Water Board Meeting October 19, 2020

For a transcript of the meeting, please read below:

Meeting Transcription Disclaimer:

Note: The following is the output of transcribing from a video recording. Although the transcription, which was done with software, is largely accurate, in some cases it is incomplete or inaccurate due to inaudible passages or [software] transcription errors. It is posted as an aid to understanding the proceedings at the meeting, but should not be treated as an authoritative record.
To listen to the meeting alongside a transcript, please visit:


I’ll go ahead and call the water board meeting for October 19 2020. To order Heather, can you do the roll call?

Sure Todd Williams. Here. Alison Gould here. Kathy Peterson. Here. Scott Horwich. Here.

Roger laying your

can use in your Nelson Tipton. Your West Lowery, Kevin Bowden, here. Heather MacIntyre is here. francy Jaffe here

and price Hadley

and David Bell is coming in. And Councilmember Martin.

No, I saw are you shooting? There she is. Okay. All right. With that the next item is approval of the September 21 2020. Water Board meeting minutes. Does everybody had a chance to review those any questions, comments? If not, we need a motion to approve those.


we have a motion by Roger. Is there a second? Second? Okay, Alison seconding. That further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed. Okay. Next item item four is the water status report. What else are you doing?

I do have that. So the flow the same brand at lions gauge at ADM today was 10 CFS with 124 years storvik average of 36 CFS for this date. The call in the same vein Creek is the James ditch admin 8756 with a priority date of June 2 1868. And the call on the main stem is the South Platte River it on for the South Platte River is Pruitt inlet canal. an admin number of 31,423.29219 and its priority date is January 13 1936. real price reservoir button rock is currently spilling. And we are releasing 10 CFS union reservoirs at 23.7 feet or down approximately 3000 acre feet.

And that’s all I have. Unless there’s some questions.

Any questions for Wes on the water status report?

I don’t hear any Thank you Wes.

item five is public invited to be heard and special presentations. Heather if I understand right there’s no public invited to be heard today. Is that correct?

That is correct.

Okay, and then can let me know under special presentations. I think we’re gonna hear from price the the new Ranger for the button rock Preserve. Is that right? Ken?

That’s correct. I’d like to introduce price Hadley, our new senior watershed Ranger up at button rock price comes to us from the Aspen area Pitkin county where he was the lead supervisory Ranger for the for their Ranger open space program in that area. So but prior to that it actually worked. You’re in Boulder County on the front range here. So yes, both local experience and some excellent experience where it comes from. So price if you don’t mind, just give us a quick rundown on on.

Introduce yourself.

Again. Good afternoon, everybody. As Ken said, I came here from six years working as a ranger up in Pitkin county where the county seats Aspen, it gave me a really good insight into kind of public safety and natural resources. I’ve got a formal background in natural resources a master’s degree in public land management. Previously when I lived in the Boulder County area including in Lyons I work for city of Boulder open space, it trails work and basis species pest control, trail work work with youth outdoors so really excited to be coming full circle and back closer to family and working with a great water team here and

welcome price. I don’t know if you’re gonna do somewhere else. But can you give us an idea, I guess with regards to the fires that the Cal wood and I know chimney parks maybe hopefully further to the north of you there but maybe just what’s happening or what you’re seeing in terms of fire activity in there. Yeah.

Yeah, luckily, things are fairly calm here button rock. miles Churchill myself have been sticking close to the preserve since the fire started came in on the weekend violence was here. We closed the preserve on Saturday to the public that closures extended indefinitely due to the fires to our south and north. Currently on the kellwood fire. The fire crews are working from Calvin Education Center clockwise around the northern flank of the kellwood fire really working through all that incredibly steep topography along the south same vein Canyon to keep that fire from crossing highway seven. It sounded like the there was some new fire or not new fire activity but most active area of the fire today was to the right of that mouse icon on that would be east of button rock along the northern perimeter right about where you’re pointing. The precipitation and humidity that we got yesterday kept the fire growth of Kelud fire pretty negligible. However, they’re reporting high winds above 9000 feet so the unlimited aerial operations today although we anticipate working with them to support water drops from Ralph price as soon as they’re able to really get airborne again, I’ve heard some helicopters and fixed wing air traffic today but pretty limited. So all those all that news is good. So we’re continue to keep our eyes out. We’re staying in close contact with all the residents on a daily basis. there’s currently no mandatory evac order or evac warning for Longmont Damschroder CRA at button rock area. But we’re keeping close tabs on that keeping the closure, the trail system intact, and just being ready to support the firefighting efforts in any way that we can.

