Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutWater Board - Minutes - 03/27/1997WATER UTILITIES BOARD MINUTES March 27, 1997 3:15 - 5:10 P.M. Light and Power Training Room 700 Wood Street COUNCIIJWATER UTILITIES BOARD LIAISON Chuck Wanner - Present at the meeting WATER UTILITIES BOARD CHAIRMAN Paul Clopper - 223-5556 (W) STAFF LIAISON Molly Nortier - 221-6681 (W) MEMBERS PRESENT Paul Clopper, Chairman; John Bartholow, Vice Chairman; George Reed, Ray Herrmann, Alison Adams, John Barnett, David Lauer, Howard Goldman, Robert Ward, John Morris, Tom Brown, Dave Frick, Tom Sanders STAFF Mike Smith, Wendy Williams, Gale McGaha Miller, Dennis Bode, Bob Smith, Laurie D'Audney, Diana Royval, Molly Nortier GUESTS John Bigham, Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District Randy Gustafson, City of Greeley MEMBERS ABSENT Joe Bergquist, Bob Havis, (excused) David Rau, Randy Fischer Chair Paul Clopper opened the meeting. The following items were discussed: MINUTES Ray Herrmann moved that the minutes of February 20, 1997 be approved as distributed. After a second from George Reed, the minutes were approved unanimously. NOTE: ALL ACTION TAKEN ON AGENDA ITEMS IS PREFACED BY THE WORDS ACTION, MOTION AND VOTE IN BOLD TYPE Water Utilities Board Minutes March 27, 1997 Page 2 UPDATE: NORTHERN COLORADO WATER CONSERVANCY DISTRICT John Bigham distributed the SNOTEL numbers as of March 26, 1997 and the CBT reservoir totals. He began by saying that the reservoir storage remained approximately the same for the overall CBT system. Carter Reservoir is full. No water is coming through the Adams Tunnel. Unit 3 in the Pole Hill Power Plant is ready to go. As soon as water is needed in Horsetooth, the District will reverse the water from out of Carter and run it through the power plant through unit 3. "We anticipate that the tunnel will be back in operation between the 7th and the 15th of April," he said. He reported that the snow report percentages for the basin have continued to drop, yet all of them remain above the average. The District anticipates that there will be enough water coming into the system on the west side that there could be a spill over there under the most probable conditions. There probably will be some spill out of Granby. Mr. Bigham invited Board members and staff to attend the NCWCD Spring Water Users Meeting in Fort Collins on Wednesday, April 9, 1997 at the University Park Holiday Inn. Board members received a preliminary agenda in their packets. He also announced the Board of Director's meeting, which is on the I Ith. The Board will set the quota then. They continue to anticipate that it will be a 50% quota because of a substantial amount of carryover water and excellent local storage. Mr. Clopper asked if March or April is the heavy snow month. "Both of them are," Mr. Bigham replied. Mr. Clopper announced that George Reed had annual reports from the North Poudre Irrigation Co. from 1911-1992 which he wanted to give to anyone who might find them interesting. "There is a lot of valuable information about the drought years," he related. Alison Adams said she would like to have them. Dennis Bode has most of them on file, but Mike Smith said that the Utility may want to fill in the missing years when Ms. Adams finishes with them. WATER CONSERVATION ANNUAL REPORT Board members had received the Water Conservation Annual Report in their packets. Laurie D'Audney, Utility Education Specialist, prepared the report. She stated that the annual report is part of resolution 92-63 about the demand management measures. She said that she did not plan to go through each of the 12 measures, but instead would highlight a few items that were new this year. One of the areas that staff spends a major part of their time on is education. She pointed out on p. 3 under measure # 4, that staff is preparing for the 1997 Environmental Series program on April 16th at the Senior Center from 7:00 - 9:00. Staff began plans in 1996 to renovate the Xeriscape Demonstration Garden at City Hall. Last year was the 10-year anniversary of the dedication of the garden. Essentially, it will be given a facelift by doing some pruning, adding some new plants and updating all of the signs. 14 Water Utilities Board Minutes March 27, 1997 Page 3 Another project staff is working on is the YARDX (Yield and Reliability Demonstrated in Xeriscape) project. It is a three-year effort funded by the Bureau of Reclamation and Metro Water Conservation, Inc. The goal of the study is to compare the water usage of Xeriscape with traditional landscaping. "We are looking for 55 homeowners in the Fort Collins area to volunteer to participate in the project. They must have new homes. We will be monitoring their water use, maintenance and installation costs," she explained. Currently there are close to 40 that have applied for the program. They will participate in a seminar on April 12th, after which, they will commit to a three-year involvement in the study. They receive the benefits of a professional design for half of their landscape, coupons for 20% off plants from local nurseries, and some irrigation material discounts. Paul Clopper asked how the Utility is getting the word out to potential home buyers. "I have sent letters to the builders, and we have had some volunteers through that, but actually I have targeted certain areas." In Fort Collins they are concentrating on larger lots and more expensive houses. She has found certain developments that generally meet the criteria. She has sent out 100 letters to homeowners in those areas and has received, so far, about 11 responses. "Why are you only targeting new homes?" Alison Adams inquired. "That's one of the BOR's criteria," Ms. D'Audney said. "In different areas up and down the front range, there are about 12 test sites. Some are doing retrofits; they are taking existing homes and converting them to Xeriscape. Some of them are studying existing Xeriscapes, and our area is applying it to new construction," she explained. "Is the Bureau funding this 100%?" Mr. Clopper asked. "Yes," she replied; "but we give our time," she added. David Lauer asked if it would be possible, in the future, to supplement