Water Board Meeting – October 18, 2021
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.
Read along below or follow along here: https://otter.ai/u/l_hPHW2oxs4VO-DQRtfOC2AVAsU
Unknown Speaker 0:00
Unknown Speaker 0:01
that’s 15,377 ecfs which is 42. CFS and going to Xcel Energy for deliveries at a gas and reservoir pursuant to our
Unknown Speaker 0:21
union reservoir was down from full approximately 750 acre feet and we’re releasing seven CFS from that reservoir.
Unknown Speaker 0:31
Longmont is trying so the CVT cold water to local storage this time, more specifically in the Pleasant Valley reservoir and union reservoir for future irrigation use, and we plan to still plan to carry over the maximum carryover amount available to us next year or CDT. So that’s all I have any questions for us?
Unknown Speaker 0:54
I do have one less. So if you’re making a free to CFS release for Excel. How does that I mean, typically try to get as much out of the bottom into the system for meeting those obligations. So is it that’s the limiting factor is how much f1 You have is there. I mean, really, the the thought is, is to release as much of the lower system that you can’t treat, but if you’re releasing a button rock that is treatable water, so just kind of curious how that plays out through the season. So we have an agreement that each year we
Unknown Speaker 1:27
trade, Excel for CDT one, and then and then in turn, we provide them for consumable water.
Unknown Speaker 1:36
The XL was asking if they could.
Unknown Speaker 1:41
So normally, they would take a small delivery or daily big per day basis, a couple CFS for
Unknown Speaker 1:50
made the most efficient deliveries, they’re asking for more of the slugging so in a two week period receiving about 1000 acre feet.
Unknown Speaker 1:59
So our sources to be able to satisfy that delivery request falls on either union reservoir or button off.
Unknown Speaker 2:09
Had we taken it out of union and then would have had 1000 acre foot hole and union that we’d have to refill. And it’s very difficult to fill union is it’s an off channel reservoir, button rocks have been on channel, it’s much easier for us to fill in the spring, is we can put a lot of water in there in a short period of time. So the
Unknown Speaker 2:31
point is that, yes, we’re living 42 CFS, we don’t have nowhere near that coming out of the wastewater treatment plant and our effluent. And what is coming out of the wastewater treatment plant as fully considerable, in addition to the small amount that we have, which is about three CFS out of union online must be now going to lease obligations and requirements of long line. So we felt that it’s somebody that to get this 1000 acre feet and make more sense to get out and button off in Union so they can eat more easily and quickly replaced this year in the runoff. So the there’s 1000 acre feet that’s coming from the upper into the system is the balance met by either effluent or non printable sources. Through one one system, I guess I’m trying to understand in terms of the overall water supply, balancing, obviously, there’s water out of the wastewater plant that can’t be treated, you know that you’re getting CBD in return, it’s a net benefit. Whereas if you’re supplying an eight foot button rock that could have been treated, you’re not getting that net benefit to the system. So I’m just trying to understand that. So I guess the bottom line is the trade beyond the 1000 acre feet that you’re releasing that primarily on a wholly consumable f1 or union reservoir those both of those resources. So yeah, those are those are making up the remainder of our requests and deliveries. And then what will likely happen, the start of the new water year in November 1 XL will come back down to something, two or three CFS, and those releases will probably be made up out of the wastewater treatment plant, which will have a higher return flow credit factor so we can use that. And then any adjustments that we need to make for reason.
Unknown Speaker 4:15
If we were in a drought circumstance, and we’re bad probably be that you maybe would make the release out of union in that situation because it depends I mean, we have to teach, there’s several things that we’re considering in the in our operations
Unknown Speaker 4:34
of utilizing all our available sources again, we have
Unknown Speaker 4:40
1000 acre feet would probably take a minimum of a month of filling out the oligarchy. And so depending upon
Unknown Speaker 4:49
Unknown Speaker 4:51
opacity of the dish, that water in addition to the oligarchy shareholders, we have got to keep that into consideration.
Unknown Speaker 5:01
It’s hard for an irrigation ditch that was built for rival seasonally to have to run year round. And so we’re taking that into consideration. But probably the most, the foremost consideration in this instance, is the ability to put in a significant amount of water in a short period of time into buttoned up. So yeah, if you were into a drought, we have to weigh those, we really are utilizing both ends of our system, the lower end and the upper end. But we felt in this case, it made much more sense because the upper end, even with that slightly more transient loss, a new experience. And during a drought, keep in mind, the real gaesco
Unknown Speaker 5:45
limits the maximum out they can request absent, or provision ACFs, which is usually due to rubble water or wastewater treatment. So kind of squeezes,
Unknown Speaker 5:58
requirements open they could be met via always. Exactly. So so in a drought,
Unknown Speaker 6:05
we probably wouldn’t agree to short term 1000 acre release, right? That would
Unknown Speaker 6:14
further deplete unions to
Unknown Speaker 6:17
Unknown Speaker 6:19
either panacea, that’s right.
Unknown Speaker 6:24
What was the reason for the larger question? So XL each year, again, we do we do a trade, they give us a certain amount of CD acre foot amount of CBD. And then we pledge to make available that same. So they can take deliveries of that at their own schedule. And there, it’s part of our agreement and the typical daily maximums, eight CFS, they would like to put water into Jackson reservoir so that they can have it available for their use later on. But if they take it in slowly happened small amounts over a long period of time, you just don’t realize that water in the reservoir, it’s a long ways down and you lose it through the conveyance of the transfer loss and so forth. So it’s much it’s much more beneficial for them to get a slug. So they can realize a greater percentage of that water is our obligation to deliver the water stops at the the outfall union reservoir. So without sandstone Ranch, they they shoulder the burden of any losses from there down to where they take the Jackson reservoir. And so it’s kind of just a, everybody tries to position to the best that they can forecast of getting water wondering whether or not you’re going to come into priority or not. And there’s a lot of things that are involved in essentially this make more efficient use of the water that they’re entitled to. And then they do that on an annual basis. So normally, they normally they haven’t taken a big slug, occasionally they have normally they would wait. And you know, they would wait until November, sometimes January. And then they would say okay, I want you to start releasing this, for example, five CFS for the next three months. And then we will do that. So in a way, what this might do, time will tell is that by taking the slide, they may choose not to take any in the month of November and December perhaps. And in so doing there, it may actually result in Longmont. DeLong was benefit because we wouldn’t have those commitments to deliver the water. during the wintertime there’s there has been occasion where they haven’t taken their full amount. So they just request how much they want. And we make it available to them. And so
Unknown Speaker 8:37
I believe that this might be one of those circumstances where it is a burden. And instability would be along with this interest is so close part of the reason they’re one at this site because there was no call earlier in the season. So they didn’t need as much and then they’re left with this on the balance sheet and then turned around into Jacksonville. I believe that’s that’s a part of it. I I really didn’t have a discussion as to why they wanted it other than to say they wanted to try to make arrangements. And I guess in that regard in the run up to Jackson, they have it available, it may reduce the amount that they want to do on the trade this upcoming next year. It’s very well. Hey,
Unknown Speaker 9:13
thanks for humoring me. I understand that. Any other questions are only real a little bit there. Alright, thank you. We’re on Item five, which is public invited beard and special presentation. Yes, from St. brim, and Water Conservancy District.
Unknown Speaker 9:31
All right. You can look me or I have a few slides. Here to give you guys an update on the stream management plan and 70,000 initiative. I’m Scott dribbling I’m with the district I just started about six months ago. So if anything I’d say is historically inaccurate, please feel free to jump in and
Unknown Speaker 9:54
get all the details from sound and all of that. So if you can go to the next slide, please.
Unknown Speaker 9:59
So some quick
Unknown Speaker 10:00
history, the district was created back in the 70s, to develop some large reservoirs, particularly poppin. Top. And that was right towards the end of the era of big dams. And that was pretty fiercely opposed. And so it never got built. And the districts had to kind of find something else two other ways to contribute to the basin and decided to develop an augmentation program. And that is still in existence today. And in the floods of 2013, is really when, at least from what I understand the the way that the basin interacted on water really took on a very a much more collaborative effort everyone has worked together during the flood recovery. And really strong partnerships were built during that time, strong collaborative partnerships. And from that came the screen management planning process. So in 2015, that started, the district led the stream management plan, and from that plan have developed a series of basic like goals that everybody agreed to all the stakeholders and collaborators agreed to. And it also identified the need for additional funding to achieve some of those goals. And that’s that birth to $70 initiative, and passed, passed in 2020. With thanks to everyone support this, he was certainly a strong supporter of that. So we all get to celebrate that win. And now it’s time to get to work. So if you can go to the next slide.
Unknown Speaker 11:38
With that, the question is, you know, how are we as the District going about implementing that work. And a quick reminder of the four goals and four basic goals that came out of the stream and a plan of very easy water quality, there’s a flow goal, water management and a habitat goal. And those
Unknown Speaker 11:59
all were critical elements that were identified in that plan. And the district took those and made them relatable to more relatable to the voters and in the way that we phrase them for the seven eight ballot initiatives. I think of the next slide, please. There’s some language that was in the seven a ballot initiative. And it identifies some very similar goals. So water quality, healthy rivers and streams, safeguarding, conserving drinking water supplies for both communities, as well as food production, and also protecting forests. So identifying that we need to keep our watersheds healthy in that regard.
Unknown Speaker 12:42
And, you know, there’s 68% of the voters voted yes. So this was very, very popular within the district. And it was very encouraging to see the level of support that water received from from everyone in the district. You go to the next slide, please. So what we have done is taken kind of combined those s&p goals with what was stated in the stream in the seven $8 initiative to develop and combine that a little bit with some of the district’s own priorities to develop this five point plan. This is really what we are using to guide our implementation of the seven a ballot initiative.
Unknown Speaker 13:26
It’s an interconnected plan. So all of these points, as I’m sure you guys are all well aware water connects all aspects of life. But this work really goes hand in hand. So water quality relates to maintaining healthy rivers and creeks and also relates to having good water, drinking water supplies, and that connects the storage as well as food production.
Unknown Speaker 13:50
I’ll highlight a couple specific projects. If your next slide please. You’ll see that storage is still on there. So going back to the district’s original creation to develop reservoirs. But rather than big on Channel reservoirs, we’re looking at a slightly different approach. So looking at what we’re liking to call Creek improvement facilities, which is a kind of a concept that I that recognizes that we want to develop storage for multipurpose storage projects for a variety of benefits. So storage for the sake of storage and in dry years, but also storage that can help enhance modes for recreation, and the environment. Some of the types of storage buckets that we’re looking at are existing structures. We have existing structures, expanding existing structures. We’re also looking at potential new storage and it’s almost I think it’s 100% off channel with this.