Thank You price. One other question. Jason, gave us a report last month that there was some work that was going to go on with regards to the outlet. Was that is that been done? Or what’s the schedule for that work?

So can can touch on this too, I’m sure but there is work to be done on the regulatory gate, which is the on the button rock dam. That project is an understanding that’s currently under delay while they wait to assess the fire danger to see if the Cameron peak fire crosses 34 or the CAL FIRE crosses highway seven. But yeah, the work needs to be done on the regulatory gate on the button rock dam and it’s still waiting for the situation to stabilize.

Todd, the contractor main contractor has been engaged external with their sub as a ms, which is a firm that does some big, large dam outlet work. We actually have a pre construction meeting scheduled for Wednesday with prior to Saturday’s fire, was scheduled to mobilize early to mid week next week. So we’ll reassess on Wednesdays. If the Cal wood fire hasn’t jumped highway seven, it probably means they’re starting to get a handle on it. Plus, with wetter and colder weather coming in this weekend. If it doesn’t jump highway seven, we probably be okay by the weekend. So we’ll reassess that both Wednesday and at the end of the week.

Thanks, Kim. Does the board have any other questions for pricer for can? I don’t hear anything. Okay. We’ll go ahead and keep moving. Next item is agenda revisions and submission of documents. Everybody should have received an email this morning with three documents. One was the bonus ditch draft water court application. And then there were two items related to the windy gap firming project memo and then an updated a lot in a contract with proposed changes. I assume everybody got that if he might didn’t can they speak up? Okay, it looks like we have that was there anything else can in terms of revisions or submission of documents?

That was it. It was just those three submittals

Okay, and we’ll go over those when we get to the right part of the agenda here. I think item seven is the development activity. I doesn’t look like there is any of that correct, Wes?

Yes, that’s correct. There is none for this month, but I do anticipating having some for the board to review next month.

Okay. Thank you. Item eight is general business as the 2021 Legend’s legislative guiding water principles, Nelson.

Yeah, I thought I’ll go ahead. And so give a background for for Allison and Scott. So each year prior to the start of the legislation, session, staff, staff, go ahead, they we take the guiding water principles for staff and city council and water board uses to kind of go over and kind of guide us on when new legislation bill bills are, are brought forward. And so we take a look at those principles, and they help us kind of make some decisions on on what the what how to vote towards that. towards that bill. So, we’ve brought them we haven’t made any changes the last several years to them. So I’ve talked to Sandy cedar system, city manager, and she still plans on taking the all of the city let’s legislation principles, along with the guiding principles and December of 2020. So that’s about time she does it each year. So we just kind of talked through if you guys have any questions on them, or any changes, like I said, we haven’t changed them for several years now. So um,

all kind of bad.

Okay. Does anybody have any? I know, Allison, and Scott, these are new for you. Are there any kind of questions, comments, you or any of the other waterboard has with regards to the proposed water principles?

So so what we do is waterboard didn’t give the recommendation to city council and then seek out to reduce them and, and approves them are moving forward or whatever they would like to do with them.

So Nelson, do you want a motion formally adopting these and recommending them to?

Yes, we got some lunch in each year?

That’s correct. Okay. Okay. Sounds good. I’ll open it up for any kind of questions, discussion? And if not, then we need a motion to recommend the proposed cutting water principles to the city council.

Thought I had a quick question, Nelson, maybe you can answer but does long line. Have a vote? And does it participate in the state affairs committee at water Congress? Um,

can do we have a vote? I’m not sure what our position is. But can

so we’re not a man, we’re not a voting member of the state at first. No, thanks.