that with existing landscapes locally. "Not as a part of this project, but it's something we can talk about," she said. It would be interesting to see that final report on all of those, Robert Ward said, "and out of that you may be able to design a locally supported program that would target what limited resources we have, for the most bang for the buck." "We'll get a copy of the report," Ms. D'Audney said. She pointed out that there are actually 5 different sites throughout the United States that each has a cluster of different areas similar to what there is along the front range. "Is this essentially free to the homeowner?" Mr. Lauer asked. "At the end of the seminar on the 12th we will ask them to pay a $100 deposit to indicate that they are committed to the program. They receive up to a $300 rebate, 45 cents per square foot of the area that they Xeriscape." She emphasized that the Bureau wanted to make sure that volunteers are really committed before they are given all the services and materials required for the program. Mr. Lauer contends that targeting upper income families doesn't seem appropriate. "As I understand it, that's just one part of it," Mr. Ward responded. "There's another group that may be targeting low income, and they're going to try to blend all of that data." Ms. D'Audney said Mr. Ward is correct. She related that they essentially eliminated income as criteria, "because we didn't have that many people in the income level that the Bureau wanted us to find." She pointed out that they are also working with ELCO and Fort Collins -Loveland Water District on this program. "All of us had a hard Water Utilities Board Minutes March 27, 1997 Page 4 time finding people with incomes over $100,000 that the Bureau suggested," she stressed. She said that now it has changed to home value over $175,000. "Are you still targeting large lots regardless of the income structure?" Mr. Lauer asked. `Basically, they need to have 5,000 sq. ft. of their lot that is going to be used for landscape, so they must have a lot that is 7,000-8,000 sq. ft. minimum," she replied. "Does the house have to be new and not been lived in?" Mr. Goldman wondered. "It's not so much whether the house is new, but rather that the landscape is new; it must have totally unimproved soil," Ms. D'Audney responded. She explained that people with retrofits get $1,000 cash back because it is quite expensive to remove bluegrass, for example. Diana Royval, Public Information Coordinator, presented information on youth education efforts. She distributed copies of a publication called The Runoff for kids and adults. She said that four municipalities (Greeley, Loveland, Boulder and Fort Collins) worked together with the NCWCD on this 16-page newspaper that is going to be placed as an insert in The Coloradoan. It is geared towards upper elementary students and their parents, and deals with various aspects of water education. "As you look through it, you can see it contains information about the watershed and the water cycle, the CBT system, irrigation, wastewater, being water wise, ditches, floods and snowflakes, etc. There are basic science facts and fun science facts. Olympic Gold Medalist Amy VanDyken introduced the publication with a letter on the importance of water. An artist created cartoons for the watershed, water cycle and irrigation segments. "We tried to think of important things that were common to the front range," she explained. Each municipality produced its own four -page center section. "Our goal was to make this bright and colorful and attractive to upper elementary school children,"she pointed out. She went on to say that the publication was done as a test project for this year. "We are pleased with how it turned out," she stressed, "but there are a few things we would do differently." Depending on how well it is received, they plan to publish it every two years, using the same group of people, but using a different theme each time. She said that the Boulder Daily Camera printed 200,000 copies at a cost of about 11 cents per copy, which the group thought was reasonable. Each city contributed about $3,000. She related that when Boulder produced this on their own they spent over $20,000. As a group they managed to reduce the costs substantially. "This will be inserted in The Coloradoan on April 29, 1997. It's a Tuesday and there is a circulation of about 28,000 that day," she said. The inserts will be available for all the area water festivals as well as for distribution to schools. Some will also be placed at the public library, the Discovery Center, EPIC, etc. She mentioned that the group used a kids and teachers review board that provided input on some draft copies. "We are considering going statewide with this publication in the future," she said. There has been some interest from Grand Junction and Denver area utilities to participate. "We received a $900 grant from the Colorado Water Conservation Board to help fund the publication," she added. Water Utilities Board Minutes March 27, 1997 Page 5 Ms. Royval announced that the 6th annual Children's Water Festival will be held on May 21 st from 9:00 a.m. until 2:00 p.m. at the CSU Student Center and Engineering Building. "We have 1,875 fourth graders signed up; there are 36 presenters and about 15 exhibitors. It's better organized and more successful each year," she concluded. Laurie D'Audney announced that the City received a grant from the BOR for $10,000 to produce some displays for the Discovery Center. "We will be working on those this year. It will be a project that should get considerable use throughout the community," she said. George Reed had a question about Measure No. 5 in the report. He began by saying that there are a number of locations adjacent to city parks which might be converted to raw water. There are also several homeowners associations with large greenbelt areas that might possibly use raw water for irrigation. "Is there any opportunity to sell raw water to those people with whatever you create for the parks?" He has read that 75% of the parks are already irrigated with raw water. He pointed out that Warren Shores, near Warren Park put in their