Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/15/2024 - Economic Advisory Board - AGENDA - Regular Meeting Economic Advisory Board REGULAR MEETING May 15, 2024, 4:00 p.m. - 6:00 p.m. HYBRID MEETING OPTIONS Physical Loca�on: CIC Room @ 300 LaPorte Ave. Virtual option via Zoom: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/84688470753 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL 3. AGENDA REVIEW 4. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 6. NEW BUSINESS a. Presentation: Water Supply Requirements (WSR), Excess Water Use (EWU) Surcharge, and Allotments for All Commercial Customers i. Presenters: Heather Young, Community Engagement Manager; Donnie Dustin, Water Engineer; and Katie Collins, Water Conservation Specialist ii. Optional Read-Ahead: www.fcgov.com/utilities/wsr 7. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 8. BOARD MEMBER REPORTS 9. OTHER BUSINESS 10. ADJOURNMENT 05/15/2024 – AGENDA Page 1 04/17/24 Minutes Economic Advisory Board REGULAR MEETING Wednesday, April 17, 2024 – 4:00 PM 300 Laporte Ave, CIC Room 1. CALL TO ORDER: 4:00 PM 2. ROLL CALL a. Board Members Present – • Tim Cochran • Chris Denton • Thierry Dossou • Erin Gray • Val Kailburn • Braulio Rojas • Richard Waal b. Board Members Absent – • Denny Coleman • Renee Walkup c. Staff Members Present – • Jillian Fresa, Economic Health Manager, Economic Health Office • Erin Sporer, Business Support, Economic Health Office • Paul Sizemore, Planning, Development, & Transportation (PDT) Deputy Director d. Guest(s) – 3. AGENDA REVIEW 4. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION a. 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES a. Chris motioned and Erin seconded to approve the March agenda. Motion carried unanimously. 6-0. 6. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 7. NEW BUSINESS a. Meet & Greet with Mayor Jeni Arndt, EAB Council Liaison • The board doesn’t want to be afraid to speak out and act. • That is super important. Something I am worried about is I had a Page 2 04/17/24 Minutes meeting with a banker in the region and they asked if I feel like Fort Collins is a city in decline. That is a concern. There are some things that we need to pay more attention to like Attracting talent. We haven’t attracted a major employer for a long time. Some of the City processes are too involved and processed to detract businesses, large and small. We have wonderful climate goals and always need to remember there is a balance between driving up costs so the average person can live and work here but also that people need jobs and jobs are businesses. There is a part of this town that wants to drive up the cost of housing and turn away businesses. I don’t share those thoughts but want to have a vibrant, integrated, welcoming community. We need to be intentional about it. We used to rely on physical settings and trying new things. This is an important board when we get an economic perspective. An example is the building codes. Who isn’t for environmental causes, but we have goals of affordability. We want to consider all of those, and this is the board where all of that can happen. • A board member shared an experience regarding a rental home he owned that became vacant but some of the applicants couldn’t afford it. He also mentioned that PSD’s enrollment is dropping. We might be living in a good place now, but what will happen in five years if they don’t act. It is important to provide support to Council to make tough decisions. We should be active and not be shy. • Question to Mayor - We have not attracted a big employer for a long time. What do you think is inhibiting that? • I am not sure. We have Woodward, HP, Broadcom, and Budweiser. • I don’t know necessarily. We need diverse talent to attract. Folks come to Fort Collins and end up leaving because they don’t want to stay. • The reason people stay is varied but most people who come to Broadcom have seen the general nature of the City and are proud to be in Fort Collins. People that haven’t come here, the cost is too high. People make that decision. For some it’s worth it. When you are young, you fathom expenses and it’s hard to attract that. Locals are very excited to work for Broadcom because they see what they offer and see what they are getting. Why is it so expensive in Colorado because it is worth it. You must find people that find it worthwhile. There is always some turnover. Make sure people are not leaving and not knowing about what jobs we have to offer. It's hard to bring people here. People who have come haven’t left. As soon as they are here, they get it. There is a segment of people who don’t want that but we should have that in this community as well. Not everyone should enjoy hiking, biking, and going to Horsetooth. • One board member moved to Colorado 30 years ago from San Fransisco. Businesses around the Bay Area had an expertise. In Colorado there was an expertise in navigation. When they think of Fort Collins, they don’t get that. When trying to attract businesses they look at what is the