Water Board June 15, 2020


We’d like to call the June 15 2020 Longmont Water Board. Meeting to order Tammy, could you please start with a roll call?

You type. I’ll start with board members. Todd Williams chair.

Renee Davis, Vice Chair.

Board member john Caldwell. Present.

BOARD MEMBER Kathy Peterson

and board member Roger lane.

Oh, go ahead, Jim.

Okay. For city staff. We have a staff member can Houston prison.

staff member Nelson Tipton Rosen,

staff member les West Lowery, resident

staff member Kevin Bowden

and staff member francy Jaffe and staff member Jason Elkins present and then for our council liaison, council member Marsha Martin

antastic. Thank you.

Thanks, Tammy. All right, the next item is a reminder the public. Anyone wishing to speak during public invited to be heard item six on the agenda will need to watch the livestream of the meeting. instructions for how to call in to provide comment will be given during the meeting and displayed on the screen at the appropriate time during the meeting. Comments are limited to three minutes per person and each speaker will be asked to state their name and address for the record prior to proceeding with their comments. item four on the agenda is approval of the previous month’s minutes as the board had a chance to review the Meeting Minutes. Is there any comments?

I don’t hear any. If there’s no comments, I need a motion to approve the February 24 2020. Meeting Minutes.

I move to approve.

We have a motion. Is there a second?


Caldwell. Okay. We have a motion in a second. Further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor say aye.


Those opposed say nay.

Okay. Looks like passes unanimously.

All right, the next item is the water status report. Is that Nelson or Wes? Who’s going to give that?

Yes, I’ll I’ll present that information to the board. So the flow at lions 115 this afternoon was 391 CFS, the 124 year, year average flow on this date is approximately 585. CFS and that’s very close to our peak. oil price reservoir is currently full and spilling. And we’re releasing approximately 170 CFS. All local reservoirs are full or nearly full. The peak runoff lines occurred on June Fourth, with a peak of 557 CFS, or normal peak would occur generally around June 12. Union reservoir is full at 28 feet or 12,768 acre feet and we’re releasing 11 and a half CFS. The call on the same brain is a supply ditch with an admin Number of 10378 and a priority date of may 31 1878. The column the main stem of the South Platte is harmony ditch with an admin of 17290 and a priority date of November 20 1885. At the end of May local storage was approximately 86% full, are currently at approximately 95% full. So essentially all reservoirs are full or near full as they want to be. And that’s about all I’ve got on the water status report. Unless there’s some questions.

there any questions for West on the water status report?

Is it

Go ahead, john. I’m sorry, john.

Any thoughts about why peaks early this year?

This year year has been very non traditional not expected we we started to think we were going to see flows over 600 CFS, and for some reason they just dropped, then we thought, and so we’ve been, we’ve been reacting at button rock releases, according to what we were seeing and also what we were historically finding. And so I’ve been in constant communication with the water Commissioner. And we’re all kind of perplexed as to why it was such a yahner of a run off this year. We had good snowpack above average. And all indications were that we were going to have a fairly substantial runoff. We had hot weather there earlier at 90 degrees plus, which would have normally led to some higher flows. But firstly, reason they just didn’t come out that way. And so this year has been like none other that I’ve experienced, at least in the nearly 28 years with water resources. And so I think the ground was just taking a lot of that water before it was a crewing back to the stream. I think that was part of it. We’ve kind of seen a little bit of a resurgence in flow since last this weekend. I think that was a compliment of these higher temperatures. I think we’re scheduled to get about mid 90s. Tomorrow and 90 on Wednesday, so I don’t I think we’ll probably see another little bump in flows. But I do believe our peak that we saw on the fourth at 585 was probably going to still remain our big.

Vernay, go ahead.

Um, yeah, so I have a question and it’s not so much about water supply, but it’s water demand. Are you guys seeing anything Different with the COVID situation.

So similar to the stream run off

when it got hot there earlier in May, the plants seen a fairly high peak, daily peak, we would normally be running at that time around, say 20 or 22 Mgd. And we were going between 26 to 28 million gallons a day. But within a week, it went back to normal and says, and since then the flow rates have been near normal or below normal. So we’re not I’m not 100% sure, the cause of it. But that’s, that’s what we’ve been seeing is below normal or just barely at normal.

flows it at the plants.

