we were told that it is possible that entrepreneursdo put together horse shows independently of local organizations.A 400 horse show could be drawn from the membership of many local organizations.We do not have any method of assessinglikelihood that this will occur.Nothing in our survey gave support to the idea that there is an underlying demand for horseshows untapped by existing organizations. 26 We then work with the following estimates of horse days per year:10,630 (conservative),17,717 (optimistic),and 25,600 (unrealistic).Given a numberof horse days per year,we translatethis into revenue per year by multiplyingby dollars per horse day.As mentioned above,survey results indicate that stall fees are approximatelyone half of revenue per horse.We confirmed this by examiningan event analysis for a Dressage Horse Show conducted in Los Angeles in 2003.Horse stall revenuewas 54%of total show rental.Based on this,we assumetotal revenue per horse is twice stall rental,even though some revenue is indirectly linked to the number of stalls rented (e.g.the facility rental). We must distinguish between stall fees charged to the participant from stall fees paid to the facility.Show organizers pay facility stall fees and charge participant stall fees.For the purposes of our study,we are only concerned with facility stall fees.In our survey of WA equine organizations,Steve Busick asked the organization officers what stall rentals were at their current locations.Seven respondents said $25,while the other three listed $35,$40 and $65 per day.For the Los Angeles show we examined,stall fees to the facility were $13.86 per horse day.Given this disparity in rental fees,we were unsure if our survey respondentswe providing stall fees charged to participants or charge fees paid to facilities.In order to resolve this we conducted a brief internet search of current facilities. The Kentucky Horse Park lists $20/night for the first night,and $15 per night thereafter. This Horse Park of New Jersey lists $30 for one day shows,$45 (total)for 2 or 3 day shows,and $10 per day thereafter.The North Carolina Eastern Agriculture Center charges between $10 and $15 per day depending on the numberof days.Examining the entry forms of the Reining Horse Association NW,the per day stall fee to the competitor at various Northwest locations is uniformly $25 per night.This information suggests that revenue to the facility is between $10 and $15,while stall fees charged to 27 participants by the promoting organization are usually $25 per night. Based on this,and assuming total revenue per horse is twice stall rentals,we use revenue per horse figures of $20 and $30.We believe higher figures than those are unrealistic.Our primary evidence is a survey performed for another proposed facility in Washington.When asked the primary reason for changing facilities,rising facility charges was the most frequent answer.Organizers of horse shows seem to be quite price sensitive. While equine shows will be the primary source of WSHP revenue,it is also possible that the facility will be used for other types of events.An essential componentof profitability will be booking eventsfor otherwiseunused times,and in our discussions with industry consultantsseveral possibilities were proposed. One is housing a "livery stable"-an organization that rents horses for trail riding.Given the proximity to the Suncadia resort,it is possible that the WSHP may lease space to a contractor who in turn rents horses for trail rides.Riding lessons may be another potential market.The resort may also wish to lease the facility for very large events - trade shows,etc.-that require more meeting space than is availableat the resort. Entrepreneurial talent on the part of the WSHP management,as well as flexible facility design will maximizethe potential of non-equine revenues.As a rough approximation, it may be possible to generate $100,000 per year in non-equestrian revenue,and we include this amount in one of our scenarios.This revenue stream is highly uncertain for several reasons.First,the design of the proposed facility is for a relatively small number of spectators.A non-equestrian event will normally generate revenue from spectators(e.g.music events),so the WSHP facility with seating,restrooms ,etc. designedfor an audience of 1000 will have little appeal.Given its location a mountain pass away from population centers,we view ít as unlikely that it will be used for the host of events normally housed in county fairgrounds,such as car and gun shows.The 28 facility is also not designed for horse boarding,leaving a conflict between stall rentals for horse shows and stall rentals for a "livery stable".In one of our scenarios we include $100,000 per year in alternativerevenue,but the generation of this revenue will require considerableentrepreneurial ingenuity. Costs. We used two methods of calculating operating costs.First,we estimated the cost of each componentof operations(e.g.labor costs,utility costs,etc.)and add them together (the componentapproach).Alternatively,we informally surveyed existing horse parks to discover their operating costs (the survey approach).Each method has disadvantages.The componentapproach has the disadvantagethat we must estimate the quantities of all inputs -we must know how many workers will be hired,how much fuel will be used,etc.Such estimates generally assume efficient operations,which is unlikely in any new business. The survey approach has the advantage that it reflects the costs of actual operations, but the disadvantagethat other facilities may have very different operations -for examplethe number of non-equestrian events may be substantiallylarger or smaller. Both of our approaches yielded similar results,giving us substantial confidence in the approximatecost of operations. The 1998 feasibility study conducted a component cost estimate,based on estimates by the Langer Equestrian Group and confirmed by a survey of 13 equestrian facilities. That estimate was $445,500 as a first year operating cost,and we scaled that estimate up by the amount of inflation from 1996-2005,resulting in an estimate of $516,232 for the first year of operation..Another component based cost estimate was performed independentlyby Ed Lapsley as part of his re-estimation of construction costs.His result was within $12,000 of ours. 29 For the survey approach,we called a number of existing horse parks in order to estimate operating costs for a facility of the size proposed for the WSHP.For 400 stall parks,we found a wide range of operating costs,with lows very close to our estimate and highs around $1.2 million dollars per year (see below).This estimate is very imprecise,for surveyed facilities varied the length of their operating season (with some operating year round),as well as the range of equine and non-equine eventshosted. In our scenarios we increase operating costs by 7%per year until the facility reaches full capacity,and then decrease its growth rate to expected inflation (2.5%). This model of cost over time assumesthat many of the operatingcosts will exist regardless of the numberof horse days -for examplethe managerwill have to be paid even in the first year of operation when the number of events is small.To these "fixed" costs we add costs that will increase with the number of horse days,such as bedding and manual labor costs.Because only pad of the total operatingcosts will increase, the rate of total costs will increase more slowly (7%)than the number of horse days (20 or 25%). One operating cost that is not included is property tax.Based on an expenditure of twenty million dollars and a land value of five million dollars,property taxes will be approximatelytwo hundred and twentyfive thousanddollars.We have assumed that the taxing jurisdictionswaive these taxes -the facility will experience substantial operating losses if these are included. Scenarios: We use the parameters of demand and cost to develop four scenarios regarding profitability.All assume an absence of capital costs and property taxes.Tables Two 30 through Five show the assumptionsand output of each of the modeled scenarios. Scenario 1:This has our pessimistic estimate of the maximumnumber of horses, plateauing at 10,630 horse days per year.We begin with more than one third of this - 4000 horse days per year.We assume a low rate of growth;the park takes 8 years to achieve its ma×imum number of horse days.Revenue starts at $20 per horse.All scenarios start with the same assumption about costs,but since this model has few horses the initial cost per horse is quite high.With this scenario,the park never experiencesprofitability,and loses approximately half a million dollars per year. Scenario 2:This has the very most optimistic demand forecast;all 400 stalls rented for every weekendfor 32 weekends,or 25,600 horse days per year,and a rapid rate of browth to this number.Revenuestarts at $30 per horse.Profitability is achieved by year six,and followingthis the facility has net revenues of around $150,000 per year. Scenario 3:This scenario assumes a maximumof 17,717 horse days per year,$30 per horse revenue,and $100,000 per year of non-equestrian revenue.At its maximum numberof horse days,the facility loses approximately$80 thousandper year. Scenario 4:This duplicates scenario 3,but instead of adding non-equestrian revenue, we raise the revenue per horse sufficiently to break even.At $42 per horse,the facility will net approximately$15 thousandper year.This corresponds to stall receipts of $21 per horse,and correspondingfees for all other revenue sources (shavings,feed,etc.). We view Scenario 3 as the most likely outcome,with the reservation that the $100,000 in alternativerevenue is far from certain.This scenario is consistent with the experience of the vast majorityof horse parks around the country -it is very difficult to find any examples of horse parks that do not require continuing subsidies. 