talent around them. When you think of Fort Collins you don’t think about one thing or another. Page 3 04/17/24 Minutes • The board commends activity at global and local level and Council Priorities. It is not just about development and growth but a wide variety of goals. What makes Fort Collins exciting is we are a good example of a progressive city working on complex issues. There are different incomes and ethnicities. Lots of cities are experiencing the same thing. This is a diverse board that can hopefully help. We can’t please everyone but how do you move in the right direction to move forward. • The mayor believes this is a great role to try and help bring that out. By the time things come to Council it is easy to pass. Council’s view is so narrow. This is where a lot of work comes from, asking have you talked to affordable housing about water supply rate etc. We try to ask but we can’t catch it all. We do the best we can do. This group can catch some of those things and it’s a great place to dig in. • Can you describe what the Council Liaison role is and how often do you come to our meetings? • I come to almost zero. It is the person who if there is a problem or question, I work with Jillian. I also lead interviews. I try to come when I can and read your notes. There are a lot of conflicts but if you want me to know something or want me to come, I will. b. New Member Welcome • The board did introductions. New members include Tim Cochran, Chris Denton, and Val Kailburn. c. Fort Collins Development Update • Paul is part of a large department in the City • 90 people - covers planning and development, historic preservation, neighborhood services, etc. • Recent development activity • Reviewed data up to 2023 including development applications and minor amendments. • A little concern in new applications in 2021-2022, fluctuates overtime. Not sure if it is a trend down, but in 2023 went back up. • Other set of data- forward looking pieces – pre-submittal review, conceptual reviews, and preliminary design reviews • consistent over time. • Development applications by type • 2022 inflated over 2023- double counting on some. Useful to see what industry and sector we are seeing. • Since 2020 commercial has been on steady decline – made up by “other” (earlier stages of larger scale and longer-term projects, ex pud plan), multifamily increasing as well. Single family residential also declining overtime. Less zoned land available for single family available. • Building permit trends, looking at multifamily units, 2023 was a strong year. • Geographically looking at permits as well – some years we see it concentrated in one area. This shows it spread out. • Master plan communities • Largest one is Montava • NE part of town. Longest term built out over 25 years on 1000 Page 4 04/17/24 Minutes acres. 3 phases that are all at planning right now in development review process. • Phase G and E moving along. The developer has run into situation with ditch company regarding storm water. Need to come into agreement to get these phases to approval so it is taking longer than they expected. They are working on an agreement. • Phase D overview is not reliant on ditch company and will now probably 1st phase to get started on construction. Working hard to get to that by the end of the year. It is an aggressive timeline. • Bloom • 225 acres. Many filings are in process and actively under construction. It is smaller than Montava. • Sonders Village • 129 acres, 689 dwellings include 95 affordable housing units. It just started. • Commercial development • Very few new nonresidential development apps in 2023 • Parts of larger developments • Prospect sports only commercial project recently approved by planning and zoning commission. • Basketball venue with courts for league practice, games, and tournaments • Located on sharp point drive off east prospect. • Projects under construction • Morning Star/block 23 • Midtown King Soopers • Multifamily overview • List of 8 projects that have been through development project either approved or prehearing. • Policy process and customer service • Land Use Code (LUC) foundational updates. • 1st zoning code adopted in 1929. The current code from 1997 has been amended but there is only so much working around the edges you can do. 2018 adopted new city plan. • 1st phase of LUC includes a new framework for development code but also focused on residential components. Last night they came back with the 3rd iteration of updated code. This version has taken out the components that were controversial including not increasing density or allowable uses in existing residential neighborhoods. All foundational changes that adjust densities in already dense residential areas. Incentives for affordable housing are all intact. • Get foundational changes in place can get on to the rest of the work they have been doing on the code. • Phase 2 focuses on commercial corridors – 15-minute City • Revise processes and procedures. • Modernize development standards. • Work session with city council June 11 