So the reason I bring this up is at Denver water, we’ve got a some ami, some rapid need be meters distributed in like multifamily and commercial and all of that. And so we’re monitoring our situation. And then of course, we’ve got the monthly data and we’re seeing residential is like, humming along it like 20% above normal. And then commercial is way down. And I was just wondering if you guys are overall is up though. Like the residential being is such enough of a mix, even in Denver, that it being high is enough to offset commercial being reduced with everything shut down. And I just wanted to share that nugget with you guys. Because it could be a big water year.

Yeah, well, and we’ll talk a little bit about our water demand and when we do our water supply and drought management plan, but so far, it’s it’s been about average about what we’ve been expecting, but every time I think I’ve got an idea what’s gonna happen. It’s definitely changed. So we’ll find out in July if my story is still true.

Right, or, you know, the weather could change and everything changes, but just thought I’d share that too.

Thank you.

Thanks, Renee. Anyone else? Kathy? Roger, any comments, questions? Well, okay. Thank you. So next item is the public invited to be heard and special presentations. So I’m going to go ahead and read this little statement here. For any public wishing to speak for public invited to be heard, please call in now, carefully.

Excuse me. We’re having problems with the live stream. It is not connecting for me. So this is sort of a moot point at this point in the in the meeting. If I do get it running. I will let staff know and perhaps offer another opportunity toward the end of the meeting, if that’s all right.

That’s fine. We can just postpone the public to be heard. And until I hear back from you, thank you. Okay, that’s fine. All right. So if we move on to item seven agenda revisions and submission of documents. Can you guys have any additional items or revisions?

I have none.

Okay, so item eight is development activity. We have two items that I think they both need recommendations by the board to Council for approval. Is it Wes or Nelson, we’re going to go over those or

I’ll review those with the board. And if I can take

singularly or take them both together, however you all prefer, but let me share that information. The first one was Sugar Mill paired homes final plat. That’s a 17.43 acre parcel. The historic water rights were transferred at time of annexation. And after the application of the historic water rights, there’s left a remaining deficit of 50.739 acre feet. Sugar Mill parent homes final plat is being developed for 112 paired homes, and we’ve had some preliminary discussions that they may be looking at doing cash in lieu for that, but that’s not been decided for sure. The other item in front of in front of the board today is springs and Longmont final plat, that’s a 25.703 acre parcel. It’s located south of highway 119 and east of county line road. Historic water rights were transferred and after application of those historical water rights. Left are remaining 68.602 acre foot raw water deficit. That particular development is being developed for 212 unit multi families.

And they two are

thinking that they’re going to do cash in lieu and to give the board a sense if both of those developments come through with cash in lieu under its current rate of $17,683 an acre foot, those would add up to $2,110,000, approximately. So we might get a surge of cash in lieu. But that will be to be determined. And that’s all I have on those unless there’s questions on either of those.

Or any questions for Wes on the two developments?

If not, why don’t we take them one at a time. We’ll need a motion to the council for approval? The first one is the sugar mill pear homes final plat. Is there a motion to recommend that the water requirement for council approval?

at some

Okay, so we got a motion we’ll say Roger motion, john. seconded. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor say aye. Aye.


Those opposed say nay.

All right, it carries. Why don’t we go ahead and do the second one which is springs at Longmont final plat once again, I need a motion for recommending the water calculation to the city council for approval.

I move that we recommend that for approval. Okay, we have a motion is there a second?

I’ll second.

Okay, rename as motion. Kathy with a second. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor say aye.



Okay, carries. Okay.

Let me see. So the next item that we’ve got is under general business and is the city of Longmont 2020, water supply and drought management plan. Wes looks like you’re on a roll here.