31 Table2:Scenario1ParameterValues4,000StartingNumbersofHorses20.00%GrowthRateofHorses$80,000.00StartingTotalRevenues$20StartingRevenuePerHorse$516,232StartingTotalExpenses$129.06StartingExpensesperhorse7.00%GrowthRateofExpenses400Numberofstalls10,630MaximumHorses2.50%inflationRateYear123456789Horses400048005760691282949953106301063010630TotalRevperHorse$20.00$20.00$20.00$20.00$20.00$20.00$22.47$24.05$25.73TotalRevenue$80,000$96,000$115,200$138,240$165,888$199,066$238,879$255,600$273,492TotalExpenses$516,232$552,368$591,034$632,406$676,675$724,042$774,725$794,093$813,945Expensesperhorse$129$115$103$91$82$73$73$75$77OperatingProfits-$436,232-$456,368-$475,834-$494,166-5510,787-$524,976-$535,846-$538,493-$540,453CumulativeLosses-$436,232-$892,600-$1,368,434-$1,862,601-$2,373,388-$2,898,364-$3,434,210-$3,972,703-$4,513,156 Table3:Scenarlo2ParameterValues8,000StartingNumbersofHorses25.00%GrowthRateofHorses$240,000.00StartingTotalRevenues$30StartingRevenuesperHorse$516,232StartingTotalExpenses$64.53StartingExpensesperhorse7.00%GrowthRateofExpenses400Numberofstalls25,600Ma×imumHorses2.50%InflationRateYear123456789Horses80001000012500156251953124414256002560025600TotalRevperHorse$30.00$30.00$30.00$30.00$30.00$30.00$35.76$36.66$37.57TotalRevenue$240,000$300,000$375,000$468,750$585,938$732,422$915,527$938,416.$961,876TotalExpenses$516,232$552,368$591,034$632,406$676,675$724,042$774,725$794,093$813,945Expensesperhorse$65$55$47$40$35$30$30$31$32OperatingProfits-$276,232-$252,368-$216,034-$163,656-$90,737$8,380$140,802$144,322$147,930CumulativeLosses-$276,232-$528,600-$744,634-$908,291-$999,028-$990,648-$849,846-$705,524-$557,593 Table4:Scenario3ParameterValues6,000StartingNumbersofHorses25.00%GrowthRateofHorses$180,000.00StartingTotalRevenues$30StartingRevenuesperHorse$100,000Non-equinerevenue$516,232StartingTotalExpenses$86.04StartingExpensesperhorse7.00%GrowthRateofExpenses400Numberofstalls17,717MaximumHorses2.50%InflationRateYear123456789Horses600075009375117191464817717177171771717717TotalRevperHorse$30.00$30.00$30.00$30.00$30.00$31.01$31.78$32.57$33.39TotalRevenue$180,000$225,000$281,250$351,563$439,453$549,316$563,049$577,126$591,554Augmentedtotal$280,000$325,000$381,250$451,563$539,453$649,316$663,049$677,126$691,554TotalExpenses$516,232$552,368$591,034$632,406$676,675$724,042$742,143$760,697$779,714Expensesperhorse$86$74$63$54$46$41$42$43$44OperatingProfits-$236,232-$227,368-$209,784-$180,844-$137,222-$74,726-$79,094-$83,571-$88,160CumulativeLosses-$236,232-$463,600-$673,384-$854,228-$991,450-$1,066,176-$1,145,269-$1,228,841-$1,317,001 Table5:Scenario4ParameterValues6,000StartingNumbersofHorses25.00%GrowthRateofHorses$252,000.00StartingTotalRevenues$42StartingRevenuesperHorse$516,232StartingTotalExpenses$86.04StartingExpensesperhorse7.00%GrowthRateofExpenses400Numberofstalls17,717MaximumHorses2.50%InflationRateYear123456789Horses600075009375117191464817717177171771717717TotalRevperHorse$42.00$42.00$42.00$42.00$42.00$43.41$44.49$45.60$46.74TdtalRevenue$252,000$315,000$393,750$492,188$615,234$769,043$788,269$807,976$828,175TotalExpenses$516,232$552,368$591,034$632,406$676,675$724,042$774,725$794,093$813,945Expensesperhorse$86$74$63$54$46541$44$45$46OperatingProfits-$264,232-$237,368-$197,284-$140,219-$61,440$45,001$13,544$13,883$14,230CumulativeLosses-$264,232-$501,600-$698,884-$839,103-$900,544-$855,543-$841,999-$828,116-$813,886 Table Six lists revenueand cost data for eleven horse parks,ranked by the number of permanent statis.The dollar figures are in thousands.As may be observed from the table,most horse parks experience operating losses,averaging 19%of operating costs. This report's Scenario 3 is consistent with this,with losses of around 11%of total costs. Table Six:Comparable Facilities'Revenues and Costs Operating Permane Revenue Costs Profit Profit as a %of Facility #nt Stalls ($1,000)($1000)($1000)Costs 1 217 $495 $597 -$102 -17% 2 300 $850 $1,500 -$650 -43% 3 400 $490 $586 -$96 -16% 4 440 $600 $1,100 -$500 -45% 5 460 $1,178 $1,117 $61 5% 6 480 $6,171 $7,447 -$1,276 -17% 7 484 $580 $680 -$100 -15% 8 550 $578 $860 -$282 -33% 9 672 $2,400 $2,400 $0 0% 10 750 $3,205 $3,558 -$353 -10% 11 1,100 $6,190 $7,239 -$1,049 -14% Average -19% Scenario 3 predicts operating losses of around $80,000 per year.This should be put in perspective.Whether there are losses or gains of this amount,these results are only a very small percentages of the opportunity cost of the 20 million dollar capital expenditure.At a five percent interest rate,the annual interest on 20 million dollars is one million dollars.The facility also requires two hundred and twenty five thousand dollars forgone property tax.The opportunity cost of the facility,on an annual basis,is therefore $1.225 million.If this facility provides this much value to the citizens of the state,it probably also justifies another eighty thousand per year in operating subsidies. 32 V IMPACT ANALYSIS:METHODOLOGY,APPLICATIONAND FINDINGS Impact analysis is commonly used in regional policy making to predict the economic changes that result from a project.These changes,or impacts,are experienced as increases or decreases in the magnitude of selected economic variables. Employment,output,income,value added,and taxablesales are the most often used impact variables.Project impacts may be estimatedfor a local,regional,state,or national economy. One purpose of this study is to estimate the impacts of the horse park operations upon the state,and more importantly,upon the immediate regional economy.This chapter explainsthe methodsthat we used to estimatetotal regional impacts that result from the initial direct effects of the project.First we describe the general types of economic impacts.Then we briefly explain the specific modeling techniques. Types of Economic Impact There are three types of economic impacts,direct,indirect,and induced--each of which captures one facet of change in regional economic activities. Direct impacts Direct impacts refer to the initial purchases within an economy that result from project activ¡ties.Direct impacts of the horse park include expendituresstemming from construction,operationsand maintenance,and from spending by event participants and spectators.Examplesinclude purchases of concrete for construction,purchases of bedding by the horse park,and expenditures for lodging by out-of-area participants. Indirect (mpacts 33 The term "indirect impacts"refers to the production and sales of goods and services that result from the fact that direct impacts require inputs from other business sectors For example,in order to sell hay at the retail fevel (a direct impact),materials will be purchased from local wholesalers and growers.This second level of activity is the source of indirect impacts. Induced Impacts Tlie changes in employmentin those industries that experience both direct and indirect impacts result in changes in income that are spent in the region to purchase consumer goods and services.This income effect is the source of induced impacts.For example, if hay is produced locally,local incomes increase.Local spending of this additional income is the basis of an induced impact. Total Economic Impact The total economic impact is found by adding all three levels of impact for each sector of the local economy.The larger the magnitudeof local purchases,the larger will be the total local impact;conversely,the larger the podion of expenditures which are made outside the local economy,the smaller will be the total local impact.The amount spent outside the region does not effect the local economy,but the amount spent locally on such things as food,services,and supplies is considered a focal impact.Similarly, purchases resulting from increased wages which stem from both direct and indirect impacts are the basis for the induced impact,a fudher round of local spending.Induced impacts lead to additional rounds of indirect and induced impacts.This is referred to as a "multipliereffect." To the extent that expenditures occur outside the local economy,they are considered to 34 be leakages.With each round of spending a portion usually leaks outside the local economy.Leakages from successive rounds of spending eventually taper further rounds of responding to zero.The larger the region,the more intricate the economic linkages and,accordingly,the greater the total local impact from a given direct expenditure. There is,therefore,a multiplicativeeffect of a given direct impact,which results in greater total impacts.This so-called multiplier reflects the extent to which the initial expendituresrecirculate through a local economy.The multiplier shows the relationship of direct impact to total impact and depends upon both the degree of linkages among the local industries and the extent of leakages.In a general sense,the multipliercan be estimated by dividing the total impact by the direct impact.For example,if a total impact of $1000 is comprised of $500 of direct impacts,$275 of indirect impacts,and $225 of induced impacts,the multiplier is $1000/$500 or 2.In this example,each dollar of direct impact creates a total impact of $2.Note that the total impact includes the original dollar of direct impact.To most accurately assess the multiplicativeeffect,estimates of the multÍplierare often derived for each sector of the economy.To accomplish this task a computer model of the local economy can simulate local economic interactions. A number of economic impact analyses have been conducted for horse-related activities.The primary element of impact analysis for horse parks is the measurement of direct benefits.These are based upon a set of measurementsregarding the number of people for every horse on the grounds,the expenditures per person,and the percentage of expenditures that originate outside of the region of analysis.This last component is included because,by the precepts of regional economics,it is assumed that only external dollars advance the local or regional economy,since expenditures from locals would have occurred anyway,whether on horses or on other items that would cycle through the local economy.It is,accordingly,appropriate to review the values of these spending patterns used in other impact analyses of horse parks.A 35 second major elementof impact analysis is the multiplier.Each analysis develops a multiplierto convert direct expenditures to total impact upon the target economy.The multiplierswill vary depending upon location and type of activity. Fortunately,the measurements of both direct and indirect impacts that have been developedor assumed in other horse park studies converge into a somewhat tight band.A brief review of the relevantvariables in these studies follows;all dollar values have been converted to year 2006 dollars. The feasibility study of the national scale Marylartd Horse Park assumed the extremely low values of 1.27 participants including spectators per horse.Spending per person in the local area was $100 per day for lodging and meals plus $160 of horse related expenditures. The study for the California Horse Park assumed spending of $126.22 per person,with 95%of participants and spectators coming from outside the county.Total individuals per horse was 2.5. The