Unknown Speaker 14:52
And we are just in a start kind of high level feasibility stage of identifying good spots to pursue
Unknown Speaker 15:00
And to look at to look into further detail.
Unknown Speaker 15:05
And next slide, please.
Unknown Speaker 15:07
So another big project that we’ve been
Unknown Speaker 15:13
contributing the funding to and also participating in as wildfire mitigation and pretreatment. And I’ve highlighted maintaining healthy rivers and creeks. But this really touches a lot of aspects of those types of plans. watershed health is critical, kind of all aspects of water quality and our ability to get drinking water and also some extent on growing, growing food in agriculture and all that with having good clean water sources available to us some of what we have been doing, and we’ve been working with the left hand water system, and also
Unknown Speaker 15:49
the Longmont and Boulder Valley Conservation Districts on both mitigation efforts for the Kalvin fires. So doing some mulching and seeding supporting some of that work, in addition to pretreatment. So developing
Unknown Speaker 16:06
education and outreach for the public and also strategizing to see how can we best maintain our forests to best protect our watersheds.
Unknown Speaker 16:17
There are a bunch of other things that we are looking at that we have some we have been started this past year, and other things we’re looking at. excited to jump into
Unknown Speaker 16:28
2022 and beyond, we’re out stream gauging. And instrumentation is certainly something that came up during the stream management planning process. And it’s very much in the districts, we will have some of the implementing smart stream gauges, soil health, working with local agriculture and supporting soil health tests to improve growers knowledge of their of their soil health and how they can increase both their yields and decrease their inputs.
Unknown Speaker 16:59
Flow targets. So looking at how can we best manage our flows in the integrated fashion and focus primarily on some key dry spots.
Unknown Speaker 17:09
And then also passage projects we’ve been working in the city has been working hand in hand on several of those. And we’ve been trying to support kind of the overarching approach that when we look at when we talk about passage projects of this passage, seven pass $1 that haven’t been how can we position ourselves to have that be a ditch coping driven, rather than
Unknown Speaker 17:32
externally driven in a project being brought to it? It’s completely ditched companies themselves really? Trading?
Unknown Speaker 17:40
That’s all they have. Great. Be happy to take questions if you guys have anything else.
Unknown Speaker 17:46
Unknown Speaker 17:50
I’ve got one, in terms of the kind of Forest Hill. Yeah, and one of the issues that comes up is public versus private lands. Yeah. Like you’re trying to partner with other entities that public lands in particular via fonts. Because a lot of times that’s the majority of the land yet. You may only be able to accessory programs on private, just you can get into that. Yeah. So we’ve been working with that St. Bryan, and the same thing, forest health partnership, and it is they’re doing work on both public and private lands. And my understanding is they do have federal and state partners on board and that
Unknown Speaker 18:33
one, Scott, yeah.
Unknown Speaker 18:38
Scott, Scott, yes. Sorry.
Unknown Speaker 18:46
Unknown Speaker 18:48
Question. I mean, it’s a big deal to get new storage in Colorado. Yeah. Let me look what we just went through with the chimney haul reservoir. And it was a big deal a few years ago to allow homeowners to have rain barrels.
Unknown Speaker 19:04
So when you say moderate size, local storage, what does he What do you have to go through to get that approved? That’s a great question. And we and that’s part of the are looking at
Unknown Speaker 19:19
opportunities that don’t have a very onerous permitting process, if there’s any way that we can kind of thread that needle to find opportunities that we can increase existing structures or we have existing structures or, you know, pull together with other entities and look at possibilities of where it can start to expand. So
Unknown Speaker 19:41
so there are there there are possibilities. Yes. For sure things exactly. Yeah. And we are we’re just started that process.
Unknown Speaker 19:52
I mean, just put a finer point on that. I mean, we’re talking like gravel pits and and such I mean, like that’s one it
Unknown Speaker 20:00
Do exactly? A little bit more. Exactly.
Unknown Speaker 20:05
Yeah, then, you know, we had kind of done some
Unknown Speaker 20:09
Google Earth map exercises where we looked at the whole basin and say, you know, what are working with Mark complaining or not on this and using, they’ve got a great depth of knowledge. And so saying, from your guys perspective, as well as other, some of our board members of people in the community, Dr. Ken, a little bit about this, you know, where are opportunities in your guys’s mind for mental storage, and then as we develop a very large list a lot of things, although they quickly we can start focusing on a few key spots.
Unknown Speaker 20:48
Do you have a question?
Unknown Speaker 20:53
Yeah, so the stream has been identified some critical habitat or some critical stream reaches, and one of them was the lions, the Longmont where they dried up at several points during the year and there’s also some
Unknown Speaker 21:08
endangered fish species. So looking at ways to support flows through there, to both adding water to the creek and also looking at if we can re operate things if we can kind of get find ways to to bring rock water through that reach that benefits everybody so that we can collaboratively work to minimize the amount of dry at time. That’s one example. And more broadly looking at ways of either increasing flows November or again, we operate in Is it possible to benefit things like Kayak, so when there’s water events in line, like that, you can have fun that flows a little bit. There’s key times for fish spawning season for rainbows and browns and stuff like that, if you can reach those those times. And how are you exploring those alternatives?
Unknown Speaker 22:02
Yes, yes. So we are just on a started that as well.
Unknown Speaker 22:07
But working with experts, so working with this experts, and then also recreation to say, in an ideal scenario, what would the species benefit from and kind of building on top of that, and seeing, okay, taking that and looking at what’s reasonable and possible and kind of merging those two is that is the idea of least we’ll see where it ends up.
Unknown Speaker 22:31
And as far as measuring devices, are there any locations within this common area that your exam team that really could benefit from additional measurement, the streamers are playing identified several areas that could use additional
Unknown Speaker 22:44
instrumentation and we are also looking beyond that and see if there’s other spots so you guys have spots you guys know the system very well there’s places that would be helpful to have additional gauging please let’s talk about it and
Unknown Speaker 23:00
find for years what I do re operate whole gauging station used to be just downstream of Copeland link or thing right on the bridge. Yeah, okay to bridge the state. Just continue that I understand why they did I wish they hadn’t I still see it there. So
Unknown Speaker 23:26
Unknown Speaker 23:30
but no, there’s a lot of noun here or we operate three operating. No more water isn’t isn’t.
Unknown Speaker 23:38
And that all kind of fits together with the flow targets and
Unknown Speaker 23:42
identifying where storage is most needed and all of that.
Unknown Speaker 23:48
MLS and one of the things that just because I’m primarily though baldness that the district is doing is they’re coming up with a playbook for how to do fish passage.
Unknown Speaker 24:05
Ditch diversion structures,
Unknown Speaker 24:09
we’ve had a couple of put in basically be tried to be polite disaster. And, and because nobody else
Unknown Speaker 24:20
and there is one that just went in there not too long ago that just could have been done better. And so the district has agreed to come up with a playbook.
Unknown Speaker 24:34
Sean Soudan kind of help help. I imagine you’re about to start. And I’m sitting on it for the city
Unknown Speaker 24:46
and county space. So we’re hoping to come up with a document guide them and actually allow them to move forward and start again. So yeah, that’s something there for doing
Unknown Speaker 25:00
Can you talk maybe I should also mention we have been in conversation with the city about possible water conservation efforts. So municipal water conservation. We didn’t.
Unknown Speaker 25:12
We didn’t come up with anything for this year. But we’ve been, we are going to reengage, I’m looking forward to continuing that conversation to see ways that we can partner with you guys as well.
Unknown Speaker 25:25
The gauging is primarily oriented towards flow or also mostly flow. So the left hand watershed centered as is doing a bunch of monitoring, more quality focus monitoring. So we’re partnering, the implementation of the stream management plan is a high level taking a an adaptive management approach is really what the left hand watershed center that the mechanism through which they are wanting to move forward and monitoring and getting more data is certainly key in the successful implementation of the plan. And so identifying that, you know, we there’s several things that we know, and several things that we can start tackling now. But we also need to keep learning and have, have that learning inform future decision making down the road.
Unknown Speaker 26:15
Or other questions.
Unknown Speaker 26:19
What do you next steps and the timeline.
Unknown Speaker 26:23
So we have 70, funding for 10 years. So this is 2021 was the first of the tap. And so we are trying to get as much done as we can. So some of these projects we have kicked off. And the so the creek improvement facility we’ve gone through, we’re wrapping up the kind of high level feasibility and I’m going to start narrowing that list and developing some preliminary designs. And as we swipe projects, you know, start construction as soon as we can with those. The forest health, the wildfire mitigation and pretreatment is happening as we speak, the flow targets that process is kicking off this next year. So a lot of stuff. We started what we could this past year, and we’re kicking off a lot more this next year. So it’s very active. Yes, that answers your question.
Unknown Speaker 27:15
So it is the thought that you’re studying. But if you see opportunities you’re trying to fund and get those moving and
Unknown Speaker 27:23
not waiting for the overall plan. You’re trying to implement what you can. Yes.
Unknown Speaker 27:29
Any other questions?
Unknown Speaker 27:32
Great. Thank you for the presenters. Yeah, thank you guys.
Unknown Speaker 27:38
Head out here unless there’s anything else
Unknown Speaker 27:47
did we have that was under Republic voted to be heard? No. No public invited me or no other presentation. All right, we’re on item six, which is agenda revisions and submission of documents, anything where, you know, I don’t have any revisions. I do have one picture I’m going to show you later in the meeting about whatnot. But other than that
Unknown Speaker 28:15
on the seven and on Windows seven V which is the one month business senator. Yeah, so this is an information item only. But for the Board’s information on my business center, like Jay was a need
Unknown Speaker 28:31
is a 6.147 acre parcel located east of South Orange Street
Unknown Speaker 28:37
Unknown Speaker 28:39
this particular browse portion of online businesses final plat and reviewed by the board back in March, making the nine all historic water rights have been transferred. All of our residents have been satisfied in this prison the
Unknown Speaker 28:55
Unknown Speaker 28:56
to the policy
Unknown Speaker 29:03
and any questions or comments? Is it just information alive? So any questions comments or was on the side?
Unknown Speaker 29:13
Okay, so thanks.
Unknown Speaker 29:17
Blue in. So we’re under a which is the 2022 legislative guiding water principles.
Unknown Speaker 29:25
Yes, thank you.
Unknown Speaker 29:28
We have the Palomar principles for legislative affairs of Oregon isn’t an annual
Unknown Speaker 29:35
review of our guiding water principles, legislative purposes.