All right. So what’s included in the packet is the same information that came to the board and their information, informational packet prior. I we did not update this is what you have, but the overall recommendation is the same. So I’m going to go through and hit some of the highlights if you want to talk about any of the details, let me know but I think all the information in there is relatively clear. Back in back last year in 2019, we were in a sustainable conservation level drought response. We remain there to date. Last year, our total water supply available was 22,709 acre feet and our demand was 15,356 acre feet. In our typically the board would have reviewed this back in April or May, and we would have had some snowpack information there is none updated. That snowpack is it’s already basically ran out.

we’ve, we’ve got

just as a reminder, and I’m just going to cover the sustainable conservation level pieces if we want to talk about level one, two or three We can. But the the description of drought supply response for a sustainable conservation level speaks to looking at the storage volume and Ralph price reservoir. Again, as I reported earlier today, we are full and spilling. And that’s what we were projecting to have happen no later than July 15 of this year. The second criteria was that the raw water supply availability projection for the current mixed water year was at a level of greater than 135%. And you would see that when this was when this plan was produced, it was at 150%. And it’s actually slightly higher than that now. So we’ve met those two criteria that would keep it in the sustainable conservation level. I want to jump to kind of our tables. There’s a table a and a table. B are we kind of detail some of the specific items the in that table, we had a CPT quota declaration of 70%. As I understand, the board northern board is considering increasing that another 10% which furthers our water supply available, but at the 70%. Our current direct flow water rights are yielding approximately 7300 acre feet, or 1929 transfer decrees are projected to yield at around 1300 acre feet. Our pipeline decrease at 1800 acre feet are transferred, reservoir storage decrease it’s basically Pleasant Valley reservoir is a little over 1100 acres. feet, we have about 4200 of reservoir storage available for leases that would be out of button rock transfer water rights, we had just over 12,000 acre feet again, that would go up an additional little over 1000 acre feet if the board issues that ad, if and when they issue that additional 10% quota taking it to 80%. We show our protected our projected carryover between years. That’s what we do each year we like to carry over the maximum amount of CBT to put us in the best position possible for the following year. So we try to reserve if possible 2800 acre feet for that. And then we have approximately 1000 acre feet for water rental and leases. So our total projected water availability are available, excuse me, is 24,000 acre feet. And right now, our demand is projected to be 16,119 acre feet. And so that’s kind of the table a details, the table B details. Again, if you were to look at that, I believe it’s page 27 of your packet. The we were projecting to be full on July 15. And we’re there and we have full intentions of remaining there, which puts us in that sustainable conservation level which asks it to be greater than 90%. So there’s really not a lot to say other than we’re in a good position. We’ve got our reservoirs full, we’ve got a robust CVT amount of trans basin water available for us, and the water demand is looking to be average, so far, if it even if it goes above average, I think given that we’re probably I’m guessing closer to 155% of supply the demand. And knowing that we need to be within 135%. I think we’ve got a lot to be able to give and to still be able to remain at a conservation level status. And so that would be staffs recommendation, or planning to take this to waterboard in July. I believe it’s July 10. And to City Council for their acceptance. So what we’re looking for hear from you, from you all today is to accept the draw plan as presented and recommend that we pass this on to city council.

Thank you. Was there any questions for Wes on the presentation? I can make just a couple of comments. So that 10% quota that way Wes was talking about did get approved last week. So that will be about 1000 acre feet of additional CVT water available. Maybe a couple other nodes they are they’re cut on the border on whether or not they think the CVT system is going to fill or I should say spill are not. And that’s depending on whose forecast you want to believe in. I think most are still suggesting they’ll spill but it’ll be relatively small amounts. But with that came the decision that they’re not going to pump when the gap this year so there will not be any yield specific to the windy gap project for this year, given the all the storage is full. So just a couple of notes there. If there’s no other comments is was recommended, or suggested we need a approval of the drought management plan and a recommendation to the city council of a sustainable drought Conservation level. Is there a board member that would make that motion?

So move.

Okay. We have a motion all well. All right, john, second. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor say aye aye. Aye. Opposed say nay.

Great motion carries.

All right, so we’re on the item 10 which is items from staff. The first item is 10 a water smart water and energy efficient grant funding update. francy I think you’re gonna handle that.