often-cited OklahomaCity Chamber of commerce study measured and used the following values:3.5 persons per horse,$174.57 expended per person per show day, 85%of spending is from out of town. A survey of Nodhwesthorse owners was the basis for the estimatesused in the Lewis County study.This primary research projected the following values:2.4 persons per horse,$116.52 expenditure per day per person,and 28%out-of-state attendance. These values were given panicular weight in our analysis because of their regional derivation. The very complete analysis of the Virginia Horse Center by Kaplan and Knapp (1995) 36 derived the following valuesfrom their survey:an average of 1.5 persons per horse,a weighted average of $268 expended per person per show day,53%of spending from out of town.It should be noted that although the persons per horse measure is quite low at 1.5,the expenditures per person is quite high,resulting in a product of the two factors that falls tightly into line with the other studies. The Governor Hunt Horse Park Complexin Raleigh uses the following values:4 persons per horse,$125 expended per person per show day,67%of spending is from out of town. The Hoosier Horse Park uses the following values:3 persons per horse,$123 expended per person per show day. The Connecticut Horse Park and Exhibition Center feasibility study measured and used the followingvalues:6 persons per horse (including exhibitors and spectators,)$169.68 expended per person per show day,85%of spending from out of town. Althoughthe measures of participants from outside the area ranged from 28%to 85% across the studies,these numbers reflect several factors -the size of the area and the size and nature of the shows.Clearly the density of population in the East tends to increase this measure,and a higher propodion of large shows tends to increase this measure.The Virginia study group conducted a survey to find that 32%of small show participants were from out of state,along with 59%at medium sized shows and 52%at large shows.Thus this percentage will change as the mix of shows shifts with maturity of the facility.Because of the large sizes of westernstates and their relatively low populationdensities,we select the bottom end of the range for out of state participation, 25%.Rememberthat this is the number to be entered into the calculations for impacts at the state level;at the county level a figure as high as 95%of participants coming from outside the county can be used and deemedconservative,given the very small 37 population of Kittitas County (at 38,000)relative to the region.Again,to be on the conservativeside,we use 3 persons per horse (both padicipants and spectators),and $136 expendituresper person.Although our estimates of spending tend to be low,we find these appropriate in view of the relatively limited options for expenditures in a rural county,coupled with the lower cost of tourism expenditures for motels,restaurants,and entertainmentin a rural area. In impact studies the magnitude of the impact multipliers is wide ranging and far more dependantupon scope of the region under analysis.As for impact of horse parks,the Virginia Horse Center study employed the highly rigorous input-output technique to derive two sets of multipliers,one for the state and one for the immediate horse center area.Table 7 shows output,earnings,and employment multipliers for both Virginia and the immediate area.The output multiplierconverts direct expenditures into output (or value of product),the earnings multiplierconverts expenditures into incomes,and the employmentmultipliers convert spending into a measure of new jobs created.For the state impacts of our study,we compare the most recent input-output analysis multipliers for Washington State to those for the State of Virginia and adopted the multipliers shown in Table 8;note that they do not differ markedly from those used for the State of Virginia.However,the multipliers for Kittitas County differ significantly from those for the Lexington-Rockbridgelocation of the Virginia facility.This is because the Kittitas area is far smaller (population of 36,600 versus 360,000),and accordingly has far fewer economic linkages;many of the types of establishments in the Lexington-Rockbridge location do not exist in Kittitas county,and will not exist within the time-scope of this analysis. 38 Table Seven The Impact Multipliersfor the Virginia Horse Center Output Multiplier Earnings Multiplier Employment Multiplier State of Virginia 2.48 0.95 43.54 Lexington-R-bridge 1.88 0.72 45.79 - In the mid-1990's an input-outputmodel for the combined Kittitas and Yakima Counties was developedby one of the authors of this present study in order to estimate the impacts of the operation of a fish hatchery,also located next to the City of Cle Elum, The direct to indirect impact multipliersfor this hatchery study (1.6 for jobs and 1.8 for earnings)were very close to the 1.88 multipliers of the Virginia study.This is not surprising in view of the facts that the two county area has approximatelythe same population as the Lexington-Rockbridge area,and that most of the spending associated with the hatchery -expenditures by recreational fishers -impacted the hotel,restaurant, camping and retail foods sectors,as did most of the expenditures by horse park visitors. In both cases about 90%of expenditures impact these tourism sectors.Accordingly, the sectorial multipliers for the state of Virginia study are deemed appropriate for direct application as to the impact of the horse park upon the State of Washington. Table Eight Impact Multipliers for Washington State and Kittitas County Direct Expenditures to Totaf Employment Multiplier • Spending Multiplier Jobs/Million $of Direct Expenditures Washington State 2.48 20 Kittitas County 1.15 16 39 Because Kittitas County is far smaller and less economically interlinked than is the combined Kittitas-Yakima area (about 10%of the combined county population or income),a yet smaller multiplier is appropriate.Accordingly,based upon a number of studies that correlate multipliersto size of place,an earnings multiplier of 1.15 was used for Kittitas County impacts in this horse park analysis.A multiplier of 2.48 was used for the State measures.Another means of stating the jobs multiplier is in terms of the number of jobs created per million dollars of direct expenditures.This jobs multiplier takes into account both indirect and induced effects.In other horse park studies these jobs multipliers range from 16 to 45 jobs created per million dollars of direct expenditures.We have used 17 for the county componentand 20 for the state component,both conservativefigures.Although the magnitude of these multipliersmay appear to be very consentative,it must be remembered that Kittitas County is a very small and unlinked economy. Direct Impacts:Two categories of direct expenditures were input into the model:Direct expendituresincurred in the operation of the horse park and the direct expenditures of show participants and spectators.As for direct expenditures arising from operations of the horse park,only a small percentage of these expenses will impact the local area, due to the lack of local sourcing of many of these expenditures.As many of these goods and services will be purchased within the State,however,a higher proportion of expendituresshown on Line 1 of Table 8 are "margined"into direct expenditures for the state-wide componentof the model.After considering availability of sources,48%of total operating expenditureswere considered to be local and 90%were used in the state'-wide component.As the 48%local expenditures are included in the state's 90%, this means that 10%of direct expenditures went outside the state. Direct expendituresof show participants and spectators was calculated from the number of horses,based upon the following assumptions:3 persons per horse and 40 $136 spent per person per day.Because these expendituresare primarily for tourist services,we assumethat 82%of expenditures will impact the local economy.The remaining 18%will go to vendors who travel to the county for these events,and are therefore not considered "local." Findings of the Impact Model We applied the impact model only to the results of Scenarios 3 and 4,the "most likely" feasibility models;both were based upon the same starting numbers of horses across the years of analysis.As the impact model results are linear functions of the number of horses and therefore visitors,impacts for the other feasibility runs can be easily calculated.Table 9 shows the logic and results of the model.Let us use the Year Six column to show the impact of the horse park in its maturity stage.Direct participant expendituresof $7,334,838 are shown on line 1;these are comprised of the number of horses,times the number of participants per horse,times the spending at $138 per day. Line 1 is next margined at 95%to reflect the fact that 95%of participants are from outside the county.(Expenditures by in-county participants are netted out as it is assumed that this money would be spent in the county even withoutthe horse park.) This margining yields the $6,968,096 in line 2,spending by participants on the local market.Line 3 gives the $347,540 of expendituresmade by the horse park administration;it is calculated by multiplying horse park expensesby 48%to account for expenses that flow into the local economy;the remaining 52%will be spent outside the local area.The sum of these two categories of local expenses(local spending by participants,shown in line 2 plus spending on horse park operations,shown on line 3) appears as $7,315,636 in line 4 as local total direct expenditures.These,in turn are multiplied by the local (county)multiplierof 1.15 to yield local total impacts,shown in line 5.This number,$8,412,982 represents the total money flows,including indirect and induced effects in the local economy that are attributableto the horse park.Using the employment multiplierof 17 jobs per million dollars of direct expenditures gives us 41 Iine 6,the 143 jobs created by the horse park after the direct,indirect and induced effects are factored in. 42 