Unknown Speaker 29:42
Once they’re approved by waterboard,
Unknown Speaker 29:46
this is just kind of a waterpark legislation. These are combined with other information in the city manager’s office annually takes to city council generally around this
Unknown Speaker 30:00
Summer, this one, they take that to city council. And that basically what it does is guide staff when
Unknown Speaker 30:10
the foreign legislation comes in in January, you know, you can’t take 2000 bills to have
Unknown Speaker 30:19
a look at them. So this gives us the guiding guidance of, you know, kind of what bills should we bring forward? And if we have comments, you know, should they be
Unknown Speaker 30:32
worked out. And so
Unknown Speaker 30:36
we review these for a number of years, so they’re generally pretty good.
Unknown Speaker 30:42
There is one very modern principle that I thought I would bring to your attention. I think when we wrote it years ago, made a lot of sense. But might might consider slightly changing it. And really shouldn’t have these bullets, I should have numbered because I can say, bullet number nine, and it’s another
Unknown Speaker 31:06
two thirds of the way down the very first page, we have one says all Colorado water users must share in solving current water resource problems with costs to meet the water needs of water users being paid solely by those benefiting from the project directly. That made a lot of sense. And so a lot of sense over the years.
Unknown Speaker 31:31
Thinking about that one particular right now, though, we may want to slightly tweak that.
Unknown Speaker 31:37
As you may remember.
Unknown Speaker 31:40
Recently, one of the general elections, there was a bill pack initiative passed to have set up sportsmen
Unknown Speaker 31:52
and turns and and the funding Canada, I’ll call it the taxes in this portion of the state keeps on the sports betting was directed towards
Unknown Speaker 32:07
developing and filtering this state of Colorado is the Colorado water plan.
Unknown Speaker 32:12
And part of the Colorado water plan is developing water supplies for the future.
Unknown Speaker 32:20
A lot of the funding, of course, we’ll go to generally, I think it’ll be used at the state level to generally move color WaterFire forward.
Unknown Speaker 32:30
But I do believe as part of that, there will probably be some
Unknown Speaker 32:37
there will be some grant opportunities for development of projects and other activities that are listed under the Colorado water. So
Unknown Speaker 32:53
it probably makes sense to be keep an eye on that. And so
Unknown Speaker 33:00
I guess if I if I were to do this, I just strike solely off that. I think fine. It says that the water needs to meet the water he’s been paid by those benefiting. But you might take the word solely off because I do believe there is an opportunity for that. Turns out I guess people will call out a bit more on sports than they anticipated. Surely more money coming in on a sports betting I think partially the surrounding states, people fly into dia or they drive into the state W get a cell tower that’s pings off a cell tower in the state of Colorado and they put their bet back on. Like literally some people fly in the DIA places for bat and fly out because you get cheap flights into the I guess from Texas while we’re coming from Texas. So
Unknown Speaker 34:01
for whatever reason, I don’t know that there’s a lot of sports betting going on. So there’s no more money than was anticipated, which is
Unknown Speaker 34:09
Yeah, it is what it is. So but other than that, I think you know, I think these
Unknown Speaker 34:16
are consistent but hopefully
Unknown Speaker 34:18
take a look at it. If you want to change anything or or leaving the same is perfectly fine, too. So So I guess two items we can clock. We agree with fans got a recommendation on that removing solely. And then I guess beyond that if there’s other comments or other items that we would like to either have changed or added to the list. So maybe start with that Is everybody okay with moving solely from the
Unknown Speaker 34:45
board regarding the funding or who’s paying for the project. I also propose that we will start
Unknown Speaker 35:01
Yeah, I kind of agree that that even if solely has missing them still kind of infers that it is kind of slowly so
Unknown Speaker 35:11
that’s good. I think that makes sense, just saying that they have to be part of a funding source.
Unknown Speaker 35:19
But there’s other sources
Unknown Speaker 35:21
that other bots are
Unknown Speaker 35:26
just trying to figure out where the including.
Unknown Speaker 35:40
So agreed, all Colorado water users must share in solving Colorado’s water resource problems with the cost to meet the water needs of water users being paid, including by those benefiting from the project or effort is saying.
Unknown Speaker 35:57
It’s probably more plainly written, but that does the job.
Unknown Speaker 36:06
Everything else? I’ve got one?
Unknown Speaker 36:11
Only one, I guess I see. And I don’t know if it’s me, as mentioned here is we’ve had a lot of discussions regarding forest fires, and either mitigation or prevention measures. And I don’t want to make that a specific bullet.
Unknown Speaker 36:26
That, you know, one month supports
Unknown Speaker 36:31
Unknown Speaker 36:33
and prevention efforts for municipal water supplies, because it’s becoming more and more of a
Unknown Speaker 36:41
hot topic, and I think there’s gonna probably be legislation specific to that. I mean, there hasn’t been any more of it. So just one who’s going through my mind those reason was
Unknown Speaker 36:54
you have anything
Unknown Speaker 36:56
along those lines?
Unknown Speaker 37:00
Unknown Speaker 37:02
not, not specifically, I think I think you infer that from a number of these, but I think,
Unknown Speaker 37:10
you know, very last bullet does say forest fires.
Unknown Speaker 37:14
But that during emergency waters. Yeah. I said some like long lead sports
Unknown Speaker 37:22
legislation to prove for stewardship efforts.
Unknown Speaker 37:26
For for both the forest and the watershed. Yep.
Unknown Speaker 37:33
Unknown Speaker 37:34
Does that statement?
Unknown Speaker 37:37
I think what you’re saying no, I didn’t think it did just because it’s kind of specific, just emergency situations. I guess what I’m thinking of Roger, is, there’s quite a bit of work that needs to be done prior to that. And in terms of force management, and, you know, after the fact, maybe the emergencies gone, but then you’re having to do mitigation. So you’re protecting water quality that way. So I understand that it’s a little broader and Committee be a topic instead of it being included in emergency situation. It kind of stands on its own in terms of those activities.
Unknown Speaker 38:12
That was all I saw.
Unknown Speaker 38:15
Any other questions or comments? Everybody okay with adding them?
Unknown Speaker 38:20
All right. Thank you.
Unknown Speaker 38:22
Do you have what you need? Yes.
Unknown Speaker 38:26
So we’re long low about support for stewardship efforts to protect the forest and sustained watershed from catastrophic events. Very
Unknown Speaker 38:37
simple support those kind of bills? Very.
Unknown Speaker 38:41
Unknown Speaker 38:47
Not just the catastrophic forest fires, but the resulting mudslides and more quality impacts.
Unknown Speaker 39:17
That’s That’s good.
Unknown Speaker 39:22
All right. So we get moving around the, you need
Unknown Speaker 39:28
Unknown Speaker 39:30
Because sending that out. Alright, so those two changes that we’ve talked about, and when is this going to cancel this prediction?
Unknown Speaker 39:41
Generally, it goes in December. So we we might, sometimes we don’t I will probably be right back in November. They bring back in November. The actual language we could go in on
Unknown Speaker 39:56
Sunday, that was timing.
Unknown Speaker 39:58
Unknown Speaker 40:00
So moving on, We’re on Item nine A is the cash new policy review was that was cut. So
Unknown Speaker 40:09
there’s the border recall, we are talking about
Unknown Speaker 40:13
cashless policy, the following City Council’s direction back in July last.
Unknown Speaker 40:22
Last month, we had some input from the city attorney’s office. Since that time, Water Resources staff has had conversations with the city attorney’s office and other departments within the city of Longmont, we
Unknown Speaker 40:37
don’t have anything specific to bring back to you this month, other than to let you know that we’re working on
Unknown Speaker 40:46
some potential language.
Unknown Speaker 40:50
Unknown Speaker 40:53
multiple scenarios for setting the theme. Some of the things we’re working on, though, are coming as a byproduct of those meetings with the staff. We initiated discussions with Northern Water concerning the opportunity to review the way to get from the project firm yield ratio analysis, that’s it’s a pretty, it’s a pretty big deal. This is based in Toronto, but we started now we’re
Unknown Speaker 41:20
working with the Business Environmental Services on various financial policies and their funding mechanisms. So next month, right is being having
Unknown Speaker 41:30
representative there for them to come and give you over to natural resources, if you will want to one on things such as Linda gal, Parent Project, really affirming project tappi collections, and cash in lieu fee fund, Wendy gap specialists, assessments, all those types of things dependent, help you to interact in context, how those things are received, and how they’re applied. I think they’ll be helpful in in, in your overall
Unknown Speaker 42:04
recommendation to city council on this. We’ve,
Unknown Speaker 42:09
we’re working to collect priority gap, Parent Project sales information, we include that in the quarterly for you, you the board asked for that. So we’re going to work on collecting that. And then finally, like I said earlier,
Unknown Speaker 42:27
developing those scenarios to
Unknown Speaker 42:30
help set the fee for cash flow. So probably
Unknown Speaker 42:36
estimating there’ll be three or four different ways that the board might entertain.
Unknown Speaker 42:42
Setting that. And so that information coming in November, and November back, and then hopefully at the end, you’ll be able to make some decisions that can be applied towards our quarterly review.
Unknown Speaker 43:01
Course Questions, comments on that, you know, I, and maybe you got some information from
Unknown Speaker 43:10
as far as looking at different caching costs from other entities. That was one of our members, we had a cache and ruin average northern communities somewhere around $41,000. I was trying to figure out
Unknown Speaker 43:31
specifically, what communities like ours like CourtCall and your level, what are their caching numbers? And
Unknown Speaker 43:42
how do they arrive at something that’s much, much different than
Unknown Speaker 43:48
trying to sync these things together?
Unknown Speaker 43:53
And why they got where they got? Yeah, sure. And actually, that’s a really good point, because I think one of the things that happens, some some of these questions really originate from the other person worldwide, you know, why are they why are they doing this? Why are we doing this? And so, we just just for facts, we did go ahead and pull those numbers for Coleman’s current cash in Lieu is 42,518 and acres, although they expect that to go up to 68,200 on November 2, so that’s that’s quite soon.
Unknown Speaker 44:36
Well, is that 40,150 And really is that 36,500?
Unknown Speaker 44:44
Most of those are primarily because of course they are using
Unknown Speaker 44:52
CBT as part of at least part of all of their
Unknown Speaker 44:58
Unknown Speaker 45:00
caching and comparison. You know, some entities like little Thompson water district doesn’t really have a cache. They just say you got to get CBT. And you know, some of the small world districts. And so, right now CBT is about 60,000 a year, which is about 80,080 bucks. So it’s pretty hot. And really they don’t
Unknown Speaker 45:24
they just pay what you want to tap the lesson. So you got to look at. So that’s pretty high. Fort Collins, I find a little bit interesting, because for years, we were, you know, we have a real color, reasonable Cashman fee. Other cities were around ours. But Fort Collins was always way lower than us way lower way lower. They were $6,500 An acre foot up until the last just not too long ago. And so they were always they were the one that was always underneath us. And I don’t know why they decided to change their policy. I think I’ll try to find that out. But
Unknown Speaker 46:12
really, to go from 6000 to 16,000.