It may be just a little more background is we get into the when legislation is actually proposed, those bills that are water related will actually come to the board. And we can talk about those individually. I think what you know, the obviously the principles do is kind of help to highlight any items that maybe should be discussed by the board. And then if any of them are inconsistent with the guiding principles, that is one of the items we’ll talk about, and maybe recommend to the Council of, you know, if we want to oppose a bill or monitor a bill, that sort of thing. So you know, that they’ll still be some feedback coming back for I guess, Scott Nelson’s benefit, there’ll be feedback coming back as the list legislation is proposed, but trying to get the groundwork laid before we get into the legislative season. So

and in one comment, when a lot of times you read those bills, and they, you know, someone can get real wordy, so then it’s good to it’s good. A lot of times that that I do when I take a look at the initial bills, when we’re seeing it there will impact our water supply or our citizens, then I’ll reference those guiding water principles and see if there’s any of those key words. And those bills that are in our principles and kind of help me help guide that way. But yeah, Scott armena. Todd, you’re correct that we we go ahead and bring those bills of water that we’ve changed a little bit last couple years. It’s been going on to the to the Dale’s leadership team, and then comes to if the bill gets through there for water board’s recommendation to City Council, and those are the bills that we bring forward.

Is that correct? Can

Ken Munich want to weigh in on that?

Um, yes, that’s correct. We we bring it after the leadership team is reviewed it and then balance it against the guiding principles and that that if if we were to go forward for council action, it would be based upon those guiding principles.

Okay. I guess with that being said, once again, are there any questions, comments with regards to the proposed 2021? Cutting water principles?

Um, I have one, Kathy, go

ahead, Kathy.

I just wanted to know, from Nelson or kin, if they see anything that we haven’t addressed in the guiding water principles or that we might want to consider?

Yeah, I do not I, I go through them every time and they’re pretty detailed. They got a lot of they cover a lot of things. So I have not seen any of the last last several years. Anything, Kathy?

Okay. But the question

can if you want to answer that as well?

Yeah, no, we’re very comfortable staff is comfortable with the guiding principles, they, they really originally stemmed out of our water supply principles in our raw water master plan. We were modeled after that after that. So they really

track Well, with the city’s overall

process for acquiring water rights and managing water rights. We do have and protecting them.

Okay. All right. Any other questions of the board? Looking at everybody on the screen? I’m not seeing any hands raised. If not, we need a motion in a second to recommend the guiding water principles for approval by the City Council.


I would move to approve the proposed guiding water principles and sent to the city council.

Okay, we have a motion. Do we have a second?


Okay. We have a motion a second. Any further discussion?

A second from because we had we

I think the tie goes to Roger. Okay.

Anyway, so we have a motion a second. Any further discussion?

Hearing none, all those in favor say aye.



Okay. Motion carries. Thank you. Sure. So next item is a B, which is the bonus ditch change application. Scott, I know you maybe mentioned you need to abstain from the discussion.

Yeah. So for disclosure, the record. The bonus ditch company has historically been as used our firm for counsel while grant was there long time attorney and he’s now retired. And the company came and asked if I could take a look at the city’s submitted application under the bylaws for the ditch company. And our firm undertook that obligation. So we are conflicted with participating here. But I can turn my microphone off and my video off and you guys can can move forward. And I’ll join you back on the other side. if that’s okay with you, Mr. Williams.

Yeah, that’s fine. Thank you for disclosing that, Scott. Okay, with that, let give a second here for Scott to kind of disconnect. There we go. I guess what that can do you want to go ahead and lead us through the change case application?