Yeah, so the the board last September provided a letter of support for application for the the US Bureau of Reclamation, water smart, matching grants for applying for funding for the Amr transition. Mr. meters, the city did receive that grant funding, but I believe primarily due. I’m guessing they didn’t say specifically why I’m guessing it is probably related to COVID. But the USPS greatly delayed. So even though we received notification that we received the award a couple of months ago, we will not have our next steps meeting until October.

But just wanted to thank the board for their letter of support.

Thank you, Francine. Is there any questions on that?

Wonderful, thank you for that update. Franti appreciate it.

So item 10. b is the water resource engineering projects update. Jason, are you going to handle this one? Yes, sir.

So I just want to let the board know that. We, as of today, we’ve issued notice to proceed to see no water solutions for the extra Point installation for the South St. Varian pipeline. As I mentioned before, we’re currently doing the rehabilitation project on the south st rain pipeline. And there’s some stretches in there that are like 2000 feet long, and they can only jet and vacuum within like a 500 foot reach. So this phase of the project there’ll be constructing temporary and permanent access entry points typically consists of installing a type of vault which is a fancy way saying a man manhole. So I’m Wish you the notice to proceed and they should get the vaults on order. Hopefully they’ll have those the next six weeks and we’ll be installing them in the coming months. We’re still on schedule to have the South San Fran pipeline rehabilitated in service by the end of this year. Currently, it is on schedule and on budget. A new development is the st drain pipeline pump station project. Prior to this meeting, it was just kind of a concept just kind of a, an idea that we had. And it’s now been greenlit for the FEMA pap funding that we have. That path funding is on the order of 800 to $900,000. And so we’ve decided to make this project a priority for that pat funding. And the project is estimated to be around $3 million, which I know is a lot, but we’re going to defund some other lower priority projects in order to fund this one. One of the main reasons we really like this project is it really does complement ourselves st brain pipeline rehab project. The goal is to be able to pump water from the Sasame brain pipeline into the North st brain pipeline. This will be extremely beneficial, especially in the wintertime, when we’re trying to use some of our senior water rights. Not having to convey that water into the Highland ditch and deal with icing and debris. So anyway, we’re hoping to have this project completed. It has to be completed by the end of next year. But we suspect that the majority of the project is going to be planning and permitting land acquisition, the actual construction of the project should be no more than a month. So any questions on that?

Any questions for Jason?

I actually have one, Jason.

So it looks like you’ve got what 2.1 2.2 million in funding that you’ll be moving around to fund that project. Is that right? That’s correct. And it

won’t just come up of water resource projects. There’s other water utilities and other other CIPS Probably be defunded as well.

Okay. And I guess I asked I know, one of the concerns on the winning affirming side is, you know, what the ultimate cost is and whether or not you know, there’s if the cost goes up on that, you’d be in a similar situation where you’d have to potentially move funding around. So I don’t know, is there still, I mean, there’s still kind of quote unquote, optional projects out there that could and I don’t know, can you maybe give us an update on the latest when you get firming project costs, but I know that’s a concern of the council’s so just want to be aware of it or what flexibility we have within the budget?

Yeah, absolutely. So the the goal of defunding other projects to fund this one would be with the intent so that we don’t have to reduce our budget or when you get participation just because of this project. And so we’re meeting with Becky Doyle, partner, Grant And Dale Rademacher later this week, so that we can discuss which projects on that list that we could potentially defund for this year and next year and push those out two to three years. For example, we have about $600,000 next year budgeted for the upper North line access improvements. That is a priority project. But there’s, that would be something that we could push out to three years, there’s no immediate need to make those improvements just yet. And so by freeing up money from smaller projects like that, we’ll be able to make up that difference of around $2 million. We’re also going to do some value engineering of installing two pumps, potentially just installed one pump with the ability to add a second pump at a later time. So there’s gonna be some, you know, some some careful consideration as to how we’re going to do But it is our intent not to have to decrease our participation level just because of this one project.

Thank you. And then whether you go one pump or two, you’d still have enough expenditure on the city side to get the eight to 900,000. In federal funding, is that right?

Yes, that’s correct.

Okay. Thank you. Any other questions on on that for Jason?

Okay, my question was the same.