own raw water irrigation system. He thinks they buy Warren Lake water to augment the system.. He said it might be worth investigating, as part of Measure 5, if there are any private/municipal partnerships that could be arranged to use raw water for irrigation. Dennis Bode said there have been a number of private associations in the last 5 years, with whom the City has entered into an agreements. "We provide raw water to them, and in some cases, they initially turned over raw water to the City to receive water service." "Are you just supplying raw water to them that they have to pump and manage themselves, or are you delivering them raw water under pressure straight into their systems?" Mr. Reed wanted to know. "No, we deliver to a pond as part of their existing irrigation system, and they are responsible for it from there," Mr. Bode responded. Mr. Reed suggested that in any new areas where the City might be putting in a park, and an entire infrastructure is being installed for pumping of raw water, etc., there might be a way to put a meter on a branch of it and if there were an adjoining greenbelt area going in, sell them raw water under pressure for their sprinkling system. Dave Frick and Alison Adams pointed out some of the drawbacks they have heard about with the new low flush toilets. John Bartholow just installed one in his remodeled basement and it doesn't work. "Did you buy a pressurized one?" Ms. D'Audney asked. "No," Mr. Bartholow replied. "That's the problem,"she said; "you have to pay for the good ones." Ms. D'Audney said she is watching what is happening on the federal level to plumbing fixture regulations. Ms. D'Audney went on to discuss the volunteer metering program. In the City's goal to be metered by 2005, the target for the end of 1996 was to have 9,100 meters installed; that's in unmetered homes. "However, at the end of the year we had only 7,231 meters installed, so that put us about a year and a half behind schedule," she said. When staff realized the direction the metering program was going, they hired a consultant in 1996 who did a survey of non -metered customers. It was sent out Water Utilities Board Minutes March 27, 1997 Page 6 to about 800 customers; 400 or about half of them were returned. "The results confirmed or exceeded what we thought as far as people not being eager to have meters put in their homes," she said. Staff hoped to gauge what the support was: are these people sitting on the fence waiting for the City to put meters in, or are they just adamantly opposed to it? The survey indicates that about 30-35% of the respondents did not want a meter. "You'll have to make us!" they implied. Since the beginning of 1997, staff has been discussing some options for moving in the direction of mandatory metering. "It seems that trying to put further effort into the voluntary program would just put us further behind," she believes. Cards asking for volunteers were recently put in utility bills; "we received only 80 replies, which was not a very good response," she stressed. "We appear to have run out of people to market who are willing to have a meter," she added. "Would you gain much by installing a meter when somebody sells their house?" Alison Adams asked. "It probably would have been a good idea about 5 years ago," Ms. D'Audney replied. "We talked about that and at this time, we wouldn't get enough meters installed to catch up to our goal." "What other options do you have?" Mr. Clopper asked. "Staff was thinking about dividing the City into quadrants and randomly picking quarter sections from each quadrant," Ms. D'Audney explained; "basically a lottery system. We would tell people that this is the part of the City where we plan to install meters and then make appointments." The City has a commitment to put meters inside the homes, so "we need to gain access to the house. "It's still free, isn't it?" Ms. Adams asked. "Yes, it is," Ms. D'Audney replied. Wendy Williams reiterated that staff is in the process of looking at all the options of implementing a mandatory program. Next month staff will be bringing that recommendation to the Board. Mr. Herrmann suggested ending the free program. "Just let unmetered customers know that they have however long to have a meter installed free or at such and such a time they will be charged for the meter and the installation." Tom Brown wondered how that would look..."Not only are we going to force you, we're going to make you pay too!" Mr. Herrmann pointed out that the State is doing the forcing, the City is only enforcing it. Mike Smith said that staff has also considered raising the flat rate. "The issue is whether you can catch up on the schedule enough to do that." The issue with charging them for it is what Tom Brown pointed out. It could make the mandatory program even tougher. "The rate hike would work the same way if it's big enough," Mr. Herrmann contends. Ms. D'Audney recalled that staff talked at length about raising the rates. "It seemed like it might create quite a number of problems. If people received $50 water bills when they were used to $25, lots of people might volunteer at the same time because they wouldn't want to pay that, making it impossible for the Utility to keep up with the demand. It certainly wouldn't be very customer service oriented." David Lauer said if you are going to divide the City into quadrants anyway, you could take Water Utilities Board Minutes March 27, 1997 Page 7 it by zip codes and say "for everyone living in this part of the City, your rate is going to go up by 20% unless you have a meter." Some people didn't think you could legally do that. "Another way to do it," Tom Brown began, "is to incrementally increase the rate. If you incremented it a little you get a certain number of people. Once it goes up again, you're going to get additional people." "Stalls concern is getting enough soon enough because they are already behind in their schedule," Ms. Adams pointed out. "They can't just let this go at its own pace anymore," she stressed. "It's a matter of picking the increase correctly," Mr. Brown contends, "which could be estimated by a survey." Mr. Reed asked if the public is aware that a