Yes. Thank you, Todd. So the city of Longmont owns just a little over one half of the shares of the bonus ditch company. Two major areas that we got those shares. One is on some of the city’s open space, sandstone Ranch, in particular, that area out there as well as the golden farm property, which is that property east of our wastewater treatment plant north of Ken prop Boulevard. Those two open space properties got about to a third of our shares. But two thirds of our shares came as part of the annexation of the Erwin Thomas property and that property is immediately east of the left hand Creek where it crosses under kampot Boulevard and immediately south of campus Boulevard. Rich we received about two thirds of our share their 30 for the 100 outstanding shares in the company. So as a result of owning majority interest in the company as well as the need to move those water rights forward for use by the city, it’s standard practice for the city to go into water court and apply for a change of water rights. This particular change case is a little bit different than many of our other change cases, for two reasons. One is the bonus ditch is extremely low. On the creek, it’s pointed diversion is actually east of Main Street. And as a result, for a good portion of the summer, the water supply that meets its decree comes as returned flow from upper ditches, rather than water that comes out of the Virgin water that comes out of the mountains. Secondly, part of its decree is met by left hand Creek. And so that, obviously, we wouldn’t be able to move any of that left hand Creek water up left hand Creek wouldn’t be anywhere to put it for us. So as a result, this change case will not involve an actual change of the water right up to either our water treatment plants or the button rock or any our upper diversion points. In essence, what we’re doing is changing the use of the water from irrigation to primarily augmentation purposes, and will will lead basically leave that water in the same rain Creek at the point of diversion, and receive credit in the stream for that water for that portion of the water that is came from the open space parcels. All of those open space parcels have augmentation requirements from previous gravel mining operations. And so, those shares will be used only for augmentation of those gravel pits, which is basically leaving that water. With that open space purpose. Two thirds of the water will be changed for all augmentation used for the city. Primarily because the city has a fairly significant downstream, augment or downstream return flow. And augmentation requirements primarily return flow from operation of our upper ditches. That allows us to use use all of the historical, diverting historically dirty water and then meet the return flow obligations with something like the bonus ditch water. That part is pretty much standard change case. In addition to changing the use, we will also change the point of diversion from the decreed point of diversion up to what we call the st. Brain Creek pump station number one that diverts water just immediately downstream of Main Street to a pump station that pumps it up into the oligarchy ditch for delivery to Union reservoir. That way any of the excess bonus water that’s in excess of either are returned for LogMeIn obligations are or augmentation requirements from the gravel pits, we then will be able to put that excess water in the Union reservoir store it for delivery in the winter, because some of the augmentation requirements for the gravel pits include delayed return flow obligations in the winter time period from when the irrigation use

return to the stream at a later date. So that allows us to meet those wintertime return full obligations, so that we believe that’s going to work very well for us. And we’re fairly confident that we have a you know, a good case and good good records, we’ll be able to move forward with that case. However, as part of that case, there’s two things we’re doing one is there will be times when there’s either a free river or there the call on the South Platte River, which is downstream of this point, we won’t have to worry about the call on the same rain above us because this waters below basically all the ditches in the in the base and other than about last chance and hayseed are about the only ditches blas but the South Platte is below us. So if that call on the South Platte is junior to this case, then we’ll be able to appropriate those return flows that historically hit the stream and we’ll be able to move them into union reservoir and store them for later in the winter when almost almost all the way too long. There’s at least some call on them. Platte River, because they have so many reservoirs out there to fill. The second thing we need to do is actually move that water up the same rain Creek from the current pointed version to the new point of diversion for the same brain Creek pump station. So that’s called an appropriative, right of exchange, or appropriating the right to exchange water up to that point. So both of those are new appropriations. And whenever you go in to appropriate a water, right, you have to do an overt action and prove the intent to appropriate the water. For a typical water user, or at least in the past, what you did, you went out and you put a sign on the side of the river or you started digging a ditch. In the municipal world, it’s a little different. Really, the courts have held that to form that intent to appropriate the water, it really takes an action of your legislative body, and in our case is the city council. And they take action by passing a resolution authorizing staff to appropriate that water. In essence, staff can’t just say, we want to property, the water and file and water cart for a new appropriation. So this is fairly standard for new appropriations, we actually don’t do a lot of new appropriations, probably maybe once every 10 years is all we do it. But when we do it, we need to take this action formally with counsel. So what we wanted to do today was present that scenario to the waterboard, and allow waterboard to make a recommendation, what we’re asking for is a recommendation to city council to approve a resolution, authorizing staff to file for two new appropriations for the bonus ditch as part of our bonus ditch change application. And we’d be happy to answer any questions you have about either the change case or the process will follow going to city council.

Okay, thank you can Roger Yeah, it looks like you have a question.

What what’s the what are the downsides of this change from the users of the forest ditch people? I mean, is there much negativity along with our moves? I’m just kind of curious.