Okay. Great. Thanks for now. All right. So the next item that we’ve got is the windy gap forming project update can

Yeah, go ahead and cover that. A couple of areas I wanted to cover. The first is the legal aspects of the project. Still haven’t heard anything on the federal cases so that

it’s on

kind of perpetual hold. We hope hope to hear someday So on the state

water rights Finally, no.

It’s looking better all the time. All of the objectors have now settled, we got Selma stipulation with everybody that opened up, basically the arena to draft up and submit the final decree. As in any water rights case, the final the final form of the decree is fairly closely scrutinized as well. And so currently, the other participants in this water, the state water rights case, are reviewing that and we’re hoping that that is getting very, very close. So that’ll be a major victory. That’s really almost any time soon, we hope that we’ll be moving forward. One other related item is the connectivity channel around windy gap reservoir on the Colorado River

that actually has

reached 30% design this last month, which was is kind of one of the initial go milestones. What once we reached the 30% design, the proposal is for this particular project is to get a design build firm. And so the next step for that project is getting a design build team together. So northern staff are putting together a request for question qualifications and proposal to get that design build team that helps that helps in the design process is a pretty specialized activity that’s going to go on to build that conductivity channel. So be very helpful to have a contractor on board as that goes forward. Related item is that there’s been a formal request put into extend the deadline for so part of the funding for the connectivity channel, a large part of the funding is coming from the natural resources contract Conservation Service. So used to be CFCs, soil conservation, the federal government, and that has a deadline to be completed, and it’s gonna be really hard to meet that deadline. And so, for a number of reasons, is felt that that might be able to be extended for a year. So hopefully so that’s going to be a formal request that’s put in on that. Then jumping back to the actual windy gap firming project, as you’re aware, the contractor, Bernard construction is on board and they’re actually working. They’re doing some site prep and some cleaning and grubbing. But mostly they’re working on projects. submittals. So far we’ve got about 100 projects submittals and done and approved ready ready to acquire material and only 25% ago, so about three fourths away through the projects and middle process. It’s a pretty extended and lengthy part of of a large project like that. I’m still continuing to try to work with wapa on the power of relocation through the site. I totally understand it. But they’re saying, you know, they can’t move forward until after the federal lawsuit even though the federal lawsuit has nothing to do with relocation of the power line. They feel that there’s enough of a Nexus to the power line relocation with the project, that they are the whop is uncomfortable and moving that power line and tell after that federal case. So I get that I understand that and actually, if for some reason the project couldn’t go forward, then we wouldn’t need a power line removed anyway. So unfortunately, that will be difficult because that’ll be in the way of moving forward with the project once we do get the federal lawsuit taken care of and are ready to move forward. Larimer County has asked the project to all just refresh the intergovernmental agreement for the chimney hollow construction site. Larimer County chose or decided they did not need a 1041 permit for that site because essentially what happened in that 10 441 permitting process had already been worked out. And prior with the participants and Larimer County, of course, Larimer County is anxious to get the project done. So they can open their Blue Mountain recreation area, open space area. So but they’re asking to refresh that IGA just to reflect any changes that have occurred in the last four or five years since that

has has gone forward.

Probably the biggest thing that’s happening right now Well, it’s not the biggest thing but at some the most significant thing I waterboard needs to know is that Since about last February, January, February, we’ve been working on the form of an allotment contract that all of the project participants will find more, you know, when it actually comes down once we get a permit once we’re ready to kick off the project once we’re ready to start the financing, we’ll have a lot in that contract, a final allotment contract. We’ve been doing an interim allotment contract since then, that allotment contract is actually coming along pretty good and is close to is probably, you know, well more than 50. probably close to 75%. Done. We have additional it got obviously, similar with everything else in COVID. It got slowed down a little bit, last month, month and a half, but it is getting kicked back up again. And we really expect to see that this summer. As such, I’m not sure it’ll be July, but it may very well be. We’ll be bringing a draft copy of that allotment contract in for waterboard to to, to review and possibly starting to initiate the final project participation, details, capacity, financing, and those kind of issues. So I’m not sure I won’t promise that it’ll happen in July. But I believe it might actually start in July we’re getting, we’re kind of getting that close. Getting much closer on the alignment contract. And once that happens, then, you know, it’ll be a fairly quick Well, it won’t be real quick, but it’ll work. We’ll need to start quickly on that alignment. And so we’ll want waterboard well well versed on that before. We actually come to you and ask you To make a final recommendation on that final allotment contract. So I think that’s all good news and things things are progressing well. So that’s all I have right now. So I’d be happy to open it up if there any questions.

there any questions for Ken?