remote read-out for the meter is placed outside the house, so a meter reader doesn't have to enter the house to read the meter. "That is made quite clear in the literature," Mr. Lauer stated. "On the issue of coercion, we are only trying to choose what form of coercion to use," Mr. Brown remarked. It seems to him there are levels of coercion, i.e., incrementally raising the rates as opposed to mandatory installation. "Speaking of coercion, what happens if the City doesn't meet the deadline for the state law?" John Morris wondered. Actually the City's goal is to have the meters installed by 2005; "that was the mandate the City Council gave us," Ms. Williams related. The State law requires they be installed by 2009. "Any changes are up to the Council," Mr. Smith said. Paul Clopper noted that the Board will visit this subject next month. At that time he would also like to know what public notification options we have. He clarified that when the City decides what kind of implementation options seem best, at that point we need to be getting the word out. He wants to know how staff plans to do that. Mr. Bartholow asked staff to discuss, in depth, the results of the survey as well. Mr. Brown also would like the Board to receive copies of the survey. Next, Ms. D'Audney discussed the water use goals. A goal for 1996 was a 5% reduction of the adjusted per capita peak daily demand; 605 gpc to 575 gpc. Year end records put it at 527 gpc, which was a 13% reduction. "This includes all water use (including commercial) except for Anheuser Busch," she said. "We have talked several times before about normalizing the data," Mr. Clopper recalled. "What has happened with that?" "These are the results of that process," Dennis Bode replied. "We basically developed a multiple regression equation using current water use in a given year and various weather factors. Once we came up with an acceptable equation, we used a 60-year period of weather to develop the normalized values. It's not perfect," he said, "but we're fairly pleased with it." Ms. D'Audney noted that those numbers were for the peak day demand. For the per capita annual consumption, the base was 235 gpc and the goal for 1996 was 223; ours was down to 206 gpcpd, and that was a 12% cut. She commented that it's not just because of these 12 measures that water use declined. She is sure, however, that the number of new meters in the City has also had ' an effect on water use. Most studies say that when people go from unmetered to metered there is about a 20% reduction. The other reason for the reduction in use was the Energy Policy Act of 1992. All new homes were Water Utilities Board Minutes March 27, 1997 Page 8 required to have low flow toilets, low flow showerheads, faucet aerators, etc., and anytime anyone remodels, that's what is available. "Whether people double and triple flush is another issue considering what was discussed earlier," she acknowledged. Tom Sanders thinks that those requirements must be reviewed and revised. Ms. D'Audney referred the Board to the March issue of Pipelines where there was a picture of a City bus bench with a new conservation message and design. It is located on Riverside just past McHugh St. "It is far more impressive in color," she said. ELECTION OF OFFICERS Because this is not the month when the Board would normally elect officers, Mr. Clopper called for a vote to allow the election to be held today. John Barnett moved that election of officers be held today. After a second from David Lauer, the Board voted unanimously for the motion. MOTION AND VOTE FOR CHAIRMAN Mr. Clopper called for nominations for chairman. Tom Sanders nominated Paul Clopper. Howard Goldman seconded the nomination. Howard Goldman moved that nominations be closed and Robert Ward seconded the motion. The Board unanimously agreed to close nominations and voted unanimously to re-elect Paul Clopper as Chairman. MOTION AND VOTE FOR VICE CHAIRMAN Chairman Clopper asked for nominations for Vice Chairman. George Reed and Tom Brown were both nominated but declined. George Reed nominated John Bartholow to continue as Vice Chair and Robert Ward seconded the motion. Mr. Bartholow initially declined the nomination because he is strongly considering resigning because of his opposition to the current size of the Board. He thinks that the Board is too large to adequately perform its business. However, after Board discussion, he agreed to accept the nomination. George Reed moved that nominations cease. Dave Frick seconded the motion and the Board unanimously re-elected John Bartholow to serve as Vice Chairman. RESPONSE TO NCWCD SURVEY Alison Adams, Howard Goldman and David Lauer, representing the Water Utilities Board, met on February 26, 1997 to prepare a response to a NCWCD Survey on the formation of a Northern Regional Water Coalition. The survey was delivered to the NCWCD office. Mr. Clopper thanked Ms. Adams, Mr. Goldman and Mr. Lauer for taking on this responsibility for the Board within a short time frame. Copies of the completed survey were included in Board packets. Staff members also responded to the survey and copies of their responses were distributed at the meeting. A compilation of the 27 responses to the questionnaire was provided to Board members as well. Ms. Adams reported that she was given the survey results when she attended a District Board meeting. She said there was no analysis of the information. It is simply a listing of how those participating in the survey Water Utilities Board Minutes March 27, 1997 Page 9 responded. She said that the District has not scheduled any more meetings in the near future for the Coalition. She expects that there will be a meeting scheduled within the next couple of weeks. Mr. Clopper asked if there has been any activity from any of the regional groups since the WUB last met. Dennis Bode said that the Metropolitan Water Supply Advisory Group postponed their meeting, because they had not completed their final report. It has not yet been re -scheduled. Robert Ward reported that the Mayor's group is meeting the first and third Thursdays at 4:00 in the County Commissioners' Board Room. He stated that, up to this point, the meetings