Table9:CalculationofImpactsfromContinuingOperationsYeari23456789DirectParticipantExpånditures$2,484,000$3,105,000$3,881,250$4,851,563$6,064,453$7,334,838$7,334,838$7,334,838$7,334,838OutofCountyParticipantSpending$2,359,800$2,949,750$3,687,188$4,608,984$5,761,230$6,968,096$6,968,096$6,968,096$6,968,096LocalHorseParkExpenditures$247,791$265,137$283,696$303,555$324,804$347,540$356,229$365,134$374,263LocalTotalDirectExpenditures$2,607,591$3,214,887$3,970,884$4,912,539$6,086,034$7,315,636$7,324,325$7,333,231$7,342,359LocalTotalExpenditures$2,998,730$3,697,120$4,566,516$5,649,420$6,998,940$8,412,982$8,422,974$8,433,215$8,443,713LocalEmploymentImpacts(Jobs)51637896119143143143144OutofStateParticipantSpending$496,800$621,000$776,250$970,313$1,212,891$1,466,968$1,466,968$1,466,968$1,466,968WithinStateHorseParkExpenditures$438,797$469,513$502,379$537,545$575,174$615,436$630,822$646,592$662,757WithinStateTotalDirectExpenditures$935,597$1,090,513$1,278,629$1,507,858$1,788,064$2,082,403$2,097,789$2,113,560$2,129,725TotalStateExpenditures$2,320,281$2,704,472$3,171,000$3,739,488$4,434,399$5,164,360$5,202,517$5,241,628$5,281,717TotalSalesTax$406,145$507,681$634,602$793,252$991,565$1,199,279$1,199,279$1,199,279$1,199,279SalesTaxtoCity$30,630$38,288$47,860$59,825$74,781$90,446$90,446$90,446$90,446SalesTaxtoCounty$2,785$3,481$4,351$5,439$6,798$8,222$8,222$8,222$8,222SalesTaxtoState$372,730$465,913$582,391$727,989$909,986$1,100,611$1,100,611$1,100,611$1,100,611 State impacts are also calculated from the sum of participant plus horse park expenditures.This sum of $1,466,968 in Column 6,Line 7 is derived from Line 1;it has been margined at 25%,because only 20%of participants are from out of state,and therefore this is the source of impacts captured by the state.Those participants who come from within the state would be assumed to be making those expenditures elsewherein the state if the horse park did not exist.Accordingly,the state participant spending is actually less than the local.To derive other state measures,State Horse Park Expenditures of Line 8 are added to Line 7,summing to the $2,082,403 of State Total Direct Expenditures.This,in turn is multiplied by the State multiplier of 2.48, resulting in a total impact (including indirect and induced effects)of $5,164,360 shown on Line 10. Thus,it can be seen that the proposed park,even on a very conservativeestimate of use,generates a significant impact on the County and the State economies.It should be noted that these estimatesare based on horse shows only;they include no impacts from use of the center by other events,which are expected to consistentlyaccount for up to 25%of the days the facility is used.Any additional use by horse shows will also markedlyincrease these totals.This analysis also only applies to operating e×penditures -it ignores the very large initial construction expenditures. Fiscal Impacts upon the Public Sector Lines 11,12,13,and 14 of Table 8 show tax impacts,based upon the results of the "most likely"scenario.Line 11 represents total sales tax collectedfrom participant expenditures,calculated at a rate of 7.7%.Line 12 shows Cle Elum's local share of the sales tax,$90,446 in Year 6.County share is $8,222.Finally,State share of sales tax (6.5%)is shown in Line 14,$1,100,611 in Year 6,reflecting the sales tax collected from out of state participants..Local share of the motel and hotel tax is based on 50%of participant spending going to lodging and the tax rebate to local government is 44 2%;thus for year 6 this is $73,348. Property Taxes Using the assessmentrate for Cie Elum of 8.34390 per thousanddollars of valuation, the $5 million of land plus approximately$20 million of constructed improvements would generate an annual property tax of $225,285.The potential impact of adding this level of taxes to the analysis of horse park economíc feasibility is critical.Using the projections of the most likely scenario,the payment of property taxes would add this same amount to losses.Hence,even the most optimistic Scenarios,2 and 4,would be kept in the red.Essentially,payment of propedy taxeswould render the project infeasible under the most likely scenario. Other Benefits: Economic developmentis the business of attracting,creating and retaining businesses in the State.An important elementfor any state in this battle is the ability to offer a desirable quality of life.Any improvementin the quality of life makes a state more attractiveto people,and therefore more attractive to the companies which need those people. The addition of a first-class,nationally-knownhorse park would be an enhancement to the quality of life in Washington as well as an important means for promoting the State's image. This type of facility,which brings thousandsof people into the state from all over the country,serves as a marketing tool.It brings people here,exposes them to the benefits of the area and perhaps stimulatestheir interest in Washington as a place to do business --while at the same time pouring millions of dollars into the State's tourist 45 economy. The various State and County developmentagencies subscribe to a goal of creating additional major tourist attractions.The Washington Horse Park would function in much the same way as a major sports arena or concert center where people come from a wide area in order to watch events.Tourism is an important industry because it brings substantial revenue into the economy without significantly burdening local services, particularlyschools. An increased numberof equestrian eventswould also support those businesses in the State serving the horse industry -farriers,feed and hay suppliers,veterinarians and the like.Increased interest in horses could also be expected to result in increased business for horse dealers,stables and tack shops.Economic models estimate that over 7%of the Overall Economic Impact occurring in the State due to the Horse Park wouldflow directly to the State in the form of taxes. While these impacts were calculated using standard economic methodology,it must be noted that most of the forecasted eventsat the horse park are transfers of existing shows at other facilities.Only truly new events will create new spending,employment and tax revenue. VI RECOMMENDATIONSFOR ORGANIZATIONALSTRUCTURE A major task of this study was to make specific recommendationsas to the appropriate organizationalstructure needed to acquire control of the site,solicit funds to construct improvementsand successfully operate the facility over the long term.In this section we recommendan appropriate organization structure for the WSHP Authority Board of Directors based upon our interaction with the managementof other horse parks,with 46 State and local governmentofficials,and with groups of potential users. The WSHP Authority is a non-profit corporation that was authorized by the Washington State Legislature in 1995 under the provisions of Title 67 RCW 67.18.The seven member Authority Board of Directors is appointed by the Governor of the State of Washington and is granted broad authorities to "develop,promote,operate,manage, and maintain"a horse park facility.We believe the most effective organization structure to accomplish these key functions is:(1)for the Directors to establish a non-profit corporation with IRS Code 501.C.3 tax status so that it can receive tax free donations, (2)for the corporation to contract in the private sector for the services of a professional manager experienced in the establishmentand operationof equestrian facilities,and (3)to assign that professional manager the responsibilityand authority,subject to appropriate Board review,for the development,promotion,operation and maintenance of the horse park facility. The professional manager,who would not be an employee of the State of Washington, would be responsibleto monitorthe construction of the improvements,to prepare a budget to be approved by the Board for the operation of the facility,and to manage the marketing and operationsof the horse park facility.These responsibilities would include hiring and managingemployees (who would also not be employees of the State of Washington)and negotiatingdirectly with private sector suppliers of goods and services to conduct the operations of the horse park facility.Based on our contacts with horse park facilities in other states and with other authority-controlled activities within the State of Washington,it has consistently been pointed out that the flexibility, time responsiveness,and cost savings availableby not being required to operate with employee regulationsof the State of Washington and not being required to go through the State purchasing system are significant and may be essential to the ability of the Horse Park to achieve financially self-supportingoperationsin the early years. 47 In summary,we recommend that the WSHP Authority Board of Directors set up the organization to be run by an experienced professional manageras a commercial operation outside of the State governmental institutions and procedures,that the Board focus its activities on obtaining the site and funding commitmentsrequired for the construction of improvementsand the first five years of operation,and that the Board actively work with existing equestrian organizations to promote the Horse Park project. VII CONCLUSIONSAND RECOMMENDATIONS The primary objectivesof this study were to determine the financial feasibility and potential economic impact of the Washington State Horse Park in its proposed location in Kittitas County,and to make recommendations as to the organizational structure of the institution.We will summarize findings and make recommendationsas they pertain to each of these objectives. FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY Horse parks are not money makers in and of themselves.This is a reality which cannot be overlooked.As shown in our analysis,they have a significant positive impact on the economy,but are not themselvesprofit sources.This is particularly true for high quality facilities where typically revenues do not fully cover operating expenses. We developeda relatively sophisticated financial model to determine economic feasibility.The inputs into this model were gathered from the experiences of operating horse parks around the country,user groups that we surveyed,and the experience of horse park managementprofessionals and consultants.The advantageof using such experiential data is that elementsof good and bad luck,managerial learning,and shifts in facility goals and procedures are therefore incorporated into the modeling process. Four scenarios of the model were developed and "run;"they differed as to assumptions 48 of growth rates of:numbers and types of shows,entries,revenues,and costs.In Scenario 3,which we believe will be the most likely scenario,the park operates at an eighty thousand dollar per year loss,despite assuming augmented revenues of $100,000 per year from non-equestrian events.Scenario 2,which assumes a much higher and likely unrealistic rate of facility use,results in net revenues of approximately one hundred fifty thousand dollars per year.The key financial findings of these two scenarios are: *Maximum use of the facility is reached in the sixth year.Scenario 2 breaks even in the sixth year. *Accumulationof 1.4 million dollars in losses by the end of the tenth year in Scenario 3.Scenario 2 accumulatesone million dollars in losses prior to break-even. *Net revenues losses of $74,726 when the facility reaches maturity in year six for Scenario 3.Scenario 2 projects net revenues at maturity in year seven of $140,802. *For Scenario 3,annual revenuesat maturity will be $549,316 and annual expenseswill be $724,042.For Scenario 2 these values are respectively: $915,527 and $774,725. *69,357 exhibitors and spectators will use the facility annually when the facility is at maturity. *For either Scenario,it will be necessary to waive property taxes on the facility and to create a capital funding approach which requires no direct repayment from operating revenues. 