Unknown Speaker 46:15
That’s gonna be a shock.
Unknown Speaker 46:18
Zero, yeah, the
Unknown Speaker 46:23
easiest way to do it.
Unknown Speaker 46:28
Although I caveat a little bit, I don’t generally worry too much about what Fort Collins does, because they don’t serve much of their city with water. They serve about number of citizens, about half of them. They serve the old part of Fort Collins in the middle, all the growth area on the south and all the other areas in the north and northeast, our rural domestics. So, area wise, they only serve about 1/3 of the city of Fort Collins, which is okay. It’s interesting about that situation.
Unknown Speaker 47:01
That’s really scary to me, as water provider,
Unknown Speaker 47:05
because you’re dependent upon road investments for your community. So did you put the numbers on the road?
Unknown Speaker 47:14
I haven’t pulled those yet. I just had time to do these. Actually. I thought that was an excellent question. We got we actually have. It was actually started by the city of Loveland. And I saw from years ago that we have a pretty complete spreadsheet. That is way out of date now. So we’ll update it for the November be welcome, please spreadsheet of all a lot of them, you know, all the way from Boulder, Louisiana, Lafayette, Fort Collins, Greeley,
Unknown Speaker 47:45
number, the Roman Gnostics, their raw water policies, not only what is the how they said it, because everybody’s different. And that’s, that’s one of the things I always caution people is.
Unknown Speaker 47:59
Don’t just compare a number, that doesn’t be any good.
Unknown Speaker 48:03
Well, if I may, because the reason that we brought this in for you guys, is because we were being questioned by the public. And also because as far as the council is concerned,
Unknown Speaker 48:18
this is very closely tied to our growth policy.
Unknown Speaker 48:23
So back in the 90s, and aughts, one would
Unknown Speaker 48:31
wanted to grow and approved a lot of annexations. Because we could and we didn’t want to barriers up to do it. Well, now, we’re about out of annexations that will there are not that many more plants that can be brought in.
Unknown Speaker 48:50
And you have other sources of revenue now, which was much more much less true back in those decades. So there are people who want to discourage amongst growth a lot. And there are people who just want to be careful with long runs growth, and be sure that when we annex some something that we’re doing it for the right reason than not doing it just to be doing it. And I think you will, you may remember that we have
Unknown Speaker 49:24
sent a couple of annexation requests back to the developer or property owners said,
Unknown Speaker 49:33
Nick Longmont doesn’t need this. We would like to annex you, but we want you to come up with a better plan that’s more aligned with the city’s vision.
Unknown Speaker 49:44
And so, if the answer that comes back is Well, alright, we have more risk than we used to have and button rock may be riskier than it used to be. But we’re still
Unknown Speaker 50:00
Don’t get a peg to button rock,
Unknown Speaker 50:02
they’re gonna say, Well, does that take into account all the policy matters that we have before us.
Unknown Speaker 50:12
So I think that, in addition to the pricing, that, you know, comparing to other cities, we should at least we’ll get at the risk that
Unknown Speaker 50:28
button rock is not going to perform the way we expected it to I’m sorry, that was Jimmy Hall. tivity hollow, is not going to perform the way we expect it to. Because, you know, nobody knows right now. And they’re there, you know, all the existing diversions even
Unknown Speaker 50:48
are at risk because of lower basin distress, and we see.
Unknown Speaker 50:55
Unknown Speaker 50:57
I don’t think just a
Unknown Speaker 51:01
financial analysis is going to be sufficient and be prepared, depending on who is reviewing this, because it’s not going to be before November 2, obviously,
Unknown Speaker 51:14
you know, the,
Unknown Speaker 51:17
the way it’s going to be looked at by the Council could be quite different.
Unknown Speaker 51:23
Unknown Speaker 51:29
Unknown Speaker 51:30
there’s a change of the memory talking about because because the policies could change, you know, so just like, just like Boulder, you know, boulders.
Unknown Speaker 51:43
Boulder wanted to be surrounded by open space, but then they resisted changing the land use codes to allow for more urban density. So now they don’t have any place to grow.
Unknown Speaker 51:58
And there is debate going on in the city council, and there will be a debate again, next term to as to well, you know, does one not really want to
Unknown Speaker 52:12
push on on the number of homes and, and meters and so on that we expect to have it built out? Or do we want to keep that the same as it has been in terms of, of your planning.
Unknown Speaker 52:29
And I have honestly, no way of predicting right now, the people running for the large seats in particular are not unknown quantity.
Unknown Speaker 52:40
So I’m going to say,
Unknown Speaker 52:44
be prepared in terms of heavy, heavy weighed
Unknown Speaker 52:49
all those possible factors.
Unknown Speaker 52:54
Unknown Speaker 52:56
look at the numbers, it’s hard not to look at the number. I didn’t say don’t
Unknown Speaker 53:02
know, I’m saying the difference between our rates and the others. I have a hard time.
Unknown Speaker 53:10
Unknown Speaker 53:15
Maybe I can take a little shot at that. And Marsha sorry, watch the original Council and the public invited to be heard. In the the original call that prompted some of this discussion was coming from the place because I heard it that, oh, we have way low cash in lieu rates and these other guys are way higher. And they’re inferring that, because of that difference long one is subsidizing development that that we are in, we’re subsidizing development at the cost of the water and the water rates are going up to help kind of fun. That was kind of the inference that was made in that that comment.
Unknown Speaker 53:53
You didn’t hear though? Well, I think it could it could be heard that way that I can certainly they are we have kept our caching feasible because we wanted to encourage development and that was the policy all along. The next question is since annexation is not going to be as much of a driver
Unknown Speaker 54:17
do we? You know, is is that the thing? Or are we just leaving money on the table? Well, but I think at least my view of it is we’re looking at it what’s the cost of service what what does it cost us to develop an acre foot for new development in right now the project in this will be a comment on God because as I went, I listened to the rest of that conversation. Something else was going through my mind but the cost is we’ve got when you got when you got firming costs that now had been the project’s been led. Yeah, we’ve got a hard toss. We have a pretty good idea what the cost of that reservoir has been going. So based on that in the firming ratio, which we’ll get into the risk in a second.
Unknown Speaker 55:00
adjustment factor. But we know, you know what those costs are. So what is the cost of new development in the context of the cost of adding one acre foot of supply? And that’s what we’re trying to set it out. If we in, we can add these risk factors, and I’ve been the one kind of talking about some of that, and I agree that we need to do that, if when you get firming has more risk than maybe the other supplies within the city at one loss portfolio. But I think we need to have that conversation in that context. What I don’t like is if we’re saying, when you get perming is, you know, 18,000, we have a 20%, you know, factor until northerns can do more modeling, and we feel better about whatever that percentage is. What I don’t like is okay, somebody who’s at 30 or 40,000 an acre foot, we’re leaving money on the table. No, we’re not. We’re pricing it at what the cost of service is. If we’re saying, hey, we want to bump that up, under what rationale? Well, no, because leaving money on the table is not the same as losing money. Right? In other words, this revenue could be
Unknown Speaker 56:05
in the city for in the inner in the city spots for
Unknown Speaker 56:11
risk mitigation for disaster recovery for a lot of things that the waterfront can pay for.
Unknown Speaker 56:19
And if we are not gouging, you know, if we’re not a pair, if we’re a parody with other cities around, then
Unknown Speaker 56:29
I don’t know.
Unknown Speaker 56:32
That would be leaving money on the table if we if we stayed low for no reason, when in fact, we have we have ways to use the money that would benefit the city. And in some of those marches, in my mind, maybe beyond what I view is maybe the water wars, rolling, right I view our role is what is the cost to add an acre foot for meal to the water system. And that’s what we’ve been recommending in terms of the cash in lieu. And I think we do need to consider in in what’s the additional risk? Or how do we maybe add that so that acre foot that’s been added with winter? Yeah, firming is on par with the rest of the system. I think that makes sense. But if it’s beyond that, I don’t know, how do we as a Water Board have that conversation of, you know, I guess I have a hard time if we’re saying somebody that $70,000 An acre foot, so let’s bump it up, it seems like we need to justify and rationalize, what are the things that go into whatever that cash in lieu number is to make sure that the development paying its own way, and it has risk factors or whatever. But beyond that, I’m just having a hard time, put my finger on any of that. And and I don’t think that it is necessarily the Water Board’s
Unknown Speaker 57:47
job to, you know, Peg, the final number. Instead, what you should be bringing forward is, is what’s the what are the components of cost? Right, you know, so the cost per acre foot dog risk? Also what it what would happen, if, you know, the worst case scenarios happened with with the chimney hollow reservoir, and we had to go buy CBT water? What if we couldn’t buy CBT? Water? You know, what are our options? When do we have to build a treatment plant in a real hurry to be able to, you know, the pump back system to be able to use
Unknown Speaker 58:30
Unknown Speaker 58:32
our other sources of less pristine water? Right, then the council doesn’t have any way of within its own knowledge of, of deciding what those costs are. So
Unknown Speaker 58:49
you know, that if you bring back the Lego bricks of of contingencies, what we had to rush the building of the pump back system, what if we had to buy this mini a graffito CVT, for the next 10 years? You know, why do we have to do all those things and then the council’s job is to look what other cities have done and make some kind of risk assessment and see how many of those building blocks to stack up into our actual field.
Unknown Speaker 59:22
So I get I guess, two comments
Unknown Speaker 59:26
Unknown Speaker 59:28
I guess the first is the other LEGO bricks you’re talking about. So it’s the union river pump back or I don’t we tried to update you guys try to update those costs, but but the level of precision but we need to get firming costs, too. If it’s a you know, we have button rock listed on there. We have all these other projects that in my mind our way, you know that they’re just kind of a swag in I think we’re being kind to the swag by saying that. of you know, the
Unknown Speaker 1:00:00
There’s so many pieces that would have to be put into that before something like that would be able to be built, that I think we’re just kind of guesstimating as to what those costs are. So, you know, we were kind of comparing my mind apples to oranges, you got a firm, we got a bid project, we know what that cost is. And then we’re saying, Oh, well, let’s bump it up to the Union nerves were pumped back, I just don’t feel a lot of confidence from my perspective after being on the water board for as many years in terms of what those costs are for those other projects. Number one, number two, the what the other projects are these other cities. So I worked in the city of Greeley was a water resource manager for a number of years, their number is pegged to what they think it’s going to cost to do their target rams project in their other add an acre foot of water supply to their system. Okay, there is 36,000 there half of what long money is why? Because online is down to where we’re pretty manageable in terms of we only have to grow this much to build out and we think we can meet it based on the projection with when you get berming. The question is going to be alright, do we add a safety factor or something on there to to that number but but my point is, is the basis that they’re using is how much does it cost to add an anchor put a firm yield to their system in terms of dollars, and that’s what on view on the Longmont is trying to at least the Water Board. In my view, we’re trying to make the same recommendation to council, the city a loved one. Another point I’ll make is city of Loveland. They assume 100% CBD quota in the last year of a multi year drought.