to confirm scope. • Development review evaluation • State of development review- see what is working well and not Page 5 04/17/24 Minutes working in development review process. • Creating plan – goals for development review plan, areas of focus and rethinking performance measures on how review works. • Come back and visit to share about that. Questions • What is the difference between single family detached and single family attached? • Attached is like a townhome, where they share a wall, but it is individually owned. • Are multifamily permits separate from multiunit buildings? • We can permit them under master permits but it’s unit counts. So, it is not individual permits. • You are saying the reason Bloom was faster was because they didn’t have a ditch issue and it’s also smaller. • There was less complexity, and it is a quarter of the size of Montava. In terms of timeline, Montava started the process before Bloom, but Bloom made it to the construction phases before them. • It seems like the new codes are trying to be more discreet in its neighborhood designation on what is allowable in certain types of neighborhoods. • I think that is part of it. A big thing that has changed in 25 years in zoning and land use codes is a lot of zoning ordinances are based on lengthy descriptions where you describe allowable dimensions on the lots, and they get pieced together section by section. In that time, form-based codes have become the industry standard where you define a building envelope, and you focus on the urban design and form to fit within that envelope and less on the narrative approach or even worrying so much about the different use types. That is one of the biggest foundational changes being made. • If there is anything the board can do now or with land use planning to be supportive or any issues we need to consider, let us know. • Feel last slide is admirable. The process is always a challenge because you need to do work but get it done efficiently. Talk about attracting companies, whatever size they are to come here, I think the development piece, and that process however streamlined you can get it is great. Obviously, you have to hit hurdles. • That s a great point of the balancing act. It is Incumbent on us to make sure we are applying standards and doing a good thorough review on projects, and we are aware there are pieces to the process where there are processes that are redundant, have evolved over time where they don’t make sense, or don’t see them because we are running through them repeatedly. So that is why it was helpful to do that survey work and get some feedback on those things that were process challenges. Some fascinating feedback we got was that people who go through process are okay with standards; the rub is that the process things can be hard. • That is a piece of marketing, the one stop show if you want to open a business. We talk about Fort Collins being open and welcoming and all of that might be more elements where we can be more welcoming, and we have updated processes to be efficient. • It is something where we try to work with our Economic Health partners to focus on small businesses that are not Page 6 04/17/24 Minutes developers and haven’t been through the process. It can be daunting. • You said with commercial there is only one, is that because people don’t want to develop or are we running out of space? • I can speculate. A lot of it is market supply and demand. Post covid environment, that has been less of a demand for employment type uses and office space. Those types of developments that might have come through pre 2020 would classified as commercial. We are not capturing those right now because there is enough inventory. A lot of it is happening through those minor amendments to existing development where a business already has location but needs to expand. They can do it on their property, so they do not need to acquire a new site. • Do you have data on other communities to compare? • Anecdotally with conversations. Loveland also presented. I think there is a lot of alignment but haven’t done cross referencing. • I was just curious if it was local, regional, nationwide or industry as a whole. • When looking at housing and current demographics of the City as far as income and the housing that’s available, and trying to have more unformal affordable housing or likely curve of what people are going to be able to need to spend on housing, are you going to be able to provide through this plan a match to that long term need Or will we accidentally build too much toward the higher or mid high? • I wish I had my colleague lead Meaghan here who is the Housing Manager. She could give a more detailed answer on demographic impact. The foundation changes that City Council considered at first reading has built in a lot of additional capacity on already high- density zones. That is one of the key pieces of this first phase of this Land Use Code update is take that long term approach of what is needed in the future and trying to align those zone districts. Your