49 The model was also run to solve for revenues per horse (Scenario 4).Under the most likely assumptions,the level of revenues per horse necessary to break even in terms of operating costs were unacceptably high. Our findings are reflected in the national equestrian park picture,where large and medium sized facilities are typically subsidized around 20%of operating revenues. Only two of twenty-fivehorse parks break even. The primary reasons for the lack of positive cash flows in our projections of the Washington State Horse Park are that: The climate and location limits the numberof open weeks per year. Our survey showed that equestrian groups are very sensitive to price. The equestrian-dedicateddesign limits the size and nature of nonequestrian events. For full utilization a facility needs to serve large horse events,and there is a lack of growth in the numberof large horse organizations in the region. Under these circumstances there are several major provisos that must be met before we can recommendthat the plans to raise funds for the facility proceed.The first two have already been stated,that capital repayment not be required and that property taxes be waived.Third is the requirement that in order to assure successful operation, the Horse Park Authority must recruit a facility managerfrom the upper 90 percentile of managersand support that manager with top-notch review and assistance by professionalequestrian managementprofessionals.Finally,the facility will require subsidizationfrom either private foundations or public coffers of approximately $80,000 per year. 50 ECONOMIC IMPACTS One means by which other facilities justify operating grants is through their impacts upon local and regional economies.Therefore,an impact model based upon expendituresof the horse park participants and expendituresfor horse park operations was developedto estimate financial flows to both the local and state economies and to local and state finances.Using the "most likely"scenario at year six maturity,the following impacts are projected: *The direct spending by exhibitors and spectatorsare estimatedto be $7,334,838 when the facility reaches maturity in the sixth year of operations. *The total money flows attributable to the horse park in the sixth year,.including indirect and induced effects,are $8,412,982 annually. *Using the employmentmultiplier of 16 jobs per million dollars of direct expendituresprojects,143 jobs will be created by the horse park after the direct, indirect and induced effects are factored in. *Starting at the sixth year,annual state impacts from out of state residents were found to be $1,466,968 of direct,indirect and induced spending. *The recreational services sectors will be the sectors most affected by Horse Park operations. ORGANIZATlONALSTRUCTURE We recommendthat: 51 *The Washington State Horse Park Authority Board of Directors set up the organization to be run as a commercial operation by an experienced and successful professional manager. *The organizationof the institution be that of a non-profit corporation,avoiding designation as a State governmental entity and thus avoiding the labor and procurement procedures required of State governmentalunits. *The Board focus its activities on obtaining funding commitmentsrequired for the construction of improvementsand the first five years of operation. *That the Board actively work with existing equestrian organizations to promote the Horse Park project. Our findings are reflected in the national equestrian park picture,where large and medium sized facilities are typically subsidized around 20%of operating revenues. Only two of twenty-fivehorse parks break even. Under these circumstances there are several major provisos that must be met before we can recommendthat the plans to raise funds for the facility proceed.The first two are that capital repaymentnot be required and that property taxes be waived.Third is the requirementthat in order to assure successful operation,the Horse Park Authority must recruit a facility manager from the upper 90 percentile of managers and support that managerwith top-notch review and assistance by professional equestrian managementprofessionals.Finally,the facility will require subsidization from either private foundationsor public coffers of approximately$80,000 per year. However,the positive economic impacts accruing to Kittitas County and to Washington State add somejustification to financially support this endeavor. 52 BIBLIOGRAPHY Abell,John and Marsden,James,"The Economic Impact of the Standardbred Industry on the State of Kentucky:A Report Prepared for the Kentucky Harness Racing Commission."1984. Adelaja,Adesolji.,"The Proposed New Jersey Horse Park at Stone Tavern: Economics Impact Analysis and Financial Analysis."Rutgers University,New Brunswick,NJ,March 1987. Allmon,Carolyn I."Horse Racing in America:What Impact on the State's Economy?" Minnesota Departmentof Revenue,1987. American Horse Council,Inc."Economic Impact of Horse Shows."Washington,DC 1979. American Horse Counci I,Inc."1989-1990 Horse Industry Directory."Wash¡ngton, D.C.:June,1989. Atelier,ps."Washington State Horse Park in Kittitas County."Master Plan Report, Draft. Bigler,Alexander8.Associates."A Financial Feasibility Assessmentof a Proposed Connecticut Equestrian Center."Oakton,VA,February 1982. Carr,James;Atwood,Barbara;Bolin,David;Southard,Larry."Economic Impact of Kentucky's Tourism and Travel Industry,1987 and 1988."Kentucky Department of Travel Development.Tourism Research Series No.44.,1989. Center for Business and Economic Research,College of Business &Economics, University of Kentucky."Understanding The Impact of the Equine Industry in Kentucky and the Central Bluegrass."Lexington,KY,1991. City of Dallas.Texas Horse Park at Trinity.2006. http://www.dallascityhall.com/committeebriefings/briefings0806/20060821_TR C_DealPoints.pdf Center for Economic Development,California State University,Chico-"California Horse Park Analysis of its Impact on the Economy of Shasta County."2004.Chico, CA Crawford,Kay."Lewis and Clark State Equestrian Center,Economics and Employment 53 Impact Study."Auburn,WA,The Merit Co.,1991. Economic Research Associates."Memorandum Report -An Evaluation of Planning for Kentucky State Horse Park."Kentucky State Department of Parks (March 5, 1975):30. Economics Research Associates."Analysis of DevelopmentPotentials for The Percy Warner Equestrian Center."McLean,VA,December 1977. Economics Research Associates."Feasibility analysis for a Virginia Horse Center in Roanoke,Virginia."(Draft)Washington,DC,November1984. Garnet ConsultingServices,Inc."Connecticut Horse Park and Exhibition Center Feasibility Study Update."January 1996. Garnet DevelopmentGroup,Inc.and R.&L.Associates "Connecticut Horse Park Feasibility Study."December 1987. Holt &Morgan Associates,P.A."Master Plan for New Jersey Horse Park at Stone Tavern."New Jersey,1979. Kaplan Samuel R.;Knapp,John L.."Economic Impact of the Virginia Horse Center." September 1995 Kerns,Terry."Economic Impact of the Horse Industry on the State of Kentucky,"Show Horse.June,1987. Kisler,Joseph R."West World Research Report,"Unpublished Report prepared for the West World Business Plan Committee,1997. Kopp,Karen."AHC Study Reveals Equine Industry's Economic Clout,"EQUUS.June, 1986. KPMG Peat Marwick -The Policy Economics Group."Economic Impact of the Ohio Horse Racing and Breeding Industry on the State of Ohio."Executive Summary, vol.1,September 1990. KPMG Company-"Economic Impact Analysis for a Proposed New Horse Park in Anne Arundel County,Maryland".March 2006 Deloitte Company-"TheEconomic Impact of the Horse Industry on the United States."American Horse Foundation,2006. KPMG Company -Policy Economics Practice."The Economic Impact of the Horse 54 Industry in the United States."NationalSummary,vol.1-4,December 1997. Mack,Richard;Richardson,Gary."Financial Feasibility and Economic Impact of the Washington State Horse Park.Contractor Report,Ellensburg,WA.1998. Maryland Stadium Authority_"Maryland Horse Park and Agricultural Education Center 2006 Feasibility Analysis." Minnesota IMPLANGroup,Inc."Micro IMPLAN User's Guide."(July 1993). Pannell Kerr Forster."Evaluation of a Proposal for the Developmentand Management of Horseman's Equestrian and Theme Park to be Located in Scottsdale, Arizona."New York,NY,May 1986. Robbins,Mark;Terpsma,Betsy."Structure and Economic Contribution of the Horse Industry in British Columbia:"1990 Sharp,Jim."Virginia Horse Center Financial Estimates."Richmond,VA,October 1982 (updated 8/84). United States Equestrian Federation (USEF)Data Pages 2006 (http://www.usef.org). 55 Appendix I Questions for Equestrian Organizations General horse park introduction General questions about the nature of their organization 1.Size of organization?Change over six years? 2.How many events do you schedule? 3.How many horses/event? 4.What stall fees do you pay? 5.What do you pay for arena facilities? 6.Are past years'calendars available? 7.What is the geographic range of your activities? 8.How satisfied are you with your current venues? 9.How frequently has your organization changed venues? 10.Why did you stop using these venues? 11.What new venues have you added? 12.What is your event planning horizon? 13.What has been the trend in fees for stalls?Do you think that your members are willing to pay $5 more? 14.Do you have past years'data (going back to 2000)on events/entries/locations? 15.Would you consider using the WA Horse Park?New events? 