Unknown Speaker 1:01:31
So you need to take that into account to is what are their assumptions that lie behind these cash in lieu rooms? Because, you know, a little Thompson Water District assumes a 50% firm yield number on CBT units. Yeah, you’re off by a factor of two, between this guy and this guy. So I think you need to make sure you everybody think is caught up in the numbers without understanding the rationale behind them. Exactly. Right. And kind of welcome to my world.
Unknown Speaker 1:02:06
The people who who finalize the policy are doing exactly what you’re talking about, you know, we have we have firm numbers, some places we have slides other places. And you know, we are just doing our best, I’m I’m just saying
Unknown Speaker 1:02:26
Do your best. And I you know, Longmont has has been in such a good place, and I don’t want to make this last for a long time either their loved one is in such a good place with water for such a long time, that it’s been a matter of turning the crank.
Unknown Speaker 1:02:43
And now I think things are changing.
Unknown Speaker 1:02:47
Most people think things are changing now. You know, thus the Eric club has changed their policy from never make new storage because it you know, it it my dad made some species of bacterial go extinct or something if you change the riparian habitats, and now they’re saying, Oh, well, we’ve got to add storage because there are so many risks out there. You know, and those are, those are environmentalists, were we’re still going to be dealing with the extremist iron environmentalists who wanted us to cover its consumption in half next year. And you know, that is a reasonable thing to ask. But those are the pressures that we’re going to be looking at. So that’s all I’m saying is is
Unknown Speaker 1:03:41
to be the most help
Unknown Speaker 1:03:44
within all the different contingencies that you can
Unknown Speaker 1:03:49
to you know, so why Fort Collins has such a big number. I don’t know You know, it couldn’t be because
Unknown Speaker 1:03:58
all those What did you say girl
Unknown Speaker 1:04:01
Girl domestic domestic you’re pretty good too. Yeah.
Unknown Speaker 1:04:06
And you know, do they have their do they have from supplies or not?
Unknown Speaker 1:04:13
And how does that compare to you know, what goes on
Unknown Speaker 1:04:20
what goes on in the in the other mini movie gap participants you know, because they surround us and I’m a lay person I am have been on the Water Board for eight years
Unknown Speaker 1:04:32
Unknown Speaker 1:04:35
I’m just saying that that turning the crank just with the windy gap contingencies is probably not sufficient.
Unknown Speaker 1:04:46
You know, the land use how many more fees and loot can we charge
Unknown Speaker 1:04:56
Tom good. Yeah, I was just gonna say that. So I
Unknown Speaker 1:05:00
This is these conversations when I benefit from being the new person, they come into, like, almost kind of with
Unknown Speaker 1:05:07
fresh eyes are definitely more kind of naive eyes or something, I guess. But, and, and then also having gone on the road water to this this past month, which, by the way was amazing, thank you for that. And
Unknown Speaker 1:05:21
I think one thing that gets lost in the numbers is, is basically that kind of the fact that we’re benefiting so much from like, the historical kind of the history of our water systems, right? I mean, that, like so many people before us, right, like really planned for contingencies moving forward and kind of almost sent conceal over about the system in a way and, and kind of, you know, really prepared us for where we are today. Right. And so if you just focus on those numbers,
Unknown Speaker 1:05:53
and not the broader kind of
Unknown Speaker 1:05:56
a broader approach, right to setting those numbers, what gets lost is that we’re in relatively decent shape. And so as a result, then our the amount to build out more, more water is, is cost us less than it was somebody else who is basically always operating in crisis, right? I mean, if you take it to the extreme, and so, so the idea, I mean, the thought that I, or perhaps what I think maybe needs to get out a little bit better as a perhaps a little bit more about history, right? If it’s the public, for example, that’s kind of pressing for ditional costs, maybe there’s just not quite as much understanding of the history of the contingency plan that really did go into all of this. From a historical perspective. Yeah. I mean, I
Unknown Speaker 1:06:49
I tell that story all the time, I’m sure, you know, in terms in terms of saying
Unknown Speaker 1:06:57
long months, not in the same drought, even when we’re in drought, we’re not in the same drought, as as you know.
Unknown Speaker 1:07:06
Who those places down south Parker, you know, Parker’s in a drought there, Drew Alex.
Unknown Speaker 1:07:17
And so we did tell that story all the time.
Unknown Speaker 1:07:22
And so there is it’s it’s basically a political question, do we be
Unknown Speaker 1:07:29
we make it easy on the people annex, wanting to annex into the city, because we can for you make the people who are in excellent into the city help us to stay in that food place?
Unknown Speaker 1:07:47
You know, that’s ultimately going to be looked at decision is?
Unknown Speaker 1:07:54
Unknown Speaker 1:07:56
I think I believe
Unknown Speaker 1:08:03
I think one of the questions that was raised was how much land is actually an accessible?
Unknown Speaker 1:08:12
Well, that’s my thought.
Unknown Speaker 1:08:15
You know, Mark, I mean,
Unknown Speaker 1:08:19
depends on what the city is. In, it’s getting growing up to the point where, and that changes a lot of the dynamics of the whole thing. And we’re in a whole different spot.
Unknown Speaker 1:08:32
Unknown Speaker 1:08:33
I agree with that. Because so I mean, if we take it to the extreme, right, we have like one 300 acre plot that is going to be annexed and subdivided. And we’re having this discussion, is it worth it for just that? That one right now that’s to the extreme? Right. So like, basically, how much are we talking about? Is it five of those? Is it 10 of those? Is it like, we’re gonna be doing this into the future? So yeah, we should definitely have this conversation, or is it showing now we have plotted all that out on she is bringing that in November, to show you the whiteboard versus a lot to keep in mind. There’s two categories. There’s one plan that heads there’s not much, honestly a lot of data, but there’s a lot of land left to collect. Okay, so the cash in Lieu is really finally sorted as annexation is there sort of a lot when you plan you have to so there’s a lot of land that’s already been annexed, there’s more land, it’s already been attics, still has a plan versus land is going to annex and then leave. And but it’s easier to see that on the GIS application. And so we’ll have that November is that have that one? Does that happen more hand in hand today, like kind of annexation planning happening? At this
Unknown Speaker 1:10:00
Same timer. Is that still there’s still?
Unknown Speaker 1:10:03
No if you look at the one we just did today that came through originally 1999. Yeah, sure. So ironically, it’s the same ages. To me how many got 30? Yeah, which was 19 started 1990. So yeah, I can be 20 years away. So what someone? Well, we’re onto something big one more. I think it’s critical. This point is funny, because what you just brought up was going to be the next point, which is, how much is left to go here for these these water providers. The city of Greeley was when I was there, we were looking at growth projections in 2015. They were not meeting their old build out. Yeah. So my point is, is they got to not just look at, we’re looking at, hey, there’s too many all meet all our demand. If not, maybe you have to build a small pump that they’re looking at, we got to do this, in this in this in this in the further out there you go, the more costly those projects get. And the more uncertain. So So my point is, is when we bring it back, and we’re doing the comparison that we’re asking for on the cash in lieu, let us be part of it, two of these guys are looking, you know, they’ve got a big annex area, a lot of potential water growth, and they’re gonna have to do a lot of projects to get to their build out. Longmont, on the other hand, one has a good system, I think that was a great point.
Unknown Speaker 1:11:21
When two, we don’t have a lot of growth left overall and the numbers, I think Ken’s talking about will bear that out in terms of meeting or build out water demand. And as such, we’re able to, you know, kind of limit it to maybe chimney alo and maybe another cost effective project to get there. That means we’re a lot less costly, in terms of a cost per acre foot of adding a new even if we had safety factors and everything else, you’re still going to be way below these other guys. So that’s something that I think during this conversation needs to be part of it to make sure you have the right picture. What are these other numbers? Not just one of the projects are they looking at but what is their? What’s their planning horizon in terms of being able to have to bring new water supplies on board? It’s a big factor. Yeah. And that’s important, because a decade
Unknown Speaker 1:12:13
the whole our whole expectations could have changed. You know, I mean, we know that we’re in a pit in a period of rapid leather change, and we don’t know whether it’s going to be stable or not. You know, we just we just don’t know, we’re getting floods in places. We never had floods and droughts in places we never had droughts.
Unknown Speaker 1:12:36
Unknown Speaker 1:12:40
yeah, I mean, I,
Unknown Speaker 1:12:43
I guess part of the part of the mental model, whether you would model it this much this far or not, is the difference between the commitment we made when somebody annex it, we approve an annexation, you know, in acre feet of water.
Unknown Speaker 1:13:02
Bring us is the price of the water pegged at the annexation time where they don’t have to have it. So it was a flat pricing service in place, what they what they pay is
Unknown Speaker 1:13:17
what they plan is when they plan out. So we like based on changing data, we might raise that fee in lieu and the today’s annexation might have a higher cost based on future data. For sure. Okay. So Elson, or sorry, just just to kind of maybe put in perspective, a good way to look at
Unknown Speaker 1:13:42
the conversation about how much is less good way to look at it is
Unknown Speaker 1:13:49
called build out.
Unknown Speaker 1:13:53
Your planning horizon, we’re going to be about 30,000 acre feet
Unknown Speaker 1:13:59
when media very project is currently planned to be the last little bit of that, and our firming of that is a little over 3000 acre feet. So it’s so put it into place about 10% of or total
Unknown Speaker 1:14:18
planning horizon water demand is yet to be. Yes, yes.
Unknown Speaker 1:14:26
Except that and
Unknown Speaker 1:14:31
Unknown Speaker 1:14:33
business leadership as pushing one way the city’s environmental leadership is pushing the other way that build out could change by plus or minus 20% depending on which faction wins. You know, there are people who who want to say let’s just refuse those annexations let’s do it. You know, just leave it out there. And and then there are others of course
Unknown Speaker 1:15:00
To want to say let’s annex it all now. And let’s look at our infill situation, and go with a much higher level of, of urban density than dams exists anywhere in Lombok. And like I said, you know, I’m on slagging here, but it could be plus or minus 20%. It could be more than that. If we change things like height restrictions. Yeah, that’s one of the things when we did our future water event evaluations.