Um, there really isn’t obviously, because the other shareholders have an interest in the company. They’re gonna watch the case real closely. And they did. What is the sensible thing to do, they had their board, you know, engage their own legal counsel to look at our application. This is actually the second. This will be the second change case for the bonus ditch, the same rate and lefthand water Conservancy district previously changed. I believe it was just one share of the company. But they did do a change case, which set

some of those standard

standards for bringing a change case on the bonus ditch Ford, they did a they did a change case, it was specific to the share they owned, and the location they took it from. So our engineering report will be slightly different from theirs. But the numbers come out pretty similar. In reality, the other shareholders, Boulder County owns almost the rest of the shares. And they have no interest in changing their shares because their shares on open space and their open space. Regulations don’t allow them to move water off their open space. So they’ll they’ll not be changing their shares. Now we do own 16 and a half shares jointly with the same Boulder County on open space where we’re either we own open space or its own jointly. And then the county has an inherent writing that so far those joint shares on the county will be there, their half interest or their undivided interest. And those shares will be changed. And so they’ll they’re kind of a joint applicant. We’ve been working with the county since about January, working out any issues we have with them, and they actually just did sign a consent form to consent to this change. So that helps a lot that that indicates their acceptance of the project moving forward. There are four other minority shareholders have like a half a share each and they are actually on the bottom end of the ditch. They just have small you know, five acres tracks that they irrigate their lawn with. All four have indicated no concerns with the change case, I have one of those four have actually already signed a consent form to include their shares. It’s actually a benefit, if you include your shares if you’re a minority shareholder, because then all it does is add an additional legal use to them, it doesn’t take away any rights, they have to irrigate with it. And it can’t be used unless they give permission to use that. So one of the four I already have a consent form, two of the four have indicated they intend to send me a form, they just got to get it notarized. And the fourth one is looking at it and they say, well, we’ll never attics or never do anything. We’re not sure we want to do it, but they they understood what we’re doing, and have expressed no objection or concern about it. So we believe we’ve received at least either overt action from an consent forms from all the other shareholders or at least an expression of no concern about it. So it we do believe it or move forward fairly easily.

Thank you,

Ellison. Go ahead.

Thank you can ask, Is there a katlin approval required in any of the bylaws.

The bonus ditch, ditch bylaws require approval by the company, board of directors for a change. And we did actually go to their board this last month. And the board of directors Well, we actually asked them to call a full stockholders meeting to make sure the stockholders could give input to the board at the same time, as we were presenting our case. So they had a special stockholder meeting. And their stockholders did not express concern. And so the board did go ahead and approve our

change application.

Second question, if I may, are there any any intermeeting water rights on the exchange reach?

There, there are no currently no intervening water rights. Actually, it only innervating water right as a city along much recreational in channel diversion, for which is goes right through this section. So during those periods where we want that flow, we’d be able to leave it in and take credit, we’d really only move it up during the spring runoff, when there’s more flow for us. Frost, it’s actually a little bit more interest for most of the air to keep it in the stream and keep our our Greenway going well and receive the credit, but there are no intervening water rights. And so really, the property right of exchange would most likely not even not, not be, you know, come into play unless somebody tries to move water up above us and through our reach. So we’d have both this property exchange as well as the Ric D to protect us in that scenario.

So I apologize, I haven’t looked at the application in detail is a resin but one of the uses that specifically applied for


we didn’t explicitly include our recipt filing for this. However, if, if we’re, if we’re getting credit, if we’re planning on taking credit down below, this is just below our risk of filing. So if we’re taking credit below it, I think not only would this case protect us our risk would but help pull that water down to the point of diversion where we want credit for it. So I think they’ll work in tandem. Yes.

And it’s augmentation, one of the uses that’s been cleaned.

I’m sorry, I didn’t catch Alan augmentation. Your augmentation is, is really our primary. Use the word changer use the word applying for

okay. So in that case, you could just include it in the

as an exchange source potentially.

Yeah, yeah. And, and one of the things this will do for us is there are augmentation credits, even below, around the sandstone ranch reach that some of the shares came off that sandstone region. And so it’ll be meeting those existing augmentation requirements, that we’re actually meeting with other water rights. And that will free up those water rights to better facilitate delivery of water to some of our agricultural water users on our open space. Then, of course, the second thing is it really helps us out with making sure that Flow remains in our green way, which is a benefit for that dual benefit.