I don’t see any. Okay. Thank you for the update, Kim.

All right, so next item is 11 is items from the board, the review of major project listings and items tentatively scheduled for future board meetings. And I guess 13 kind of relates to that. We have the cash in lieu that will be revisited in July. Is that right can

Yeah, that’s correct. We just didn’t quite get all the data this month but we should be ready next month to do

that. But I guess along those lines, I have not heard Any changes to the budget for the windy get firming project? Is that correct? Just since we missed the last cash in lieu date?

That is correct. We do not have any additional.

And we probably won’t have any real revisions on that. Unless we miss. We’ve obviously missed April. project start date in the bidding process. There were two start dates one in April one in fall. Certainly we’re hopeful that the federal case will get down and then we’ll be able to meet that fall deadline. That would be kind of the next critical thing. If that doesn’t happen. Then we’ll be negotiating with a contractor for a new bid price and that then would adjust that when the gap project estimate

Is there any other from the rest of the board? Any other questions, comments on future? There’s a listing in the packet of water project status report. Any other questions, comments from the board? Okay, hearing none, the next item is the informational items and waterboard correspondence. Does any of the board have anything?

If not, I do.

The let me get my notes here.

I just I don’t know if everybody’s aware, but this is john Caldwell’s last waterboard meeting. He was term limited. And I just wanted to personally say thank you to john. He’s been he’s given he’s been a wealth of knowledge. He’s given a lot of his time. And I was looking at the waterboard little write up in the best I configure is he’s been involved on the water board or liaison to the water board from the City Council for almost 40 years. I just think it’s a testament to, you know, the civic duty he’s felt and the amount of time and effort he’s put forth to the city. So I just personally want to say thank you. I talked to Ken and I’d like to and I ran it by john, I think he’s okay with it is, if we can figure out a proper social distancing way to do a reception. To say thank you for all the time and effort you’ve spent. JOHN, we’d sure like to do it. So I think Ken and staff are going to work on that. I’ll be in touch with the rest of the waterboard as we get hopefully some details on that. But I just want to say thank you, john. It’s been a pleasure to work with you and I just I really admire the work that you’ve done for the city. Thank you.

Well, it’s, you know, it’s been a real I don’t Joy’s the right word, but I, you know, I think I’ve learned I’ve gotten more than I’d given, put it that way and starting with, you know, learning. The waterboard is like 15 years old. 616 years old. 16 years after the Home Rule charter when I got on the board and

taught grandfather and

melt Nelson and Larry Flanders were the ones that really taught me a lot. And Jim scindia was the staff person at that point. And

you know, there’s been a lot of water under the bridge.

Since then, and I just want to thank everybody on the city staff, starting, like Jim said, Ian and Pete Moore and now, Dale and kin, and Nelson and Wes and Kevin like to thank them for everything they’ve done, and Tammy and the secretaries have been been with the water board. And also the the, the the chair such as Dennis and Dennis was chair for a long time. And then john Bruning and now,

Todd, so

thank you very much. It’s really been.

It’s been a real privilege for me to be able to be on the water board. So thank you very much.

Thanks, john.

Is there anything else that any of the board members have for the good of the order? If not, do I need to check back Tammy, do we need to revisit the public invited to be heard? Is that possibility? Or are we If not, I think we’re ready to adjourn the meeting.

Chair I was not able to recover that opportunities. So and my apologies to the board and city staff I also failed to present Wess presentation. So I was in the midst of trying to get the stream up. So now you do not need to do the invited public invited to be heard. You are welcome to adjourn.

Wonderful. Well, thank you all and thank you, john, for all your your service over the years.

Have a good day, everyone. Thanks, john. Thanks.

Transcribed by https://otter.ai