have been devoted to dealing with the fears of the agricultural community that anything the Mayor proposes will depress the prices of water. "You can see that the group is trying desperately to assure the ag. community that it won't, but their fears are there," he stressed. The group is having a hard time making sure that all of the players who are part of the process feel comfortable; "and they are not all comfortable right now." George Reed didn't understand the answer to question #5 in the survey, which asked "what should be the geographic extent of the area encompassed by this effort?" The answer was "all river basins feeding the South Platte River downstream of Fort Lupton." Ms. Adams said that was a question that the three of them weren't quite sure how to answer either. "We looked at the Northern District boundaries on a map and it appeared to us that the northern boundary didn't incorporate all of the river basins feeding into the South Platte River;" thus their answer. Mr. Bartholow said that the answer to question #12 (What do you consider the top goals/objectives of such a cooperative effort?) seems to show some ambiguity. Response: "Develop win -win alternatives with the Denver Metro area for the joint use of water resources and maintain as much control over water rights as possible." Mr. Bartholow wondered whose control and whose water rights? David Lauer said the City's water rights and other local owners of water rights. "In other words, we want to be flexible with use but not with the transfer of ownership to the south," he clarified. Ray Herrmann wanted to know what the compilation answers were on that question. Ms. Adams referred him to the copies that were made. She made it clear that there were no summary answers, only a listing of everyones' answers, and there was a broad spectrum of responses. Mr. Herrmann contends that the questions "beg for ambiguous responses, which makes it hard to come up with any answers." GATEWAY PARK UPDATE A letter from David Lauer, President of Friends of the Poudre, to City Manager John Fishbach, was included in Board packets. This was in response to a letter to Mr. Fishbach from the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District. The first paragraph of Mr. Lauer's letter states: "In the above cited letter Eric Wilkinson of the NCWCD seeks to derail the City of Fort Collins' commitment to Gateway Park, located about five miles up the Poudre Canyon, by offering an alternative site at the mouth of the canyon. We (Friends of the Poudre) think another park is a very good idea; an Water Utilities Board Minutes March 27, 1997 Page 10 alternative park is not. A trail linking it with Gateway Park would allow biking, horseback and hiking alternatives to driving up the canyon." Mr. Lauer wanted the Board to be aware of Friends of the Poudre's response to the District's letter to the City Manager. He continued by saying that there have been a number of meetings on the park and Randy Gustafson from the City of Greeley (attending the meeting today) and John Guthrie from the City of Fort Collins have been making presentations about that park. Friends of the Poudre has scheduled a public forum on May 1st at 7:00 p.m. in City Council Chambers for the City of Greeley to give a presentation to the general public. He urges members of the Board and other interested people to attend and learn about the partnership that FOP is trying to forge in an effort to create two parks. REVIEW OF BYLAWS AND DISCUSSION OF MISSION STATEMENT - GOALS AND OBJECTIVES Mr. Clopper informed members that the Utilities'mission and vision statements were included in their packets at his request to give a "jump start" to Board discussions. He mentioned that this was on last month's agenda and the meeting went so long that the Board didn't have time to get into it. Last time the bylaws were approved with the intent of moving the purpose and objectives of the Board to the City Code. Dave Frick commented that during the process he had lost track of what "we as a Board are here for. We have some specific statutory powers that we are supposed to provide advisory as well as final decisions on. In the past, however, I have been unclear as to what matters come before this Board and what matters go straight to Council or what are approved by staff." He stated that the Board needs some kind of mission statement to clarify "what we think should come to us for our review and recommendation as compared to what goes right from staff to the Council and City Manager, and simply bypasses the Board. I'm not sure I could decide what goes where right now," he asserted. "I would like us to come up with what we feel our purpose is and pass that on to Council to see if they agree with us," he proposed. Wendy Williams clarified that policy items that go to Council, go first to the Board, because the Board is advisory to the Council. "If it doesn't go to Council, it probably won't go to the Board," she said. "In the past I thought that some things that went to Council should have come to the Board," Mr. Frick insisted. "Sometimes we get bypassed, and maybe we should; I don't know. Some things went directly to the Water Planning Committee, composed of 3 Council members and 3 Board members, and really never came back to the Board." It appears that the Board is not always in the loop. George Reed remarked that if we followed the guideline that Wendy Williams related, our role should be fairly clear. "In the past I would ask at a meeting why something hadn't come to the Board, and I was told it was none of the Board's business," Mr. Frick argued. "When is it our business and when isn't it?" he wanted to know. Water Utilities Board Minutes March 27, 1997 Page 11 It seems to John Barnett that the Board needs to create a clear contract among the Board, staff and the Council. "Somebody has to take the first step. If the Board takes the first step, and, for example we were to adopt one of these suggestions for how we want to operate, that would clarify things. That certainly puts us where others can respond and say, yes, that's right or be told that there are these instances where that is not correct." Mr. Frick