Thank you. Thank you.

It can Oh, got one question. In the map that you guys sent out, there’s a St. Green Creek comm station number two, you mentioned the number one, what would be in that same brain Creek pump station? Number two is a basically an intersection of the same brain river and highway 119. How would that fit in the kind of your future plans? And I believe that’s a future pump station to be constructed. Is that right?

That is correct. Yeah, we have both the same rain Creek pump station number one which we have constructed and have used and are using. And then saving Creek pump station number two is to be built. It was located on the same rain Creek just as it goes underneath highway 119 by the del camino area. That pump station would then go into a pipeline that pumps up to Union reservoir that does a number of things. There’s more water, of course down below the confluence of Boulder Creek and same vein Creek. Also, all of the water rights that are on the irrigation has returned flows. As well as this water that we deliver down, once it hits that point is appropriate double. And so we get appropriated. But also we could leave this water, rather than take it out of the pump station number one, once that one’s constructed, we could leave it in the stream for a greater reach of the stream and to get it through more of our Greenway and then be able to pull it down below where it’s had the opportunity to to benefit our Greenway, the lower half of our Greenway, as well as supply the pump station number two, that’s a project that’s probably years and years out yet, but we want we always included in all of our filings and just just so when it does happen, we don’t ever have to go back.

Okay, that makes sense. Um, Kathy, did you have any questions, comments on those?

No, I’m just trying to make my dog Be quiet.

That sounds good. All right. If there’s no other questions, comments, we need a recommendation to the city council of approving a resolution for the change case.

Someone someone want to make that motion.

I’ll make it. Alright. Roger makes the motion is there a second? Ellison is doing the second on this one. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed, okay. Motion carries. So that resolution will be provided to the city council for approval to in advance of the water change case application or in advance of it. So it’s it’s 340. Right now, I mentioned before the meeting got going. I actually have an obligation this afternoon. And as you get into the windy gap firming project update in the lotman contract. I think now’s a good time for me to kind of step out. I’m going to let Kathy run the meeting. So I can hopefully make my son’s football game yet this afternoon. So anyway, with that, I’m going to turn it over to Kathy and I think Scott will join back in and Anyway, we’ll go from there. So thank you guys.

Okay, I can their game.

Thanks, Todd, baby. Okay, so you guys.

Okay, so I think that we are at the items from staff when you get firming project update. And I think that’s on you can

thank you very much. By Sure. Yeah, two things I wanted to do. One is just give you a quick update on the Wendy got firming project.

We actually got

possibly good news on the federal lawsuit today. The judge sent out a order, I guess I call it an order request. I think you’d call it an order to all of the participants in the lawsuit, who in their motions and in their filings referenced any part of the Federal record of the project, asked them to send a electronic version of an excerpt of that part of the record that they’re referencing in their arguments or the motions to the court, which at least tells us that The judges looking at the case. You know, it has been, it was a year, last July, when the final motion motions were made, final evidence taken. And then pretty much radio silence for a year and three months now. And so it’s it’s good news that at least that much is happening. The judge did give a short turnaround time to provide that information, the end of October, which is a little surprising, which is good news. Because if the judge gets that information, it’s certainly hopeful that by the end of the year, we might actually have a ruling on that case. If that means the judge is looking at it and trying to put together a decree. So that is good news. As far as the project itself, the project did get a cost estimate from the contractor, as you may remember, Barnard construction of Missoula, Montana, or Bozeman, Montana, is the contractor for the for the job, they have been working about a year now on on submittals, and design of the coffer dam and getting getting some side grabbing done and a few other projects, moving people in such that when the federal lawsuit is finally settled, we’ll be able to start construction immediately. But because their original bid for construction, had had a latest start date of the end of October, did have to get a new number from them. For construction, if we can start by the next spring, basically, about a six month extension, that was about a four and a half million dollar addition. so short, short answer, it runs thrown at us about a million dollars a month to to wait out the federal lawsuit. But that’s not a real significant increase in, you know, on a 480 $500 million project with with contingencies and engineering about $600 million. So it sounds like that sounds like big dollars, but but it’s a very reasonable amount that gets us buys us that contract and that contractor and everything will stay on track for the next six months. As far as some of the mitigation, one of the biggest projects is the conductivity channel around the windy gap reservoir on the Colorado River on the west slope that has been bid out. And it’s actually a design build. So they did a 30% design. And then they bid out the actual remainder of the design, the final design and construction.