Unknown Speaker 1:15:31
Density is density is a big thing for us anymore. We’re pretty well surrounded. Yep. We’re not going how much anymore? I mean, there’s little things. But what happens in that doughnut hole?
Unknown Speaker 1:15:45
It’s density, density density. Yeah. And I agree. 100%? Yeah, you know, you can look at our future water man evaluation has a certain set of assumptions in there, which is how we came up with the number for the windy gap for me. And
Unknown Speaker 1:16:06
I agree with you that that could change.
Unknown Speaker 1:16:09
Thank you. First of all, what is
Unknown Speaker 1:16:13
Unknown Speaker 1:16:15
Unknown Speaker 1:16:28
Unknown Speaker 1:16:31
can too, two areas of discussion, one seems like it’s really focused on land use planning decisions. And one seems really focused on kind of coming up with a very reasonable, justifiable number based on comparisons based on risk based on long term thing.
Unknown Speaker 1:16:50
Unknown Speaker 1:16:52
I think that there is an excellent there, but I also think,
Unknown Speaker 1:16:56
a separation and I just, I figured is one we
Unknown Speaker 1:17:06
are going to enter, and then what goes in there is a missing piece. To me, it would make more sense I’m predicting for streaming. So we plan to have the puzzle piece that best fits in that spot.
Unknown Speaker 1:17:21
Not necessarily a puzzle piece that can meet some sort of caching threshold.
Unknown Speaker 1:17:27
So I guess while I think that that is something that needs to take into consideration, I think that the land use planning decision is something that’s separate and aside. And it turns out the factors that are are different from what we’re consider now, which maybe is a much more screwed issue. With that said, I think looking at the larger perspective,
Unknown Speaker 1:17:50
places that are in developing places like Firestone, you know, to call it on founder, places that don’t have the kind of awesome planning and foresight that we do. has, you know, what’s there? What are they doing with water? They obviously want to grow, but they don’t have a big reservoir? How are they approaching that? I’d also like to look at Aurora, you know, they have a huge urban population. So mostly waters on the west slope, how are they approaching that situation? And kind of putting those various parts and expanding our perspective from what we might see is comparable, and we’re getting
Unknown Speaker 1:18:29
our columns and kind of looking at other municipalities that maybe have slightly different challenges and seeing how it affects what they’re doing.
Unknown Speaker 1:18:39
I agree with that. And I just as a remark on that, I’m not saying you have to figure it all out. I’m not saying that, that all of the political things should really necessarily be on this board shoulders.
Unknown Speaker 1:18:55
Behind I’m what I’m saying is, realize that that’s what you’re feeding into that where, you know, this place is all connected. And they’re they’re going to be a lot of questions. And I’m encouraging you to have this many answers.
Unknown Speaker 1:19:20
Well, I’ll be here.
Unknown Speaker 1:19:32
Think Alison, you’re trying to draw your puzzle piece analogy here, but I know I’m no good at puzzles, actually. So but I was just thinking like, I think you said something like that we can’t figure out kind of what should go on particular plot of land based on who can kind of provide the caption or something and, and I think the reverse is also true, right? That we don’t necessarily I mean, we’re the waterboard, right. We are not necessarily concerned
Unknown Speaker 1:20:00
With what goes on the plots of land, what we are supposed to determine is basically how much the whoever that entity is should pay
Unknown Speaker 1:20:11
for water that they will presumably be using, like in any given moment is kind of hold back, some of the things are tight, we’re saying that at any given moment, we can make that assessment based on some kind of planning with respect to just the water, right? Like, what is water cost us today, essentially? And what what justification do we have to be able to kind of like, do ourselves on that decision? So you know,
Unknown Speaker 1:20:40
I mean, I don’t want to put too too much about this. But like, the discussions about what other cities are doing, it might be helpful in my mind, and we might think about building a contingency doctor, you might think about, like, the ways in which other cities are doing that. But the the amount that they’re paying for water isn’t necessarily a huge concern, in my view, because it really becomes what we are paying for water, right, like, given our circumstances, given our scenario, what is it about our situation that we can justify asking this entity to pay a certain amount for the water that they are, that they are going to be responsible for? Right? And I know that that’s another to their system specific to their, to their? Yeah.
Unknown Speaker 1:21:30
But the question is, is it? Are we being nice? Or are we charging? All right, and that Yeah, and I think that that’s exactly where the evaluation has to go is like, are we being realistic about the amount that we are
Unknown Speaker 1:21:45
charging? If we are, because our situation is just better than everyone else’s? Well, then that’s a huge benefit to the people that live in this community community and encourages things like affordable housing, and like, right, I mean, presumably, if we planners do their thing, right.
Unknown Speaker 1:22:05
Unknown Speaker 1:22:06
but if we’re not doing it, right, right, because because we’re not building, it continues to crumble, then we need to fix that. Right. But I think that that’s where the discussion has to be is about, what how do we justify this price? Right? And I don’t know that we can justify it by saying, well, Fort Collins is doing this. So there should keep up with them. I think the board does not have to justify the price. Right? The council has to justify the price. So what what you’re doing is, is justifying the costs, you know, what’s the minimum? How low can it go? Safely? So, you know, you’ve got things like when we when we bid the chimney, oh, that’s for a project that was going to cost us this, it’s already up to this. And it’s a little further now, but there’s all kinds of contingencies in that quote, or in that bid. So what’s the worst case scenario?
Unknown Speaker 1:23:10
You know, we know the best case scenarios, which is, you know, that nothing else slips, which never happens. Yeah.
Unknown Speaker 1:23:18
You know, so. So that’s one set of error bars, you know, rainfall and runoff and stuff. Those are other sets of error bars. And, and, and I don’t know, who decides how, how,
Unknown Speaker 1:23:35
how we how we
Unknown Speaker 1:23:38
incorporate that data into what we have, because there are so many unknowns, well, actually, that’s regular I was trying to go live.
Unknown Speaker 1:23:50
So we get we get for me. And then we were looking at in my mind via the water planning is union reservoir, back and I think there’s an easy union reservoir pump back and there’s a hard year years, we’re coming back and you’re trying to actually take water back up to the treatment.
Unknown Speaker 1:24:07
It was going through my mind is you start saying, you know, there’s variability in terms of supply, we’re saying there’s uncertainty in the gap may have more uncertainty than other projects, find we can maybe get an estimate, or at least put an estimate, hopefully northern can help for that.
Unknown Speaker 1:24:23
And does that satisfy no kinsei and 32,000 3000 acre foot when you get maybe, if you reduced by 20%? of 2500. So we need to build but actually some of the Union reservoir pump back at what cause where I was going with this is do we spend a little time or make sure we sharpen our pencil so that our swag is maybe not as much as why we got a little better idea. Is that $18,000 An acre foot or is that 25,000? Or is that $30,000 per acre foot for that next next level? And then you can also play the demand side of it. We’re saying there if you’re saying the highest
Unknown Speaker 1:25:00
As 20% increase in demand, due to more infill and higher density, where does that put us in relation to the winning of burning project plus, you know, you need reservoir pump back in at what cost where I’m trying to get to is then you have some semblance of a we’re pricing when you got it 18,000. And we need to increase it because of the variability in the supply side compared to the rest of the long run system. The Union knows we’re pumped back cost y dollars per acre foot on a per meal basis. And how do those two comparison that when we’re setting it, to Tom’s point, we feel confident from the Water Board’s perspective that the cost per acre foot that we’re recommending covers is going to cover? Exactly.
Unknown Speaker 1:25:41
All that. And but I guess we’re I think we need to, we need to build that those pieces in that case to the council. So they understand kind of the rationale behind what we’re suggesting as a cash in lieu price. In, you know, I tend to agree with Tom that, you know, if we start looking at what everybody else is doing, you start, maybe you can look at what they’re paying and why they’re paying those amounts. But it doesn’t really deal with our circumstance. In my mind, it gives you kind of a benchmark, but we’re dealing with Longmont situation, its system, its growth, you know, its planning horizon, those are the situations we’re trying to do within the context of the recommendation in my mind that this board’s making in terms of cash and whether the city council, they want to go beyond that, knock yourself out, but I think we’ve done our job without I, I agree with that.
Unknown Speaker 1:26:34
Be aware of that they might,
Unknown Speaker 1:26:38
you know, a lot of it is going to depend on whether we will that we want to finish off our growth early.
Unknown Speaker 1:26:45
You know, other cities have really resisted going to have an urban density kind of a plan. I hope you won’t do that. But there are a lot of people in town who want.
Unknown Speaker 1:26:57
So you know, the things pushed both ways. It’s it’s how much cash how much cash in lieu of cash in lieu and density operate independently of each other, we can increase our revenue from the
Unknown Speaker 1:27:15
from with with a limited number of annexations as fees and lose in the end, we can can kind of, again, here’s that word, take a slag. How long before we do the annexation? And how long before the platting makes them money come in?
Unknown Speaker 1:27:34
Unknown Speaker 1:27:37
but the there’s a limit on how much how many acre feet, we can get out of that? It’s not related in any way to how many acre feet feet do we need? Because of our urban design constraints.
Unknown Speaker 1:27:56
So alright, let me set the stage good.
Unknown Speaker 1:28:04
Why ask for the number.
Unknown Speaker 1:28:08
So acknowledge your insight.
Unknown Speaker 1:28:20
Yeah, every one of them has a story. And that’s the point is, if you’re the number of people bought on the number without getting to the underlying,
Unknown Speaker 1:28:31
and you got if you’re going to go down and you’re going to throw those numbers on, I think I mean, Ellison know that you’re kind of suggesting this, then you need to go to each one of those. And then you got to dig into why. And what’s the basis? And how are they getting there? How much growth are they going to have? Because that all plays into it? And versus you know, I think that’s where and where I’m coming from as long as its own unique situation. So we’re trying to, you know, make recommendations to council based off long, lots specific situation, not what’s happening elsewhere. But, you know, I think that will be some of the conversation and hopefully setting that recommendation based on specific information. And then as long as we do that, I think we’ve kind of done or hopefully done our job in my mind. And then if the council wants to take other things into account, that’s their prerogative, but at least we’ve done what we’re supposed to do. I you suggesting that about the fee levels,
Unknown Speaker 1:29:24
from surrounding cities are part of the data that is brought back at all, because I guarantee you that questions going to be asked, no, I have no problem. We have a pretty extensive spreadsheet that has all that just needs to be updated. In my mind, that’s data. I have no problem in bringing data and then I only see the only pieces you need to you need to dig into it enough to where it gives the flavor of why they’re doing what they’re doing. Yeah, I would say just that. I mean, these these to me are factors not necessarily exclusive list. And it seems to me like you can sell to
Unknown Speaker 1:30:00
consideration moments unique situation. We’re also looking at discrete numbers. Yeah. What is not the board’s job is to take all the data and roll it up into a policy.