16.Will you be willing to write a letter of support for the WA State Horse Park? 56 Appendix II: Survey Questions for Horse Parks Name of Facility Contact Name Phone # Operations Manager Name Phone # Operated by: Municipality State County Public-Private Partnership Private Other Date opened Operating Months Operating Days of Week Hours of Operation How many acres is your facility7 What is the number of on-site horse stalls? 57 Appendix III DEVELOPMENTOF THE WASHINGTONSTATE HORSE PARK AUTHORITY The history of the Washington State Horse Park Authority is succinctly summarized in a January 16,1998 memo From Cleve Pinnix,Director of the Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission: In 1990 the State Parks and Recreation Commission acquired land adjacent to Lewis and Clark State Park for developmentof an equestrian facility.Subsequent detailed evaluationdetermined that the amount of wetlandson the property made it unsuitable for an equestrian facility.The propedy remains in Parks ownership. The Commissionnext authorized staff to hire a planning consultantto design a schematic master plan alternative for an 1,120 acre site near the town of Ethel,on Highway 12 about nine miles east of Interstate 5.The Commission approved the consultant'srecommended plan in January 1993.Staff was also authorized to begin acquiring needed land through use of funds previously designated for a horse park facility and through public-private land exchange authority.Staff was also authorized to work with private padies to develop suppod for a legislative package for equestrian center developmentthrough a quasi-govemmentalentity to be chartered by the legislature.Land acquisition was conditioned upon receiving legislative authorization for the managing and developmententity by September 30,1994,a deadline later extended to September30,1995.Because several of the landowners were unwilling to sell their land the project stalled. On May 1,1995 the Governor signed SSB 5403,creating the Washington Horse Park Authority. 59 Important components include: 1.Horse Park Authority Purpose The best statementof intent in the duties of the Authority is found in section I of the originating statute: RCW67.18.010(4)"It Is the purpose of this legislation to create the framework for such a partnership to facilitate developmentof the Washington state horse park.It is further the intent of the legislature that the state horse park shall be developedin stages, based on factors such as the availabilityof funds,equipment,and other materials donated by private sources,-the availabilityand willingnessof volunteersto work on park development,-and the availabilityof revenuesgenerated by the state horse park as it is developedand utilized." 2.CommissionRole The statute describes the Commission's role as follows: RCW 67.18.020 (1)Ihe Washington state horse park is hereby established,to be located at a site approvedby the commission.In selecting a site the commission shall consider areas with large blocks of land suitable for park development,the distance to various populationcenters in the state,the ease of transportation to the site for large vehicles travelingalong either a north-south or an east-west corridor and other factors deemed important by the commission. The statute also encourages the Authority to collaboratewith state agencies when it is mutually beneficial.The Commission is referenced as a potential partner in matters pertaining to public recreation. 3.Land Ownership RCW 67.18.020 (2)describes three means by which land for the park may be acquired. First,through a grant to State Parks through the WWRP process.In this case the 60 resort complex.These linkages offer more economical developmentof needed facilities and have streamlined the permitting process for the horse park facility. On October 22,1997 the Horse Park Authority voted to endorse the Trendwest/Suncadia site in order to proceed with preliminary planning.On January 2,1998 WSPRC met and approved the site. Facility Master PLAN The contract for the design of the original master plan was awarded to Atelier ps.Janis Snoey,the master plan project manager,worked with the Washington State Horse Park Authority,the Washington State Horse Park Foundation,the Public InvolvementTask Force,and the authors of this study to design the Master plan.The design of the Horse Park clearly reflects an iterative process that entailed repeated interaction of all of these padies.It is appropriate to draw directly from the document to succinctly portray the envisionedfacility: As a show and competition facility,the Horse Park Master Plan is designed to accommodate one or more small-to moderate-sized events at a time.At full build-out,the Horse Park will support large events such as regional Arabian Horse and Quarter horse shows,the North American Young Rider's Program Final Competition,Dressage and Jumping World Cup competitions.The Horse Park will meet the needs of breed shows,western competitions,and equestrian sports such as competitive trail riding,jumping,dressage, combined driving and three-day eventing.American Horse Show Association (AHSA),Federation Equestre Internationale (FEI)and Professional Rodeo Cowboy'sAssociation (PRCA)standardswill guide developmentof th.e show and competition facilities. The Horse Park will also sente those interested in less formal equestrian activities such as trail riding.The Horse Park is proposed to include a trail system interconnected to the Coal Mine Trail east of the site and the Iron Horse State Park (the John Wayne trail)south of the site.Trail access is also proposed through the Mountain Star Resort to back country trails in the adjacent National Forest.In cooperation with Trendwest,a 63 trailhead will be provided at the northwestern limits of the Mountain Star Resort.This facility will be provided so that users may immediately access more rustic trails without riding through the resort.Trendwest will determine the location of this "outpost." The architecture and landscape development within the proposed Horse Park will conform to a Northwest mountain style to blend with the natural environment and reflecting Washington State's history.The building style --characterized by sloped roofs,generous overhangs,and use of wood,stone,and heavy timber --is consistent with that proposed for Mountain Star resort.To maintain aesthetic quality control,design of specific facilities will be approved by a design review committee comprised of members of the Horse Park Authority and representatives of Trendwest.The project will be built to high-quality standards to stimulate use of the facility and reduce long-term maintenance costs.Substandard facilities may cost less initially,but will not serve the goals of the proposed project. The Horse Park will be developed in phases to reduce the initial cost and allow for flexible expansion.The proposed first phase of development would serve the needs of many small-to moderate-sized events (although probably no more than two small events or one moderate-sized event at a time).Temporary construction is minimized to reduce the cost of future construction,although some temporary features are necessary to consolidate development in the early phases. In 2006 Edward Lapsley,Facilities Consultant,reassessed the original master plan and developeda revised construction plan.The design was marginallychanged to reflect the last decade's changes in the technology,managementand format of horse park design, construction and operations.Cost estimates were also revised,based upon a bottom-up approach. 64 WASHINGTON STATE HORSE PARK REQUEST FOR FUNDS WASHINGTON S T A T E HorsePark pinä?ò ano,P4ey mese Urson"Tkân@aswt¼HAinMM 'dt00 TABLE OF CONTENTS The following information comprises the formal submission fromtheWashingtonStateHorseParkAuthorityforphasedcapitalfundingof$19,384,899 "in total"to construct the Washington State Horse Park in Cle Elum,Wash. Introduction 3 HistoricalBackground 3-4 The Organization 4 Events 4 Overviewof Facilities S Site Plan S The Facility 6 Design Costs 7 ConstructionCosts 8-10 Phased Build Out Plan &Cost Totals 11 Detail on Design &Construction Appendix A UpdatedEconomic FeasibilityReport Appendix B * *Central Washington University will be updating the 1998 Waslungton StateHorseParkEconomicFeasibilityReporttoreflectcurrentprojectionsfortheHorsePark's revenue and operating costs,in addition to anticipated local and statewide economic benefits.This additional document will be madeavailabletotheStateLegislatureandOfficeofFinancialManagementasearlyaspossiblepriortothesessionstartdate. 2 s WASHINGTON STATE HORSE PARK The Washington State Horse Park is located on 106 acres of land adjacent to I-90inCleElum,Wash.The park will be the showcase of the Washington equestrianindustryandaworld-class facility,serving the recreational,competitive andeducationalneedsofridersandhorseenthusiastsacrossthestateandthroughouttheNorthwest.The proposed facility will provide ample facilities toaccommodateregional,national and international equestrian and recreationalpursuits.Special etnphasis is included to provide equestrian activities for youthandthedisabled. HisTORicAL BACKGROUND 1986 -Washington State Legislature appropriates funds to the Washington StateDepartmentofAgricultureforinvestigationoftheeconomicimpactofWashington's horse industry.Study recommends the creation of a state-ownedandoperatedequestriancentertopromoteandservetherecreationalhorseindustryinthestateandprovideeconomicbenefitsthroughequineactivities. 1991 -Legislature authorizes expenditure of $200,000 for an equestrian centerplanningstudy.The Parks Cornmission approves $490,000 to purchase landadjacenttoLewisandClarkStateParkinLewisCountyasapotentialsitefor thePark. 1991 -1996 -After five years of planning,horse community input and siteanalysis,physical and environmental issues prove the Lewis County locationunsuitableforaworld-class equestrian center. 1995 -State Legislature,by RCW 67.18 (Recodified:79A.30),authorizes theWashingtonStateHorseParkAuthorityto"establish a first-class horse parkfacilityinWashingtontomeettheimportantneedsofthestate's horse industry,attract investment,enhance recreational opportunities,and bring new exhibitorsandtouriststothestatefromthroughouttheregionandbeyond."The legislaturefurtherstates,"a unique opportunity exists to form a partnership between state,county,and private interests to create a major horse park facilíty that will providepublicrecreationalopportunitiesandstatewideeconomicandemploymentbenefits." 