acknowledged that there are certain issues that are nice to know and they are good for information to the Board, but there are other issues that relate to policy in which the Board needs to be involved. The Board needs to determine the areas in which policy is set and deal with those things that fall within those areas, he suggested. `My purpose for continuing to bring this up on the agenda, is to get everyone's thoughts one more time, and I will volunteer to prepare a first draft to consolidate those," Mr. Clopper said. He volunteered Dave Frick to help do that. He acknowledged that the Board wasn't going to come to a full consensus and to agree on some appropriate language as a full Board. Mr. Herrmann asked if the vision statements and the mission statement are considered to be out of date. "No," Ms. Williams replied. "Is the City Code language considered to be out of date?" "No," Mr. Smith replied. "If both are no, then what are we really doing," Mr. Herrmann asked. "I think the Code that has these functions in it, is not very clear to me as to what out purpose is," Robert Ward stated. "Eight ninths of our work is supposed to deal with implementing City Code section 2438 and one ninth of our work is devoted to advising the City Council in matters pertaining to the acquisition, control and disposition of water rights and pertaining to the City's municipal water works and wastewater treatment systems." "Which of these takes so much time and what do we do with each of these functions?" he asked. It seems to Mr. Ward that a lot of things were just thrown together and approved by the Council, and it is awkward to read. "Looking at this, it appears that the Board's main function is to implement storm drainage variances," he contends. Mr. Herrmann pointed out that it's the only quasi judicial function of the Board which has to be spelled out in the code. The other function is the policy function, he said. "I prefer to keep it broad, but the key is you can't do that with a judicial function," he reiterated. The old Water Board function is a broad mandate, and I think that is a good mandate at this point." John Barnett emphasized that the variance procedure must be spelled out. After the Board makes a decision, an appeal from the Board is to District Court, he said. Tom Brown asked if a variance comes up, "do we deal with it as a full Board, or by a committee that focuses on it?" "My understanding is that it's the full Board," Mr. Clopper replied. "Can we delegate it to a committee?" Mr. Brown asked. "I don't believe a judicial function like that can be delegated," Mike Smith responded. Mr. Clopper recalled that the Assistant City Attorney said that the full Board should hear every bit of the evidence that enters into those variances. Tom Sanders had the same problem that Robert Ward expressed about the functions. "I have been thinking, as a Water Board member, about what we have done over the last 15 years, and many of things we have done don't fit into that paragraph: e.g. the sludge farm, the ranch, the transfer station, the compost plant, and metering," he said. Building water and wastewater treatment plants is not covered in there. "Also, before the Board was removed from the Charter, one of our functions was Water Utilities Board Minutes March 27, 1997 Page 12 that in a water emergency situation, the Water Board would determine what to do," he recalled. The Board needs to clearly determine what it does, so there won't be so much confusion. "If we are selectively bypassed on some issues that are either too sensitive or for whatever reason," we need to know why. "We must have more definition," he concluded. Mr. Clopper pointed out that Mr. Sanders is talking about re -working the Bylaws and he and Dave Frick want to put the sense of mission and purpose in the City Code; these are two completely different documents. Alison Adams believes that the Code is the document that guides what we do; more so than the Bylaws, "so if the Code doesn't provide the authority, policy or thoughts of what we should do, then we are not going to be able to do it," she contends. "Trying to work some way to massage the Code, is the right course of action," she stressed. Mr. Frick said that if the Board comes up with what we think is our purpose, and the Council agrees, then they can make the modifications to the Code. What we are talking about in the Bylaws is the recitation of the Code itself. Mr. Clopper agreed that the Code is the right place to define the sense of purpose. Mr. Ward suggested that one of the places to begin may be to make a list of all of the resolutions that have been adopted by City Council that pertain to item "r' in the current functions such as adopting the Water Demand Management Policy. Mr. Herrmann thinks that what makes "I" the strongest one, is that it states that the Board deals with water policy as it goes to the Council, period; that applies to sludge, all of the treatment issues, all the acquisition issues, and it doesn't limit you. Ms. Adams thinks there is an opportunity to blend a little bettey functions of the Storm Drainage Board and the Water Board. "Now we list them all separately but with no integration. We are trying to be something beyond two boards put together. We are a new board that has an integrated function," she believes. "We might say," John Barnett suggested, "that we shall advise Council on matters of water policy, including but not limited to ---and list them, e.g. water rights, water supply, storm drainage issues, interrupted supplies, if necessary." He thinks the idea of going back to include the resolutions is a good idea. John Morris wondered about policy and technical matters. "For example today we talked about water meters. Do we recommend a graduated rate; do we recommend that everybody pay higher rates, so we can move the program faster? "We on the Board are just citizens like everyone else, but we are required to advise on policy and technical matters," he said. Tom Sanders said that some of the suggestions have made him more comfortable because the functions would be more clearly defined. He suggested further a part "a" for the broader functions of both the