And the firm by the name of concrete structures got the final bid, they’ll actually be the general contractor. And I don’t have who their engineer is honestly but they’re there they actually we started draining a windy gap reservoir on the Colorado River. on Labor Day, it’s now down to essentially Dead Pool so that they can do the geotechnical investigations, where the dam will actually be reconstructed out away from the railroad tracks leaving a path wide enough for the construction of a connectivity channel. And so all of that is going well. Again, there’s a little bit of money that still needs to be had to put together the total project. But we’re very close on that. So that’s that’s going well. And then getting back to the final allotment contract as the board may recall, we came to you in September with the allotment contract for review and you recommended city council accept that final allotment contract and pass a resolution approving and directing the city to sign into it. Since that time, there have been a couple of minor changes on the allotment contract and I don’t need any waterboard apps. On this unless one of the water board members feels that the changes are substantive changes that that you feel either Catholics after or need changed. So I’m going to share my screen and walk through the changes in the alarma contract. Really, honestly, the the city along modders there’s two ways of a participant funding, you can either give cash to the project, which is what the city is will be doing, or you can participate in some pooled financing. The changes were actually for the benefit of the pooled financing folks. And so it doesn’t apply to Longmont. So that’s why we, you know, we did feel they were not substantive to Longmont, but I’d still like to share my screen. I’ll just run through them real quick. It hopefully won’t take me too long. But, but I’d like to highlight them real quick. So, let me try to share my screen here. And

there we go. Does everybody have that?

I I do everybody okay.

Okay. So, the first change in the in the agreement was in Section 5.7, which is amendments, which allows the future amendment of this agreement without having to do a completely new agreement. As you can see, it requires 75% of the lot ease so that that protects long protects a lot ease that leaves a little window open for joint times when all the allottees feel amendments necessary. The change in this section is the bottom part here, which basically there was a concern. So some project participants will bring cash and will participate, participate in the pool financing. And some may want to do all pooled financing, but may decide later to bring some cash. So there is concerned that since this contract, like right now, it says loan amount will bring all cash, it says other entities will bring all will be all pooled financing. This allows minor modifications to the payment in this case is long months of contract. So it says an amendment to the payment. If we were decide we wanted to participate in the pooled financing to allow us to do that, upon giving notice without having to adjust the contract. So unlikely that we do that. But there’s there’s that possibility, then, let me go down


6.4. On 6.41. We simply Longmont is utility enterprise. And it’s the agreement simply says that we weren’t aware of utility enterprise, which we are. So that’s a that’s a fairly easy one. And then that was really all of the amendments that that pertain to Longmont.

So but I will go on down here to

there’s a couple of re citations to Section 8.18 I

think oops.

There we go. Sorry about that. Um, 8.18 is a brand new section for the loan allottees. Again, it won’t apply to long, Matt, but a number of the loan allottees after they got to looking at the cost for doing a 30 year note decided they wanted to do a 20 year note. The problem was that some of the lacis didn’t have the money to do a 30 year note. So they had to craft language in the agreement that allowed participants to basically have what was essentially a 20 year note, but that would get paid off over 30 years. So that there was never a question of whether at the end of the 20 years, are they still on the hook for payment of the bonds out to the end of the 30 years? That became a little bit of a wordsmithing exercise with the bonding companies. Mostly because when that when this language is reviewed by somebody who might want to buy these bonds, they’re comfortable that they have the assurance that everybody that’s taking a bond out, is on the hook work to pay that bond off. Essentially what well, what we have in the for the pool financing is that the pooled financing participants have a step up provision that says, if one of the other participants forfeit or don’t make their payments, everybody else will step up to make that payment. They’ll get that capacity, though, they’ll learn that they’ll own that interest. And there’s some pretty stiff penalties for people set, you know, not doing their bonds. But this gives a lot more assurance to the bondholders that everybody in the project will pay. I don’t think there’s really much concerned about that we just got done in 2017 paying off a 30 year note on the parent or indie gap project, not a single payment was missed in any other 30 years by any of the participants. So I would be stunned that anybody would pay off, you know, would like go have a $17,000 an acre foot project when it’s 70,000 to go get CVT. So but you know, the bond you want that that for the bond. So again, that doesn’t apply to Longmont, other than isn’t our agreement. So that’s really all of the changes that we have in the agreement, and why we we feel that they’re really not do subsidy for Longmont, but we wanted to bring it to the board since you had already approved it. And we will be going into council either next, a week from Tuesday on the 27th. Or on November 10, one of those two dates for that final approval. And we wanted to give waterboard an opportunity, if anybody had a concern on any of those changes to let us know. And we do so informed counsel.