Unknown Speaker 1:30:12
Okay. But what because
Unknown Speaker 1:30:15
it because there is a point at which it is tied to everything else, all the other policies
Unknown Speaker 1:30:22
Unknown Speaker 1:30:25
like Yeah. Okay. I think I think that we like
Unknown Speaker 1:30:28
kept all the rocks on the playing field.
Unknown Speaker 1:30:34
Unknown Speaker 1:30:36
flow much more next month.
Unknown Speaker 1:30:39
Alright. So moving on. Yeah. So we’re under nine V, which is when you get for the project update. Yeah, I’m just real briefly,
Unknown Speaker 1:30:52
is McAleese construction. So I’m going on the way the 30 project, I have a couple pictures here to show you.
Unknown Speaker 1:31:01
Unknown Speaker 1:31:06
this is yesterday’s make sure you’re you’re looking you’re up on the east above it right above it down in the valley. You can each each one of these pictures, you can see it starting to form coming up here.
Unknown Speaker 1:31:29
They’re continuing to work on that.
Unknown Speaker 1:31:34
And then the next picture shows the coffer dam.
Unknown Speaker 1:31:40
So the main dam is right here. And this is the coffer dam, which you have to build a dam to protect the damage when your building does two things. One is if you get a big rainstorm will wash out the day of your building.
Unknown Speaker 1:31:57
Have a safety. The second is just normal.
Unknown Speaker 1:32:03
precipitation and runoff gets intercepted by the coffer dam gets piped around the construction side keeps your construction site safe and dry. So they actually have to build the coffer dam before they start going up with the main dam. So you can actually start to see the coffer dam going in. And then finally, you can see they’ve cleared the quarry area. And they’ve had I believe two blasts on the corridor. So they’ve actually gotten the quarry down.
Unknown Speaker 1:32:35
I used to know the number. It’s like 45 years old to get to the competent blocking on us build the dam. But
Unknown Speaker 1:32:45
that first rock they removed will be used for rock bass and you know other things at the construction site. But you can even see them pretty well cleared that quarry area. So the core areas a lot easier to see. So that’s one of the are the
Unknown Speaker 1:33:05
other issues the Colorado River conductivity channel around the windy gap diversion structure is
Unknown Speaker 1:33:14
60% design is done. And they hope to have the 90% down by about the end of October, early November. And from that they’ll do the final project estimate which should be done by the end of November. So that part of the project is going forward. They’ve got additional funding for it and are still still looking for a three to four or $5 million for
Unknown Speaker 1:33:45
Unknown Speaker 1:33:48
awful the remainder that will be coming in. I think now that construction started on Jimmy mobile, it’s actually more people comfortable that will get the conductivity channel then and a little more enthusiasm towards the end as well. So both of those projects are going quite well. And then the last picture that I wanted to show you is from Bob Rock, we had a forest fire there this last weekend. Luckily it was very small about the size of this room. And primarily because our watershed Ranger happens to be this is occurred in the coastal Gulch area. So it’s actually on us for service property right on the west boundary. The bedrock preserve area and
Unknown Speaker 1:34:42
he happened to see the smoke kept in the back there patrolling right at the perfect time saw the smoke got over to this. It was a campfire. And you’ve got to tell me how somebody would dumb enough to build a campfire right there.
Unknown Speaker 1:35:00
Unknown Speaker 1:35:02
obviously somebody’s really ignorant.
Unknown Speaker 1:35:05
Unknown Speaker 1:35:07
they were, luckily he was there to, you know, Hey, I am sorted, sorted, did a little containment lying around it
Unknown Speaker 1:35:15
and then got system Ranger brought in some firefighting equipment and water ladder backpacks. They started working on it and called both I
Unknown Speaker 1:35:31
built pedals fire and appliance fire. And they were not aligned, sorry to get in the front, my truck is locked down Orlando on foot, their first step.
Unknown Speaker 1:35:44
And because they’re with us, but both fire departments showed up, and they’ll finally extinguish it, but
Unknown Speaker 1:35:53
it was I heard it in our worship a lot for
Unknown Speaker 1:35:59
the hard part was it happened exactly one year to the day of the calendar fire.
Unknown Speaker 1:36:07
So, you know,
Unknown Speaker 1:36:10
we actually do have a number of those every year, things like that, that luckily, you know, one of the advantages of having watershed Rangers there seven days a week is to catch this kind of thing.
Unknown Speaker 1:36:24
Have that pulled up and reach the crown and take it off? You were right, there was
Unknown Speaker 1:36:32
appreciate that. They got that down, give them kudos for doing that.
Unknown Speaker 1:36:37
So thank you. All I have
Unknown Speaker 1:36:40
Unknown Speaker 1:36:48
Okay, we’re on on to item nine, see water resources, engineering projects I’ve been using? Yes, thank you. What did he do a quick update on two active projects. So the South St. Green pipeline pipeline rehab project.
Unknown Speaker 1:37:04
As you know, we’ve got that cleaned out cameras. And we’re now starting to mobilize CNL water solutions is mobilized as of last Friday. And we’re going to start actually installing those temporary access points, and we’re gonna start laying the pipeline.
Unknown Speaker 1:37:20
That’ll be from the diversion structure in the creek all the way to the manhole right east of the fire district.
Unknown Speaker 1:37:30
And so that’s basically the the first half of the South Stream pipeline. And then I’ve also just issued a change order so that they could begin cleaning hammering the second half the part of the South St. Green pipeline that’s located within highway 66. So a lot of work with CDOT to get permits and traffic controls can be a big deal. But we’re hoping based on some initial evaluations after
Unknown Speaker 1:37:56
the 2013 floods that that part may have
Unknown Speaker 1:38:00
not been as damaged as the first half. So the first half getting plugged, the debris and sediment, the boulders everything was kind of open at the last half isn’t as bad, but we’ll find out and we’ll adjust accordingly.
Unknown Speaker 1:38:15
Then the south same brain pipeline, such a brain pipeline Pump Station project, we’re, that pump station is still being manufactured that has a delivery date of February 18. And we’re currently working with our consultant to go up and bid and get a contractor on board. So within the next two weeks or so we should be advertising
Unknown Speaker 1:38:40
for the construction portion of that project. That project is probably expected to go into June of next year, which hopefully by then CDOT will be done with their highway seven project.
Unknown Speaker 1:38:55
And we can actually turn assessing right pipeline back on and get the pump station online.
Unknown Speaker 1:39:04
Having said that, we’d like to also give you a quick update on the Nelson Flanders water treatment plant expansion project, where we we know who’s the engineering administrator for that project here to give you an update on that.
Unknown Speaker 1:39:19
Unknown Speaker 1:39:22
But yeah, there we go.
Unknown Speaker 1:39:25
Start from there.
Unknown Speaker 1:39:30
So I wanted to give you a brief update and show you exactly where are the projects that and there are some other related projects that are going on next to that which I wanted to briefly mention. So you can go to the first slide. If you look at there’s two yellow dots kind of in the center of that screen. One of two left is Nelson Flanders. You can see that it’s labeled there.
Unknown Speaker 1:39:59
Unknown Speaker 1:40:00
To the right of it is the wait gas plant. I’m not sure. If you all know when we got this plant is, it was built in 1984. It is an older plant it has.
Unknown Speaker 1:40:13
It really is kind of a emergency standby plant at this point because it is pretty much near its useful life and of its useful life. The type of the design of that plant is an older design. And it’s much harder to meet the treatment requirements to run it. So we usually keep it all in for emergencies, we do not run it. We haven’t actually run it for a few years, we rely on the Nelson Flanders water treatment, right. And Nelson Flanders, if you look at it, it’s north of Highway 66. And just off of North 53rd Street, which is the road to revenue. Open Space does show some of the raw water pipelines that we that deliver water to both treatment plants.
Unknown Speaker 1:41:06
The next slide.
Unknown Speaker 1:41:09
So some of the project background, and the way Ghana’s plant is rated at 15 MGD. When we do the expansion, we will be replacing that 15 MPD. So that we have a total, around 60 MGD capacity. The existing plant, Nelson Flanders right now is 40 MGD. So the expansion will happen in two phases. We actually, once we built the original plant, we did get it permitted through Boulder County, through a 1041 process, we were able to get it approved for a maximum capacity of EDM D, this first phase will bring us from 40 to 60 MG D. So that’s currently under design. The next slide.
Unknown Speaker 1:42:04
So we are currently at 30% of design right now. We’re using a project delivery method called Design Build a typical project. Usually we hire an engineer to design the project, once it’s designed, we go up in bid it out. And then a contract we’ll we’ll build it. Design Build is different is a preferred method that we use on very large and complex projects, what we do is we have one single contract. So the designer or the engineer and the contractor are working together to develop a design and then building it together. It has a lot of advantages. It gives us more flexibility, as far as as we’re going through design into construction. So right now we’ll we’re at 30%. We should be finishing up
Unknown Speaker 1:43:04
designing around the second or third quarter of next year. And then we will start building the project. We anticipate, you know, right to 2020 14.
Unknown Speaker 1:43:20
The estimated cost right now is around 50. Empty or $50 million
Unknown Speaker 1:43:26
around 3737 and a half. Yes through the water bond election.
Unknown Speaker 1:43:35
Unknown Speaker 1:43:38
That shows kind of the where we are at in design. The building off to the left is the existing plan.
Unknown Speaker 1:43:49
He can read the labels there. Yeah, thanks. And then off to the right is the expansion. We still have to go through Bullitt County, to have them review it.
Unknown Speaker 1:44:03
And to make sure that they find that acceptable. There are some conditions in our 1041 permit that we have to meet. And so they’ll be looking at this proposed design to determine whether we can meet those conditions under our permit existing permit.
Unknown Speaker 1:44:24
That’s off to the upper right you’ll see a small four by eight. We currently have one form eight which is around 100 acre feet or 30 million gallons. We will be building a second in smaller four bay off to the right there. And that primarily is will be used for if we get water, raw water that has high turbidity or it’s cloudy or water. We can run it through the forebay and that would serve kind of as a settling basin.