former Water Board and Storm Drainage and perhaps a part "b" could be for the more defined responsibilities. John Barnett added, part "a" would be policy advice and part "b" would be quasi-judicial responsibilities. Tom Sanders asked if the Board still has the authority to provide advice during water shortages. Mike Smith said he would check the Code to see if it's there. Water Utilities Board Minutes March 27, 1997 Page 13 George Reed thinks that there have been an accumulation of oversights, violations of protocol, if you will, that have occurred in the past. "I think the WUB chair, the Utilities Director and the Council Liaison should have dealt with that the first of this year, and I don't think we have seen that happening. The evidence is there." He thinks that would be a better approach than using the Bylaws to try to spell out every kind of thing that should go to the Board, City Manager and Council. "I think Wendy Williams' comment earlier was good and clear," he said. Furthermore, he thinks those oversights should be put behind us: people became concerned and it came to the Chair's attention, and those concerns were expressed. He went on to discuss the question of a mission statement. "Both the Water Utilities and the Board lack any discussion of the responsibility for the community; for interaction or liaison. (Perhaps the Liaison Issues Committee is an exception.) The statement for the Water Utilities organization was solely within the boundaries of their service area and made no point of getting intensely involved regionally," he contends. "Recently several other forums have been developed. Does the Council expect that this Board will have some responsibility for regional involvement, planning, etc., and the Water Utilities will assume responsibility beyond their boundaries?"He emphasized that those responsibilities seem to be lacking in the mission statement. John Morris thinks the statements are out of date with the combining of the departments. "I think we are still struggling with that on the Board," he observed. "We continue to literally sit on opposite sides of the table," he laughed. Mike Smith pointed out that the mission statement and the vision statements are old and have not been updated since the Stormwater Utility joined with the Water & Wastewater Utility. Paul Clopper said that he and Dave Frick "will take a stab at" consolidating the comments and suggestions from the discussion today, plus the ones from previous meetings. Tom Sanders and Ray Herrmann wanted to review their draft. He asked if anyone else wanted to be a part of the review process. John Bartholow said he would like to be involved. Molly Nortier brought up a section of the Bylaws that lists a standing committee under two different names. Alison Adams commented that the Board had talked about re -working some of those committees; that error may have been the result of those discussions. "If we make more changes in that section, we may want to consider dropping the Storm Water Management Committee," George Reed suggested, "and just include it under staff reports on the Agenda." John Barnett was inclined to think that specific committees shouldn't necessarily be listed in the bylaws. "It would be sufficient to say that the Board may establish such standing committees as the majority of the Board determines is appropriate. The Chair of the Board shall be an ex officio member of all committees." "I think that's a good idea," Ms. Adams said. "We talked about changing names of some of the other committees, and next month we may want to change something else around," she added. Water Utilities Board Minutes March 27, 1997 Page 14 Tom Sanders doesn't think the Board should be specific on functions and then be vague on organization. "I would disagree with not listing the committees," he said. He also pointed out that it now takes 2/3 of a quorum to change the bylaws. "The whole idea is so we don't try to change something in the bylaws every month," he stressed. Ms. Adams stressed that the Board needs to have the freedom to change the committees. "We're not trying to get rid of the committees, we're just trying to create come flexibility," she asserted. Mr. Herrmann pointed out that the section states: "may include but not limited to." "So whether you list them or not doesn't mean anything." Paul Clopper said again that he and Dave Frick will draft a mission statement which may be completed in the next couple of months. Those who volunteered will review it (John Bartholow, Ray Herrmann, Tom Sanders and Alison Adams) and a draft will be included in Board packets. Committee Assignments - April Meeting The Board decided to place committee assignments on the agenda for the April meeting. Mr. Clopper reviewed the selection process. Board members are generally asked what committees interest them so they are assigned to where they would like to serve. "We'll do the selection by general acclamation to the extent that we can and I will be the tie breaker," Mr. Clopper concluded. Mr. Barnett thinks the selection process is one way to really merge the two boards. "It is important that we make sure there is a good cross selection," he added. STAFF REPORTS Treated Water Production Summary Dennis Bode reported that February's use was 1,358 Ac-ft which was about 96% of what was projected. Regional 201 Study Update Gale McGaha Miller said the study is moving along well. Operation projections on water quality are complete. The consultant is now working on evaluating plant capacity and collection system capacity for all the participants. "We put that together with operation projections to determine who is going to need what kinds of treatment systems at what time," she explained. "Are they working on existing capacity and what is programed in already at this point?" Paul Clopper wanted to know. "Exactly," she replied. "Will public participation be late spring or early summer," Mr. Clopper asked. "Yes," she said. "Are you planning to do that close to the site or in Fort Collins?" David Lauer asked. "It's not a foregone conclusion that our existing plant 3 site would be used. We haven't concluded at this point in the study that a regional