point on how much of those units are going to cost, that is the piece I don’t have as much insight into as so much is driven by the cost of construction and what the larger economy is doing. I think the hedge there is the City has taken a strong position on taking more deed restricted affordable housing so being able to provide housing for folks that are at that very bottom end of the spectrum and there are incentives that are built into the code update under consideration right now would step that up from what we’ve historically had. • Is affordable housing strictly multifamily housing or are those also single-family residences too? • Can be single family residences, multifamily, rental, ownership. There is a need for all in the community. In general, the regulations are set up where there are different thresholds for what qualifies as being affordable. There is opportunity development by development if this is a product that fits well in that development and can choose. • Are you seeing more condos or is condo defect loss still problematic? • We don’t have data to show trends so don’t want to give answers one way or another but I think it’s safe to say a Page 7 04/17/24 Minutes majority are still apartments; condos are on the rare side. • 8. BOARD MEMBER REPORTS 9. STAFF REPORTS a. Sylvia and Megan are applying for an industry award for the mulberry corridor and looking for some edits on the letter EAB wrote. b. Council interested in EAB being more involved. 10. OTHER BUSINESS a. Board wants to be more active and effective. • Role of memos, pros and cons also emphasized. • Each month City staff present - asking them questions and drilling into things is helpful for them to understand what residents care about so they can sharpen their presentations for Council. • Be more proactive. • Recommends board to look at workplan, Council priorities and planning calendar. • Jillian works to find presenters; it is a dynamic moving target. • If the board feel something is important and relevant let Jillian or chairs know • Board share duties of writing memos. b. June meeting falls on holiday • Meeting moved to June 26th. 11. ADJOURNMENT a. (5:51PM) Minutes approved by a vote of the Board/Commission on XX/XX/XX Headline Copy Goes Here Water Resources Engineer, P.E. Donnie Dustin Utilities Community Engagement Manager Heather Young 5-15-2024 Water Supply Requirements and Pre-1984 Non-Residential Water Allotments Katie Collins Water Conservation Specialist Headline Copy Goes HerePurpose 1.Build shared understanding of the history and purpose of Water Supply Requirement fees and pre-1984 non- residential water allotments. 2.Share staff’s analysis of potential methodologies for Water Supply Requirement fees and assigning pre-1984 non-residential water allotments. 3.Share planned customer engagement for 2024, including a timeline and identification of impacted parties. 4.Answer questions and seek input. 2 Headline Copy Goes HereQuestions for the Economic Advisory Board 1)What general questions do you have? 2)How might you or the community you represent be impacted by these changes? 3)What other input do you have? 3 Headline Copy Goes Here Utilities Water Service Area Fort Collins Area Water Districts Map ~36,000 water taps (32,000 customers) ~3,000 are commercial (1,900 customers) GMA Major Streets City Limits Railroad ELCO Water District Fort Collins-Loveland Water District Fort Collins Utilities (Water) Sunset Water District West Fort Collins Water District Water Districts 4 Headline Copy Goes HerePurpose – Water Supply Requirements and Water Allotments A form of Water Supply Requirements (WSR) and water allotments has been in place since the mid-1960s. The purpose is to: •Ensure secure water sources and protect the watershed •Provide a financial mechanism to ensure current and future assets are adequate to meet community water supply and service needs •Balance current needs and supply and future potential needs and acquisitions 5 Headline Copy Goes HereTimeline April 9 Council Work Session April/May Aug./Sept.2025Oct./Nov.June/July TBD Work Session Implementation Council Finance Committee Water Commission and Other Boards Continue Engagement TBD First and Second Reading Regular Meetings May Initiate Engagement July 16 Council Work Session Planning & Zoning and Other Boards Wrap Up Engagement 6 Headline Copy Goes HereWater Supply Requirements, Water Allotments, and Dedication Water Supply Requirement Fee paid by new development and some redevelopment to ensure adequate water dedication to serve. Assessed during development and redevelopment Water Allotment A volume of water dedicated to a non-residential user. Two -thirds of non-residential accounts have assigned allotments. Based on WSR Excess Water Use Surcharge A charge assessed to non-residential accounts with allotments when they exceed their allotment. Based on Allotment 7 Headline Copy Goes HereWSR Methodology •All regional water service providers have a version of a WSR development fee •Total fee varies based on water rights portfolio, infrastructure