1996 -Trendwest Resort Corporation offers to donate land for the horse parkinCleElum,Wash.adjacent to their planned resort community.Governor GaryLockeappolntsHorseParkAuthoritymembers. 1992 -A $46,000 grant is provided by the Legislature to develop an economicfeasibilitystudyanddraftaMasterPlanfortheWashingtonStateHorseParkinKittitasCounty.Aletter of intent to donate the property in Cle Elumis signed byaffiliatesofJELD-WEN and Lowe Enterprises,the newland owners. 3 1998 -The State Parks Commission authorizes Ihe Parks Director to approveselectionoftheCleElumlocationfortheWashingtonStateHorsePark,asrequiredinthelegislation. 1998 -2004 -Through several years of negotiation,Urban Growth Aci (UGA)approval and changing developers,the site in Cle Elum is selected on 106 acresincludinginfrastructureimprovementsandwaterrights.The value of thedonationbyJELD-WEN and Lowe Enterprises (now Suncadia Resort)to thecitizensoftheStategrowstomorethan$6,000,000. 2004 -Washington State Horse Park Foundation reorganizes to better manage theproject,facilitate fund-raising activities and expand the involvement by the horsecommunityandequestrian-related businesses. 2005 -Governor Christine Gregoire appoints new Washington State Horse ParkAuthorityBoardmemberstofinalizesiteplanningandbegindevelopment. 2006 -The Washington State Horse Park Authority Board works,in conjunctícawithEdLapsleyandRober!Mack (Central Washington University---Department ofEconomics),to update prior reports on capital construction cost estimates andeconomicfeasibilityrespectively.These documents will support a capitalfundingrequesttobemadetotheWashingtonStateLegislatureduringthe 2007-08 biennial budget. THE ORGANIZATION Washington State Horse Park Authority is a seven-member board authorized bytheWashingtonStateLegislatureandappointedbytheGovernortodevelop,promote,operate,manage and maintain the Horse Park using a combination ofstateandprivateresources. Washington State Horse Park Foundation is a non-profit corporation that acts asa"friend of the Horse Park"by supporting Ihe Washington Sate Horse ParkAuthority.11is comprised of an all-volunteer Board of Directors and FoundationMembershipthatrepresentsadiversecross-section of horse disciplinet.interestsandbusinesses. EVENTS The Washington State Horse Park is designed to meet the needs of local,regionalandnationalcompetitions.Its charter specifically charges the Horse ParkAuthorityBoardtoprovide4-H,pony clubs,youth groups and local parkdepartmentswithyouthrecreationalactivities.The Authority Board also is toprovidepreferentialuseofanareaoftheHorseParkforyouthandthedisabled atnominalcost. 4 OVERVIEW OF FACILITIES As a show and competition facility the Washington State Horse Park will bedesignedtoaccommodateseveralsimultaneoussmalltomoderatesizeevents orasinglelargeevent.Examples of events would include regional Arabian andQuarterHorseshows,the North American Young Rider's program.DressageeventsandWorldCupcompetitions.The Horse Park will meet the needs ofbreedshows,western competitions and equestrian sports such as competitivetrailriding.Jumping,combined drivîng and three-day eventing. The Washington State Horse Park will also serve those interested in less formalequestrianactivitiessuchastrailridingandbackcountrypacking.The HorseParkwillincludeanextensivetrailsystemInterconnectedwithIheCoalMinesTraileastofthesiteandtheIronHorseStateParksouthofthesite,It will also offerfacilitiesforovernighttrailridercampingandhorseboarding. THE SITE Location of the 106-acre site is depicted below.The northern boundary of the siteterminatesatthebaseofanaturalridge,which rises approximately 200 feetabovetheproperty.The southern border line is shared with the Washington StateHighwayDepartmentsI-90 corridor.There is a "no-build"75 foot corridorbufferingthepropertyfromthefreeway.The site is moderately forested,withpineandDouglasfir.The agreement between the WSHP Authority and SuncadiaResortisfordonationofthe106acres. Cle Ehm UGA cáŸÊ 5 THE FACILITY The key facility on the site will be a 200 x 300 foot covered arena with a 175 x 300 footopenarena.A 25 x 300 foot support service area will provide bleacher seating for1,000 spectators.Bathrooms with showers,a vendor area,judging area,event controlareaandofficeswillalsobeincluded.The estimate is based on a steel frame gableendstructure.The covered arena is supported with a 200 x 300 foot open arena and a340x140footwarm-up area. 400 exhibitor horse stalls located in eight weatherproof barns will be localed toaccommodateeasyaccesstoparkingspacesfortruckandtrailercombinations.Each12x12footstallwillincludeaslidingentrygateandslopedfloortoaccommodateliquidwaste.The barn will have an effective waste management system,storage forhedding,electrical power and water.The end of each barn will have an open-airhorsewasharea.The exhibitor parking area will have roarked parking stalls with apost-mounted duplex outlet for each space providing power needs for living quartertrailersandvehicles.This area will include concrete bumper curbs and night securitylighting. The site will include a 900 x 480 foot polo fleId.This field will serve as a multi-purposespacefornon-equestrian events,and as a special evenis parking when not being usedasapolofield.The design includes a motorized sprinkler system using Suncadia-provided irrigation water. I Waste storage vaults (20 x 30 foot)will serve each of the stable barns and the arena.Waste will be transported from the barns and clean-up areas to the waste storagevaults. A composting area (100 x SO foot paved holding facility)will be located away fromthemainusearea,and will house the equipment to process the waste. A livestock holding pen with portable control panels,fencing,gates and a loadingrampwillbelocatedofftheserviceroad. A 4,000 sq.ft.maintenance and equipment storage shop will be located near theserviceroad,and will house all the support equipment as well as the tools required forequipmentmaintenanceandminorrepair. The north property line is planned by Suncadia as the service utility route for waterandwastewater.They will be providing irrigation and domestic water to the site.Power,gas and phone lines «111be provided by the serving utilities,(PSE,etc.) The Horse Park main entrance and exhibitor parking will be located west of the CleElumCemeten;off Douglas Munroe Ave.With direct proximity from the I-90 west CleElumexchange,site access is very efficient.An entry sign and fencing on both sidesofthepaved26footwideentryroadareidentifiedintheconstructionestimate. A 365 car spectator paved parking lot with security lighting is near the coveredarena. 6 CONSTRUCTTON COSTS (CONT.) Barns 400 horse stalle to be provided.Will build eight 80-stallpost and $6,034,400 beam struc1ares 48-feet wide by 398-feet long with 12 x 12 foot stalls equipped with sliding gates.Ten fann water hydrants located m each structure will provide easy access for exhibitors. Each barn will have two locations for hay storage and retrieval. Electrical power and lighting with control switches will allowsectionallightingcontrol.Each barn will have a concrete horse washing facility. Waste Holding 20 x 30 foot concrete holding pen with raised concrete 40-foot wide $29,900Penwallsonthreesidestofacilitatethedepositingandremovalusingafrontendloader. Entry Roads Clearing and base rock installed under the site development $451,000contract.This project includes the installation of 3"of 3/4 minus topping,graded and rolled with 2"of paving for the 3,000 x 24 footofroadway.Raised curbs and a fence on both sides of the road.A new sign identifying the Washington State Horse Park is included. Walkways,Willfund the development of trails to connect the 68-acres of $516,100PathwaysanddevelopedlandwithintheHorseParksitetotheexistingtrailServiceAreassystemInstallationofwalkwaysandpathwaysbetweenthecoveredarena,parking and exhibitors barns are included.Thistrailsystemwillaccessapproximately80additionalacresthatmay be used for eventing course needs west of the main campus. Composting Area An area near the service road will be cleared and grubbed,328,100 organic material and stumpe removed to clear for a 100 x 60 footpadforthewastematerial.Developmentof the pad will consist of 6"of base rock,("of 1 1/4"top rock graded and rolled,and thefinalinstallationof2"ofpaving. Livestock The livestock holding pen will have a 60 x 80 foot pad consisting of $25,000HoldingPens6"of base rock,("of 1 1/4"top rock,and finally 4"of floor material.Perimeter fencing with control gates will complete thisproject. Utilities The scope of this element is the constniction of a 3,100 feet of ditch $728,700fromthepropertytopowertransfomterlocationsprovidedbytheservingutilities.This work includes the installation of securitylightingalongtheroadway,in addition to 1000-feet of ditch andpipingfromtheservingutilityentryontothesitepropertyandto the covered arena.Also included is a 3,000 foot dilch,manhole valves and fire hydrants for the installation from the Sancadia water,sewer and irrigation system to the end of the arena.A low voltage communication and security system will be installed. 9 CONSfRUCTIONCOSTS (coNT.) Maintenance /Construction of a 40 x 100 foot shop building with a 16-foot ceiling $171,700StorageShop(post and beam structure)near the service road and close to thearenaarea.Work includes clearing,grubbing and installing 6"ofbaserock,4"of 1 1/4"top rock and a 4"concrete pad.14-footentrydoors,man doors.lighting and power will support maintenance operations and storage of equipment and materials.Public Facilities Funds to pay for administration during planning and construction.$1,014,791Administration @ 6.00% Inflation Factor Estimated increase in Consumer Pn e Index applied to Phase 2 31,456,619andPhase3. ToTAI.,PRoJECTCOSTS $19,384,599 I 10 Planning Planning,design and construction of the Washington State Horse ParkprojectisdirectlyconnectedthecurrentStateLegislaturefundingrequest. The planning procedure is based on funding contiguous phases over aperiodofthreeyearsasshownbelow V&shington State Horse Park Concept Plan -Three Stage Build (M Costs Total Chat Line tiem Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3EIF-1 Design 4 Reid Sawy S 37,¾S 37,¾ b)Se Rarrirm $154U S 154® c)L.arciscape Destgri 5 7,Œ0 $7,0U c4 Dur.ig,5 810m 5 810mD e)Constrtcti<n Adm 5 3Œlm S 13Am2 5 14832 S 945¢24Perrrusssrl,4m s mæn s sno s 172ass g)BS 5 317.