wastewater facility is what we need. We are still looking at what everybody needs. That decision will be one of the next big tasks within a management alternatives task and a facilities alternatives task. At this point what we will present to the public is: here's what we think is going to happen in the next 20 years, and even on to the next 40 years, and here is when we think each one of these entities will need some additional capacity --almost an elaborate problem • Water Utilities Board Minutes March 27, 1997 Page 15 statement on development right now. "Does that still not include the City of Loveland?" Mr. Lauer asked. "That's right," she answered. "How many phone calls does that sign over by Windsor generate?" Mr. Clopper wondered. (This is a sign that informs people in the surrounding area and those interested in perusing housing there, of possible plans for a wastewater treatment plant.) "Since the sign has been up (about 3 years), I would guess less than 30," Mike Smith responded. He added that he has the names and addresses of everyone who called. "I'm surprised it's that low," Mr. Clopper remarked. "If the City owns that land," Mr. Lauer began, "are there any alternative uses that are being considered in the event it doesn't get used for a regional plan?" "We want to wait until we get to that point," Mr. Smith replied. "It's a quarter section and it spans both sides of the River," he related. Mr. Clapper recalled a presentation about 2 years ago on co -existing opportunities for recreation; that area was included. The CSU landscape architect dept. was involved in that. Mr. Smith said that was mainly on the east/northeast side of the site. If Mr. Lauer is interested in following up on that, there is at least some initial work, Mr. Clopper said. The Dept. of Wildlife has investigated the wetlands in the area for inclusion in their wetlands management program,"Ms. McGaha Miller pointed out. Tom Sanders is concerned that delaying construction of the plant limits the opportunity for even building there because of potential opposition from Ptarmigan and other development in that area. "We need to build something there to keep that option," he said. City of Greeley Hosting Joint Regional Boards Meeting Molly Nortier announced that Greeley will be hosting the annual joint boards and staff meeting on May 22, 1997. Details will follow. She urged board members to mark the date on their calendars. Regional Raw Water Transmission Line Mike Smith reported that the NCWCD has prepared a request for proposals for consultants for the raw water transmission line, and has sent them out. He expects the proposals to be available in the next couple of weeks. A consultant will be selected to do conceptual or feasibility design. Tentatively, for administration purposes, they call it the Pleasant Valley Pipeline. As he said before, Fort Collins will pay 25% of the cost of the conceptual design phase. The participants are Greeley, NCWCD, and the three regional water districts. It is a 7-8 mile pipeline that would transport raw water from the Poudre River (Munroe Canal) to the Soldier Canyon Water Treatment Plant. It may parallel the existing pipeline depending on the conceptual design. This first phase will include some potential routes, and cost estimates which will be reviewed by this Board. Mr. Clopper pointed out that Water Board committees had earlier determined some sizing options. Will those be considered for the new study? "Staff has that information and has passed it on to the District," Mr. Smith said. "We ended up focusing on between 40-80 million gallons a day capacity," he added. "If another dam is built on the River will that impact the pipeline capacity? Mr. Sanders asked. "It won't be affected; it's downstream of the mouth of the canyon," Mr. Smith answered. Water Utilities Board Minutes March 27, 1997 Page 16 Water Supply Committee members received copies of Robert Ward's draft white paper on water supply. Legislative and Finance No report Conservation and Public Education Will appoint additional members and new chair in April Engineering Mike Smith wants to arrange a meeting of the Engineering Committee prior to the next meeting for a briefing on the proposed Water Treatment Master Plan. The full Board will also review that information before the Council receives it. Stormwater Management No report Liaison Issues No report OTHER BUSINESS Tenure on the Board George Reed re -read the ordinances, etc., and it occurred to him after reading the minutes of the last meeting, that the Board had made the assumption that each member of this new board brought with them some kind of tenure from the previous board. "I found nothing specific or explicit in any of the language that said that. It implied from the attrition kind of language that might have been intended, but I would have otherwise thought that everyone who was appointed to this board was appointed as of the date of creation of this board and has three terms ahead of them." Mike Smith said that he and John Dual had discussed that and agreed that it could have been discussed more specifically. However, had the ordinance been designed to start over, each board member would have been appointed with new term dates, so all would have had staggered terms. Ms. Adams pointed out that the Code says the Council's intention is to reduce the board from 18 to 11, so there was every intent to use some kind of tenure on the board to do that, or the Council would have appointed 11 people from the start. On that subject Ms. Adams recalled that, at the last meeting, the Board voted to take the Board's recommendation to change that reduction rate to Council. "What has happened to that?" she wondered. Mr. Smith said the City Attorney's office is preparing that and it will be considered when 0 Water Utilities Board Minutes March 27, 1997 Page 17 they make new appointments which is generally in May. "Will that be placed on the consent agenda?" Mr. Clopper asked. Council Liaison Chuck Wanner said he would make an effort to see that it is. ADJOURNMENT Because there was no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 5:10 p.m. r—r r e� Water Utilitieg Board Secretary