Unknown Speaker 1:45:00
To clarify some water before
Unknown Speaker 1:45:06
the next slide.
Unknown Speaker 1:45:08
This is a related project, we’re one of the reasons why we’re doing the expansion in the building is separate from the existing plan is for redundancy and security reasons. Once we decommissioned, the wheat gals plant will only have one plant that supplies the city, we wanted to have some redundancy so that if something happened to the existing plants, we have the expanded plant, they can continue to run. So we basically have two plants at one site.
Unknown Speaker 1:45:45
So the one of the things that
Unknown Speaker 1:45:48
we’re doing is right now we have one primary fee to the plant and an electric fee, we plan on constructing the second electrical, primary electrical field to flex so we have redundancy there. So that will be going on at the same time, we’re building the expansion.
Unknown Speaker 1:46:11
And then the next and final
Unknown Speaker 1:46:14
related project is montgomery tank, which is just south of the Nelson sandwich clan, it’s great, you’ll see that small white circle, kind of in the lower left side of the picture there. That’s right off right at the intersection of Highway 66, North 53rd Street,
Unknown Speaker 1:46:37
that tag needs to be
Unknown Speaker 1:46:41
rebuilt. And we’re actually looking at some sites that are to the right of that there’s a property that we just purchased to the right of the workout routine site. And we
Unknown Speaker 1:46:57
are going to be working with Boulder County to see if it might might be acceptable for us to move our storage team closer to the plant
Unknown Speaker 1:47:12
of the Montgomery property that’s to the right of there.
Unknown Speaker 1:47:16
And that said believe
Unknown Speaker 1:47:20
is yet this is kind of a it’s hard to see. But you can kind of see where the existing storage tank isn’t that photo.
Unknown Speaker 1:47:32
And the right now the estimated cost for that storage tank is around 15 million gallons or million dollars.
Unknown Speaker 1:47:42
We are doing conceptual planning this year. Next year, we will start doing some design and permitting then 20 in 2023 24 trying to rebuild that storage
Unknown Speaker 1:48:00
thing that his
Unknown Speaker 1:48:05
existing plant was the capacity that it’s you know it was originally designed for 30 MTB, and then we were able to get it rerated for you. So right now, it could treat 40 million gallons per day. And the new plan was
Unknown Speaker 1:48:24
the expansion will be another 20 million gallons per day. So total, we’ll have 60 with both the existing expansion, just kind of curiosity, when they get both planning the new one up and running.
Unknown Speaker 1:48:42
Are you going to try and use both similar capacities? Or you know, I’m just curious how you get around those things. Yeah, we will probably
Unknown Speaker 1:48:53
try to we it’s definitely better to try to run the expanded portion of the plant to some
Unknown Speaker 1:49:02
level. You don’t want it just sitting there right now. So you would run there for rebalance it up. So depending on the time of the year to because the summer peak demands are going to be probably July, August, we’ll definitely be running both at that time in the wintertime are demands will probably be around eight or 10 maybe 12 million gallons per day that could be provided by either the existing or the
Unknown Speaker 1:49:37
expansion. So it kind of depends on both the manpower required and how efficiently the operations people feel, you know whether it’s better to just run one side or to run both at the same time.
Unknown Speaker 1:49:56
Unknown Speaker 1:50:00
This is where the router tour came in really handy. We were fortunate enough to go to Israel.
Unknown Speaker 1:50:08
Very helpful. So all the water kindness collected in that little pump building the giant green pipes.
Unknown Speaker 1:50:16
Is there redundancy for that? That will be
Unknown Speaker 1:50:23
structure. Okay. So right now, that lead instructor receives water from both the Carter Lake connecting pipeline, so it’s coming through Carter Lake through the pipeline, it also receives water from the st grade supply canal. And that’s during the summertime, it also gets water from the North St. Mary pipeline that goes up to a long rough dam. So we have three separate sources that we can draw on to treat water. In addition to that, if we really need to, we can deliver water through the Highland ditch and pump water from the Highland gates to the plant. So there’s actually four pipelines that we can deliver raw water to.
Unknown Speaker 1:51:10
And that was one of the reasons we’re citing before we get excited, we had access to several different sources so that, you know, depending on what was happening, and especially now, I think we’d become more critical, because of all the wildfires fires that are happening, we have the ability to switch sources, your work is one source of being impacted. So it gives us a lot more flexibility. So heaven forbid, something happens to the blending the blending structure, the
Unknown Speaker 1:51:45
potential to get water to the
Unknown Speaker 1:51:47
if say that, again, if something happened to the
Unknown Speaker 1:51:52
Unknown Speaker 1:51:55
with a highland edge to the only avenue by which to get water, we have a bypass, okay, from the landing strip, which we can’t
Unknown Speaker 1:52:06
bypass water, although it has to go into lightning structure. But yeah, we can get there, we generally we can get it to the treatment plants, both of them. And then we also have, if it is really an emergency, we have the forebay, the 30 Day, which stores around 30 million gallons, if something were really severely to go wrong, we would start drawing off the forebay. But that gives us only a limited supply and timing, assuming that we we could address whatever the problem was. But for the most part because we’re flowing by gravity into the plant. There’s not a lot that can go wrong. Unless there’s, you know, some some nefarious act, some type of terrorism. That is the other thing with this site is we’re trying to consolidate things so that we can secure all of our facilities in that area. And that’s one of the reasons also, we’re trying to move the storage tank Montgomery take away from the highway. The highway is as the storage tank is really easily accessible by the public public because it’s right next to the major highway. So if we can move that further away, we believe that would be a more secure location.
Unknown Speaker 1:53:38
The second forebay
Unknown Speaker 1:53:41
you mentioned it being able to be kind of
Unknown Speaker 1:53:45
a bit of kind of settling process there. Was that purposeful was that because of i You mentioned wildfire, for example, because you see problems in the future with wildfire wasn’t just Well, it’s an extra benefit. It is really because of what we’ve seen with wildfires. One of the things that happened with Fort Collins when when they got to wildfire, get the
Unknown Speaker 1:54:13
Unknown Speaker 1:54:15
watershed is the they got a lot of settlements, because of the bare ground. A lot of ash that came down the ash is very difficult to treat, even with a settling pond. So there will probably need to be other chemicals that need to be added. But long term wise
Unknown Speaker 1:54:37
after a wildfire, there still are other impacts that occur because of the change in the ground and just the whole change in that area. So there are other things
Unknown Speaker 1:54:51
that smaller basin. If we need to we we could probably add chemicals to that to help that
Unknown Speaker 1:55:00
One last question, then you’re saying you’re going up to 60 MTD and what’s one’s current peak for the year? And then what have you seen over the last few years with regard something we’ve talked about the per capita usage is right, going down? What are you seeing in terms of peak demands in relation to the capacity? Yeah, we refer to that as the max de Mexico day demand. And it’s probably around 30. Low the low 30s.
Unknown Speaker 1:55:30
Surprisingly, the highest maximum day, we are one of the highest maximum days we’ve had was in around 1998, I believe was a really high day. And I believe that was 34 million gallons per day,
Unknown Speaker 1:55:48
it stayed the peak, those backstays have stayed around that that level for a while.
Unknown Speaker 1:55:55
It’s surprising because we see the same thing at our wastewater plant, even with the growth that occurs, or the flows that have gone to the wastewater plant have been fairly level in the last five, five or more years. So it hasn’t gone up yet. But it will start to go up because there’s only a certain, you know,
Unknown Speaker 1:56:18
about a conservation or whatever ever is occurring. But it does occur throughout most of the metro area, most of the other cities are seeing the same thing. But at the current rate and the way you’re growing. I mean, the 60 MVP made me even returned to planet earth later, that may get you to build on you got the potential go to 80 with Academy, so right looks like you’re you’re covered in the context of that plant being able to satisfy yet you know, that, that it’s we think that it will satisfy our needs through the planning horizon. The one thing about long term projections, because they are long term changes, and they keep on changing over time.
Unknown Speaker 1:57:04
What are the concerns that are one of the issues that could change? How that changes in the future is how development is occurring? Because we are seeing very, a lot more dense developments occur. So at some point that will start to
Unknown Speaker 1:57:22
to impact what happens there.
Unknown Speaker 1:57:26
Okay, great. Any other questions or comments? Great. Thank you for the great
Unknown Speaker 1:57:32
report. Thank you learn. Thanks, Jason. Appreciate.
Unknown Speaker 1:57:36
Alright, let’s keep on moving here. We’re on Item 10 items from the board. The first item is 10 days or remote the attendance policy can and we really don’t have much to report on that today. We’re still working with we haven’t had a chance to sit down with legal crap the language. We intend to have that for November.
Unknown Speaker 1:57:59
And comments there. Otherwise, we’ll just revisit.
Unknown Speaker 1:58:03
Take it up again in November.
Unknown Speaker 1:58:06
Item 10. B is the review of major project listings that’s in your packet. And items tentatively scheduled for future board meeting. Any comments on what’s coming up?
Unknown Speaker 1:58:18
Unknown Speaker 1:58:19
11 is informational items and waterboard correspondents. There’s a few items attached in the background. And questions, comments.
Unknown Speaker 1:58:29
I don’t see any items tentatively scheduled for future board meeting. We have the cash in lieu and obviously the next time we said in December but we’ll be talking about November in a lot more detail.
Unknown Speaker 1:58:42
Unknown Speaker 1:58:44
I am phobia discuss future waterboarded agenda, anything anybody wants to bring up for future agendas? You know, I’m saying this my I was going to ask the question.
Unknown Speaker 1:58:56
Unknown Speaker 1:58:58
termination data, the existing contract that I had a couple of years ago. That’s like 15 more years.
Unknown Speaker 1:59:06
It was a 75 year contract entered into and all three. So it’s like 27. The
Unknown Speaker 1:59:16
reason I thought
Unknown Speaker 1:59:18
we had a couple three years, some of us? Well, there is an opt out provision is American and there’s a 15 year opt out. So if they chose opt out, or we chose opt out, it’s 15 years from when we either party gives each other notice. But we but your if you’re correct, we do hope to
Unknown Speaker 1:59:40
go back to public service and basically either extend or make permanent, that exchange agreement. And that is one Yeah, that’s exactly you’re remembering. We are in the process. We have the language written I’m just trying to be in review. And once it’s submitted
Unknown Speaker 2:00:00
They’re all just kind of curious. Oh, that’s
Unknown Speaker 2:00:06
great. Anything else?
Unknown Speaker 2:00:08
See anything with that around 1113 And I’m gonna go ahead and adjourn the meeting. So thank you all for your time today. Thank you all