®S 317,Ð s zzia7m 5 1.511.485 s RTÆ ©2A575i E2 Oxmirudion 4 se omsomment s asigœo s mo s 1,7æ,o tg mermi Amru S 27œ,5 2,7U, c)qwn Arena S 134UD $134E ce WumwArena S 134m 5 134m e)Rio Field 5 218.E 5 214empWPwkitgSŒ7,S 34E $3iBUD g)Erhitrtar Parlarg 5 214E S 1434U 5 1434© Ig Ehrra (Am stalls)S 4tB4,400 5 4017.2¾$3017,2¤ 1)Wate Ft:Icing A:n S 2tm $14.911 S 14,E J)Ertry Fkais S 451.tID 5 451,UD k)Wikvsy /Rttwry 5 514100 5 5141U I)Ctrrµmtirs Area 5 241tD 5 W1U rri umstock Rrl S 24U S mo n)ulliSis 5 ¯7U $47DD c)hartneraus exp 5 171.700 s 1-rt,7o S 14853,4®$1,7,800 $42M,500 $4,411,100 SutyToini $149441©5 44Œk2m S 4741,2®$4,514675 PutdicAdm Fee @fPA $1,014,782 5 24717 $SiM,474 $2KL©l Design &Chndruction EN.5 17.927.991 S 3,7tgolB S 424702 $4m7.278 ,1rflatlan@QxamrPricairx¾m 5 1,454619 S 144,495 5 T4725 S EU,3m Total heet omis ases.um s redades s aseTy 54544675. M Amount s e,sacram s asettœu stauxtcon saecacao) 11 Washington State Horse Park Funding Assumptions 1 Washington State Funding (WSF) 2 WSF has been to fund major capital projects in two separateappropriations. a)Design b)Construction 3 WSF or private funds will be used for working capital Project Book Planning Assumptions 1 Event calendar will be completed by September 30,2006 2 Economic study will be completed by November 30,2006 3 Economic study will be used to determine recommended design andconstructingcompletion. 4 Approval of Environmental Impact Statement will determine the startofconstruction. 5 Completion of the project will be when the revenue exceeds theoperatingcosts. Observations 1 The maximum horse event days will be over a 30 week period of timewhichisbasedonweather 2 Earlier economic studies suggest a 5 year period before theprojectedrevenueexceedstheoperatingcosts. Schedule 1 Revised Project Book Completed by December 15,2006 2 WSF approved by January 2007 3 Environmental Impact Slatement Engineering Contract awarded byMarch2007. 4 Site Planning Contract awarded by March 2007 5 Design Contracts awarded by August 2007 6 Site Planning completed by June 2007 7 Environmental impact Statement completed by Feb 2008 9 Site Development package completed by March 200810BidandAwardConstructionbyApril2008 11 Construction completed by November 2008 Capital Funding Packages Amount YearDesign$1,800,000 2007Construction$18,300,000 2008Const/Weapital $500,000 2009WorkingCapital$300,000 2010WorkingCapital$200,000 2011WorkingCapital$100,000 2012 Total $21,200,000 WashingtonStateHorseParkWashingtonStateHorseParkCostEstirnateforconceptplanwithphasedConstructionCashflowthrough201315-Sep-06ItemAmountYear2007Year2008Year2009Year2010Total1.Designa)FieldSurvey&Geo-Tec$37,500$37,500$37,500b)SitePlanning$156,0005156,000$156,000c)LandscapeDesign$7,00057,000$7,000d)Design5810,0005810,0005810,000e)ConstructionAdministration$360,806$133,6325133,632593,542$0$360,806f)Permits$571,483$76,354$323,0965163,50058,533$571,483g)EnvironmentalimpactStatement5317,000$317,000$317,000Tota!$2,259,789$1,537,486$456,728$257,042$8,533$2,259,7892.Constructiona)SiteDevelopment$2,519.000$750,00051,769,00052,519.000b)CoveredArena$2,709,000$2,709,000$2,709,000c)OpenArena$138,500$138,500$138,500d)WarmupArena$138,500$138,500$138,500e)PoloField$218,800$218,800$218,800f)SpectatorParking5657,800$328,900$328,900$657,800g)ExhibitorParking$286,900$143,450$143,450$286,900h)Bams56,034,40053,017,200$3,017.200$6,034,400I)WasteHoldingPens$29,900$14,950514,950$29,900j)EntryRoad$451,000$451,000$451,000k)Trails,Pathways&ServiceAreas$516,100$516,1005516,100l)CompostingArea528,100528,100$28,100m)Livestockholdingpen$25,000$25,000$25,000n)Utilities5728,700$728,7005728,700o)MaintenanceStorageShop/Caretaker$171,700$171,700$171,700ConstructionEstimate$14,653,400$1,957,800$8,284,500$4,192,300$218,800$14,653,400SubTotal$16,913,189$3,495,286$8,741,228$4,449,342$227,333$16,913,189PublicFacilitiesAdministration(6%)$1,014,791$209,717$524,474$266,961$13,640$1,014,791DesignandConstructionEstimate$17,927,980$3,705,003$9,265,701$4,716,3035240,973$17,927,980Inflation@ConsumersPriceindex$144,495$722,7255551,807$37,59251,456,619TotalPhasedProjectDesign&ConstructionCosts$3,849,499$9,988,426$5,268,110$278,565519,384,599BudgetAmount$18,000,000$3,900,000$10,000,000$5,300,000$300,000$19,500,000 WashingtonStateHorseParkSiteDevelopmentEstimate15-Sep-06LapsleyItemUnitsLengthWidthAmt$/UnitUnit$GSFCost/sfCostCleaning&GrubbingSF†,0001,6801,680,00030.065105,840Clearing&GrubbingRoadsSF3,1003093,00050.06$5,859RemoveOrganicMaterialTons30$37.50$1,1250$1,125RemoveStumpsEA300$161.00$48,3000$48,300RemoveSoilCY1,0001.68055,556$5.63$312,5001,680,000$312,500RelocateSoilCT2003002,2229.38$20,83360,000$20,833StormDrainSystemJob1$400,000$400,0000$400,000RoadBallastRockTons1,37513.12$18,0410$18,041ParkingLotBallastRockTons12,833$13.12$168,3780$168.378E×hibitorParkingBallastRockTons60025,667$13.12$336,756$336,756ExhibitorsParkingLot5/8"-Tons60012,833$13.97$179,286$179,286GradingSF1,019,000$0.048$49,306$49,306UtilityRoadClearing/GrubbingSF3,100205062,000$0.06$3,720RemovalOrganicMaterialSF3,1002010$0.00$062,000$0.06$3,720Remove&RelocateSoilTons3,100201,8949.38$17,76062,000$17,760CompactingUtilityRoadSF3,1002062,000$0.056$3,441GradingSF3,1002062,000$0.048$3,000UtilityRoadBaseRockTons3,100201,89413.12$24,85662,000$24,866UtilityRoad5/8-Tons3,100201,26313.97$17,64462,000$17.644SubTotal51,720,366ContractorsOverhead12.0%$206,444ContractorsProfit10.0%$172,037SubTotal$2,098,847DesignContingency20.0%$419,769ConstructionContingency0.0%$052,518,616Total$2,519,000MaterialTakeoffLengthWidthThicknessCUFTCYKFactorTonsSF/GradeRemoveSoil10001500121,500,00055,5561.6591,667RoadBallastRock3,00024636,0001,3331.652,20072,000PavedParkingBallastRock300150622,5008331.651,37545,000ExhibitorParkingBallastRock1,4006006420,00015,5561.6525,667840,000 ExhibitorParking5/8"-1,4006003210,0007,7781.6512,833UtilityRoadClearing/Grubbing3,10020631,0001,1481.651,894UtilityRoadBallastRock3,10020631,0001,1481.651,89462,000UtilityRoad5/8"-3,10020420,6677651.651,263Total1,019.000I WashingtonStateHorseParkConceptEstimateCoveredArenaApr-04LapsleyPage1of2ItemAmtUnitUnitPriceTotalUnitTotalRaterotalLaboLineCostHrHrCostFieldSurvey(CornersElv)1.00jbSO48$156.00$1,248$1,248Excavation10,000cy$5.63$56,250050$56,250FoundationForms4,000If$3.78$15,1200.24960527.00$25,920$41,040FoundationRebar9.00Tons$500.00$4,50016144$27.00$3,888$8,388FoundationConcrete1,300cy$78.23$101,69500$27.00$0$101,695FoundationConcreteFinish1,300cy$78.23$101,6950.25325$27.00$8,775$110,470FlatVVorkForms600If$2.60$1,5600.0954$O$1,560FlatWorkRebar7.00Tons$500.00$3,50016112$27.00$3,024$6,524FlatWorkConcrete150sf$0.75$1130$05113FlatWorkConcreteFinish1,500sf$0.75$1,1250050.00$0$1,125BackFitiClassified9,000cy$5.63$50,6250.00327$27.00$729$51,354BackFillBaseRock1,300cy$13.12$17,0560.0033.9$27.00$105$17,162BackFill5/8"1,300cy$5.63$7,3130.0339527.00$1,053$8,366Structure64,000sf.$7.25$464,0000.148960$27.00$241,920$705,920Crane(20T,60'Boom)1Wk$8,000.00$8,0004040$35.00$1,40059,400Sand900Tons$13.72$12,3480.0545$27.00$1,215$13,563ShreddedRubbermix60,000sf50.25$15,0000.000318$27.00$486$15,486HighBayLighting160ea-$150.00$24,0001160$37.50$6,000$30,000ElectricalRoughIn64,000sf50.80$51,200050551,200FireAlarmSystem64,000sf$0.15$9,6000SO59,600FireSuppressionSystem'4,000sf$3.00$12,000050512,000PlumbingRoughIn60ea$120.00$7,2003180$37.50$6,750$13,950Lavatories16ea$200.00$3,2002.540$37.50$1,500$4,700Urinals6ea$225.00$1,3502.515$37.50$563$1,913Sinks16ea$110.00$1,7602.540$37.50$1,500$3,260WashingtonStateHorseParkConceptEstimateCoveredArenaAug-06 WashingtonStateHorseParkWarmUpArenaAug-06LapsleyItemUnitsAMTLengthWidthGSFCost/UnitTotalUnitS)Cost/sf\Cost5/8"MinusTons33420015030,000$13.97$4,66834.666PorousAsphaltwithpolymeratSF20015030,000$1.70$51,000$51,000GradingSF20015030,000$0.048$1,452$1,452CompactionSF20015030,000$0.05$1,500$1,500FootingMaterial6"CY556200150$13.72$7,622$7,622Nikeadditive20015030,000$0.25$7,500$7,500SprinklerSystemEA1$2,000.00$2,000$2,000FencingLF900$12.00$10,800$10,800OutdoorLightingEA2$4,000.0058,00058,000$94,540ContractorsOverhead12.0%11,345ContractorsProfit10.0%$9,454TotalContractorBid$115,339DesignContingency20.0%$23,068ConstructionContingency0.0%$0ConstructionEstimate$138,407$138,500 WashingtonStateHorseParkExhibitorsBarnsPost&Beamhousing50stallswithWaterandLightingAug-06Plus4stailsforbedtingorfeedstorageLapsleyItemUnitsLengthWidthAmt$lUnitUnit$GSFCost/sf)Cost5/8"minus(6")Tons41040304$0.00$0CompactionSF4104016,400$0.056$910ConcreteSF3983615914,328$77.50$12,338FormsSF3983614,328$0.06$860FinishSF3983614,328$0.75$10,746CoveredAreaSF3483612,528$11.00$137,808ParkingCurbsLF800$4.00$3,200ParkingLightingEA12$3,000.00$36,000MainPowerPanelEA1$8,000.00$8,000ParkingConnectionsEA25$800.00$20,000Lighting/Power/FireSF3483612,528$2.50$31,320StallsEA121254$4,676.00$252,504$252,504WaterEA8$300.00$2,400$2.400iSubTotal3515,176ContractorsOverhead12.0%$61,821ContractorsProfit10.0%$51,518ContractorsBid$628,514DesignContingency20.0%$125,703Contingency0.0%50358555.7$754,217$754,300$395,744CheckNumberCostperSFwithoutStalls12,528$32400Stallsin50stallsperunitUnitsUnitPrice8$754,300$6,034,400 WashingtonStateHorseParkEntryRoadAug-06ItemUnitsLengthWidthAmt$/UnitUnit$GSFCost/sfCost5/8"CrushedRockTons3,000261,040$13.97$14,52978,000$14,529CompactionSF3,0002678,000$0.056$4,329PavingSF3,0002472,000$2.00$144,000CurbsLF6,00016,000$12.00$72,000SignsEA1$1,200.00$1,2000$1,200FencingIf6,000$12.00$72,000572,000$308,058ContractorsOverhead12.0%$36,967ContractorsProfit10.0%30,806ContractorsBid$375,831DesignContingency20.0%$75,166Contingency0.0%SOConstructionEstimate$450,997Roundup$451,000MaterialTakeoffLengthWidthThickmCUFTCYKFactorTonsFinalGrading/3/4-3,00026319,5007221.441,040 WashingtonStateHorseParkConceptEstimateContingency&PermitS27-Aug-06LapsleyContingencyBaseYear1Year2Year3Year4Year5Year6Year7Year8Year9DesignContingency20.0%ConstructionContingency0.0%ConsumersPriceIndex3.9%7.8%11.7%15.6%19.5%23.4%27.3%31.2%35.1%Permits3.9%OfConstructionCosts WashingtonStateHorseParkConceptExtimateMaterialData27-Aug-06LapsleyMaterialCostinstalled$@PlantTrans.$CYTons$perTonTotal$PerTonPerTruckPerTruckPerTruckTonInstall$PerTon21/2"BallastRock$10.75$8.001521.6$11.12$2,00$13.125/8"CrushedRock$11.60$8.001521.6$11.97$2.00$13.97FootingMaterial70%Sand30%Clay$11.35$8.001521.6$11.72$2.00$13,72PorousAsphaltwithpolymeradditive$1.70perSFNikeAdditive$0.25PerSFRemovalofTopSoilUnitsAmountLoads/HrYds/hr$/hr$lCYE×cavator(Track-supportto10440$150.00$3.75DumpTruckYd10440$75.00$1.88Total$5.63ReplaceTopSoilExcavator(Track-supportto10440$150.00$3.75DumpTruckYd10440$75.00$1.88SpreadTopSoilYd10440$150.00$3.75Total$9.38RemoveandReplaceSoilRemovalofOrganicMaterialUnitsAmountLoads/HrYds/hr$/TonExcavator(Track-supporttoYd10330DumpTruckYd10330DisposalTon21363$37.50TotalConcrete5DeliveredTrans.$Yds/TruckMaterial$Total$$/ydPerCYPerTruckDeliveredConcrete5sack$77.50$8.0011852.5$860.50$78.23