and ability to support existing and future customers to meet community values •Water scarcity and demand drive the cost of acquiring new water and impacts the value of our water rights portfolio 8 Headline Copy Goes HereWater Fund Inputs Water Utility Rates Rates paid by existing customers make up approximately 95% of the water fund revenue. Development/Redevelopment Fees New development and redevelopment within the water service area make up approximately 5%. Development/Redevelopment The rate of development can be unpredictable and water costs can play a part in where development occurs. Future Storage Cost Future storage has been identified through the Halligan Water Supply Project. Costs estimates of this project have increased significantly. Water Rights Additional water rights necessary to meet 2065 projected demands. Additional Storage Storage is needed for existing and future use. 5% 95% 9 Headline Copy Goes Here Headline Copy Goes HereOverview of Methodologies Full Buy-In •Cost of the entire existing water supply system which is expected to serve all existing and future customers. •Future customers buy in to the entire current system (total value of system/total yield). Incremental •Cost to expand the water supply system to serve future customers. •Only reflects the cost of future water rights and infrastructure. Hybrid •Includes a “buy-in” component for the current water supply system and an “incremental” component for the future water system needs that have not yet been purchased or built. •Acknowledges future customers will use portions of the current and future water supply systems. 11 Headline Copy Goes HereWSR Historical Methodology ›Re-evaluating options within the hybrid methodology ›Market vs. cost-based valuations ›Analysis of current risk factors (contingency/safety) 2002-2017 ›2018: $17,300/AF using hybrid method with market-based costing ›2020: $21,500/AF, updated costing ›2021: $22,145/AF, added 3% inflationary increase 2018-2021 ›$68,200/AF, same methodology with updated yields 2022-current ›$6,500/AF, based on Colorado Big- Thompson (CBT) prices 2025-future 12 Headline Copy Goes HereCurrent Methodology Overview HYBRID Buy-in Existing water rights Incremental Future water rights andinfrastructure Total cost to increase reliability of water supply Note: Future water supplies do not provide adequate reliability without existing portfolio 13 Headline Copy Goes HereWater Supply Requirement Fee WSR = Existing Water + Future Water rights & Infrastructure Can determine past purchase prices and costs. Options on how to value: •Market price in today’s dollars •Cost of what was paid plus an adjustment factor Buy-In Existing Water Rights Incremental Future Water Rights and Infrastructure Requires modeling and predicting costs of future water supply needs. Options on how to value: •Market-based •Contingency •Safety factor 14 Headline Copy Goes HereHybrid Method Pricing Options *Contingency: Captures uncertainties in future costs **Safety factor: Captures uncertainties in future demand and supplies (e.g., climate change, development types, etc.) Method Cost (draft)Considerations Market-based 30% contingency* 20% safety factor** $116,500/AF •Current approach with updated costs •Highest impact to developers Market-based 30% contingency $97,100/AF •Safety factor removed Cost-based, 30% contingency 20% safety factor $71,800/AF •Development costs reflect Utilities’ investment in water rights proactively (since late 1800s) Cost-based 30% contingency $59,900/AF •Safety factor removed •Lower than current fee •Highest impact to existing customers 15 Headline Copy Goes HereMulti-Family Total Water Supply Requirement (Indoor & Outdoor) 2024 Multi-Family 100 bedrooms, 64 dwelling units, 30,504 sq. ft. lot area, 5,535 sq. ft. irrigated area Provider Dedication Amount (acre-feet) Water Fee ($/acre-feet)Cost Ft. Collins Loveland 15.29 $120,000 $1,228,200 East Larimer County 11.07 $60,600**$670,900 Loveland 10.62 $47,380 $503,200 FC Utilities (MB,30%C,20%S)4.27 $116,500 $497,500 FC Utilities (MB,30%C,NoS)4.27 $97,100 $414,600 Greeley 7.29 $51,500 $375,300 FC Utilities (CB,30%C,20%S)4.27 $71,800 $306,600 Westminster 6.88 $40,400 $278,300 FC Utilities (CB,30%C,NoS)4.27 $59,900 $255,800 **For larger developments,East Larimer County Water District only allows 30% of its WSR to be met with cash and the remainder must be met with acceptable water rights, thus the cash equivalent listed here is based on the market value of acceptable water rights. *MCS=Market-based, 30% contingency, 20% safety factor; CCS=Cost-based, Contingency, 20% safety factor; MC=Market-based, contingency, no safety factor; CC=Cost-based contingency, no safety factor 16 Headline Copy Goes HereComparison to Other Providers 15.29 AF 11.07 AF 10.62 AF 4.27 AF 7.29 AF 4.27 AF 6.88 AF 4.27 AF *MCS=Market-based, 30% contingency, 20% safety factor; CCS=Cost-based, Contingency, 20% safety factor; MC=Market-based, contingency, no safety factor; CC=Cost-based contingency, no safety factor FC Utilities (CB,30%C,NoS) Westminster FC