Okay, thanks, Ken. Any questions from anybody on the board? about this? I’m not seeing any, so I think we can move on. Thank you. Can I Is there any water resources engineering projects, then?

Well, yes, I’d like to go ahead and do that. For Jason. He’s a little preoccupied right now. In fact, he’s not even in the state. His house is one of the evacuee houses for the camera and peak fire. Fortunately, it’s a voluntary evacuation. He lives north, just a little bit east of Carter lake. And actually on the

over the weekend, the wet

property west of Carter lake was under a mandatory evacuation. And his his was a voluntary evacuation. So you know, that’s a little exciting when it happens to you. But anyway, he would have reported to us today. Three, three projects, we’ve already talked about the button rock outlet repair project. So if there are any further questions on that be happy to answer them to other projects. The South St. Green pipeline, which is the very last of our flood repair projects is is well underway. The main the prime contractors come pleated all their work their sub, basically, we had to have a contractor come in and put additional manholes in the pipeline, because some of the real lengths of the pipeline were too long to be able to be cleaned. So put in some manholes, and now they’re all in and the sub who’s gonna actually come in and jet and clean out the pipe. We’ll be doing that next. And then the prime will then be a prime contractor will then be able to line a couple sections of that pipeline, the pipeline will then be up and new. So that sub is was scheduled to mobilize at the end of this week. I’d be stunned if he gets in the end of this week. Given given that Lyons is under a volyn evacuation, notice. They’re not mandatory, but they’ve been notified well as the fires unlikely to be completely contained, and by the end of the week, but hopefully after some cool weather this weekend, I’m really hopeful it will. So depending on the fires probably early next week, that contractor will be in to work on that. So virtually two of our three contractors are being held up. The final project was the pump station on the south a rain pipeline that Jason has mentioned before. That is we’re getting some funding to build a pump station to pump some of the water from the south saving pipeline in nursing brain pipeline. The contractor was selected for the design engineer for that was selected Burns’s McDonald, engineering consultants, they’ve executed a contract. The kickoff meeting for that design effort is scheduled for the first week of November. So that design should be well underway, and hopefully finished early next year so that we can I do that construction next spring. So that’s all I have on the construction project right now.

Great. Any questions from the board? on that review? Okay, seeing none, I think we can move on. Any items for the board? review a major project listing many things scheduled for future board meetings.


Okay. And

is there any Heather maybe you know, any waterboard correspondence?

Only what was attached in your packet?

Okay, so nothing new. All right. And I see the only thing I see down here for items tentatively scheduled for future board meetings is a cash in lieu review that we do periodically, four times a year and so that will be in December. Okay, any other questions or comments from staff or board? Roger?

Go ahead, Roger.

I, we can’t hear you, Raj.

I’m here. Can you hear me now? Yeah, no. Are you there?

Yes, ma’am. I’m here.

Yeah. What I got a text on the meeting times from five to 7pm. What? What did you originate that about inviting going to attend? I thought it had to do with

our board meeting being shown at a different time, but

no, I haven’t sent any text messages.

Forget I said anything. Okay, history

text. There you go.

All right,

thanks. Okay. Anything else from the board? Doesn’t look like it. Well, guess what? That we’re ready to adjourn, then. Nothing else? No one. So thanks, everybody. And we almost made it for Todd’s early departure, but it was good. I like to hear all your summaries can thank you. Okay,

thank you very much. Thank you.

Bye. Thank you


Transcribed by https://otter.ai