Utilities (CB,30%C,20%S) Greeley FC Utilities (MB,30%C,NoS) FC Utilities (MB,30%C,20%S) Loveland East Larimer County Ft. Collins Loveland Multi-Family (100 bedrooms, 64 dwelling units, 30,504 sq. ft.lot area, 5,535 sq. ft.irrigated area) 17 Headline Copy Goes HereComparison to Other Providers 1.25 AF 1.25 AF 1.25 AF 1.62 AF 1.72 AF 0.70 AF 0.79 AF 1.00 AF *MCS=Market-based, 30% contingency, 20% safety factor; CCS=Cost-based, Contingency, 20% safety factor; MC=Market-based, contingency, no safety factor; CC=Cost-based contingency, no safety factor Loveland East Larimer County Ft. Collins Loveland Westminster FC Utilities (CB,30%C,NoS) Greeley FC Utilities (CB,30%C,20%S) FC Utilities (MB,30%C,NoS) FC Utilities (MB,30%C,20%S) Typical Restaurant (2,800 sq. ft.) 18 Headline Copy Goes HereSummary: Hybrid Method Pricing Options Method Cost Considerations Market-based 30% contingency* 20% safety factor** $116,500/AF •Current approach with updated costs •Highest impact to developers Market-based 30% contingency $97,100/AF •Safety factor removed Cost-based, 30% contingency 20% safety factor $71,800/AF •Development costs reflect Utilities’ investment in water rights proactively (since late 1800s) Cost-based 30% contingency $59,900/AF •Safety factor removed •Lower than current fee •Highest impact to existing customers 19 Headline Copy Goes Here Headline Copy Goes HereWater Allotment Overview •Proposing to assign allotments to ~1,000 accounts that do not have one (1/3 of total) •Not proposing additional WSR costs •Allow time to adjust use to avoid surcharges 1965-1984 •Required volume based on tap size •Began to assign allotments to non- residential accounts 1984 •Allotments based on business type 2022 •Required volume of water based on acre of land served •No allotments were assigned 2024 22 Headline Copy Goes HereWhy Update Now? •Consistency •Subject to same requirement for all customers •Fairness •Customers without allotments can use as much water as they desire without surcharges •Does not capture costs for water supply system use that is above what was paid for through a WSR fee •A higher WSR fee and surcharges increases the inequity between customers who are subject to surcharges and those who are not •Conservation •Programs and incentives for customers that would regularly go over their allotment 23 Headline Copy Goes HereAllotment Methodology Overview Method Description History Impacts Hybrid (Tap and Avg. Use) Selects the greater between average historical use and tap credit •Lowest impact •Could assign a higher allotment than needed making it difficult to identify inefficiencies Tap Credit Assigns a volume based on meter size Most current allotments assigned with this methodology •Could underestimate allotment resulting in potential unwarranted surcharges Average Historical Use Assigns a volume based on average historical water use per tap (e.g., 5 years) Have not assigned this way •Could assign a lower allotment compared to the volume received with a tap credit, undervaluing WSR •Could assign a higher allotment than customer needed making it difficult to identify water use inefficiencies Business Type Assigns based on business type and specific use (e.g., # rooms in hotel, square footage of restaurant, landscape details, etc.) Current methodology for setting allotments •Best reflects actual water use need •Limited data to fully evaluate impacts (44 customers assigned this way) •Time -intensive process 24 Headline Copy Goes HerePotential Impacts 25 If all accounts used highest volume recorded in the last five years: •15% of accounts would exceed proposed allotment •Average estimated EWU per account at current rate: $5k •Total EWU impact = $824k 1989 TAP CREDIT 91% 5YR AVG (2019-2023) 9% SOURCE OF PROPOSED ALLOTMENT Headline Copy Goes Here Headline Copy Goes HereWork Directly with Impacted Parties •Involve impacted parties in developing and refining alternatives for: •WSR •EWU surcharges •Allotment assignments •Goals: •Keep impacted parties informed of project timeline, how to be involved, and decisions made •Seek input on potential impacts to customers and community members Phase 1 (April – June) Broad engagement and feedback collection Phase 2 (July – Sept.) Refine proposal and incorporate feedback Phase 3 (Oct. – Dec.) Seek adoption 28 Headline Copy Goes HereImpacted Parties •Market-rate developers •Affordable housing developers •Water-intensive businesses (breweries, restaurants, etc.) •Homeowner’s Associations •Commercial real estate •Commercial water customers •With allotments •Without allotments •Irrigation only 29 Headline Copy Goes HerePlanned Communications and Engagement Opportunities •Council Work Sessions •Boards and Commissions •Email communication •Existing e-newsletters •Survey •Seek input from community groups •Webinar and office hours for impacted allotment customers 30 Headline Copy Goes Here Headline Copy Goes HereQuestions 1)What general questions do you have? 2)How might you or the community you represent be impacted by these changes? 3)What other input do you have? 32