HomeMy WebLinkAboutWater Board - Minutes - 10/18/1991WATER BOARD MINUTES
October 18, 1991
3:00 - 4:50 p.m.
Water and Wastewater Utility Conference Room
700 Wood Street
Members Present
President Neil Grigg, Vice President Tom Sanders, Ray Herrmann, Mark Casey, MaryLou
Smith, Tom Brown, Terry Podmore, Paul Clopper, Dave Frick
Staff
Rich Shannon, Mike Smith, Dennis Bode, Linda Burger, Ben Alexander,
Jim Clark, Andy Pineda, Wendy Williams, Tom Gallier, Molly Nortier
Guests
Loren Maxey, City Council Liaison
John Bigham, Agency Coordinator, Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District (NCWCD)
Dorothy Huff, Observer, Larimer County League of Women Voters
George Reed, Citizen Observer
Faye Kirk, Citizen Observer
Members Absent
Dave Stewart, Tim Dow
Minutes
Water Board Secretary Molly Nortier pointed out the following corrections: The first sentence
of the first paragraph on p. 10 should read: "A meeting was held on August 13th." On p. 13
under Legislative & Finance, the second sentence should begin with "Linda Burger said." The
minutes of September 20, 1991 were then approved as corrected.
Undateā¢ Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District
John Bigham announced with sadness that the District's recently retired president Gordon
Dykeman, died at the end of September. His last meeting was on Sept 1lth. "He had been on
our Board for 36 years, and in that time had only missed 11 meetings," he said.
The new member of the District Board, appointed to a four year term, is Mike Applegate, a civil
engineer from Fort Collins. The new president of the parent district is Bill Bohlender; the vice
president is John Caneva. The sub -district president is W.D. Farr, and the VP is Everett Long.
He went on to say that Carter Reservoir, at this point, stands at 52.8% of active capacity;
Horsetooth Reservoir is at 57.2%, and Granby is down to 57.3%. The combined total
Water Board Minutes
October 18, 1991
Page 2
percentage for the CBT system is 56.6%. "We are a little under the 60% we were holding for
awhile," he said. Shadow Mountain Res. has been lowered by 8 ft., so the Parks Service and
Forest Service can install a boat dock, and try to control the growth of the water weeds that are
growing in abundance there.
"Basically everything is going quite well," he continued. With the warm, dry weather, a
considerable amount of O&M work is being done this fall.
Dr. Grigg asked if the District has received any feedback on the regional study. Mr. Bigham
understands that it has been received quite well. There are a few corrections coming in, he said.
Demand Management Committee Recommendations
A Summary Report, the Proposed Resolution and a proposed ordinance, as well as the DMC
minutes, were included in the Water Board packets. Jim Clark pointed out that the summary
report does a good job of going through all the measures that were considered. The Committee
met for about 8 months, and concentrated on various demand management options other than
metering. Of the 24 measures considered, half were recommended, while the other 12 were not
for various reasons.
Some of the measures were tabled, at least for now, which means they could be re -considered
at some future time. In fact, it was recommended that consideration of demand management
choices be an evolving process.
He said there are a number of measures that were selected which deal with City Departments'
water use. The Committee felt that the City should set an example. Improving public education
by targeting specific areas, was another recommendation. There were other recommendations
such as zero interest loans. The Utility already uses the zero interest loan program when the
replacement of service lines is necessary to install a meter for someone (usually in an older
home) who has volunteered. The Conservation and Public Education Committee of the Water
Board will meet with staff to determine what other measures should be included in the loan
program, Mr. Clark related.
He went on to say that the summary report explains the items in the resolution that are being
proposed. The resolution, along with Water Board recommendations, will go before Council
at some future date. Mike Smith suggested that the resolution be the first topic for discussion,
then the one page code change.
MaryLou Smith, one of the members of the DMC, encouraged Water Board members to
comment on items related to the resolution, but she also pointed out that the Committee, made
up of Water Board and City Council members, has worked very hard "to hammer things out"
in such a way that it was the Committee's belief that Water Board and Council could support
Water Board Minutes
October 18, 1991
Page 3
it. Furthermore, Water Board has been represented by three members, and the entire Board has
periodically reviewed the Committee's actions during the several month process.
Terry Podmore moved that the Water Board approve the proposed resolution. Ray Herrmann
seconded the motion.
Tom Sanders is concerned that the City is moving further away from the 1-in-50 drought
capability because Anheuser-Busch is requesting additional water for their operations. Dennis
Bode pointed out that currently our average annual demand is about 30,000 Ac-ft. The safe
yield of our supply system would meet approximately a 40,000 Ac-ft. demand based on that 1-
in-50 drought criteria, "so we do have a cushion right now," he explained. "Have you checked
the safe yield with Busch on line with their projected increase?" Tom Sanders asked. "We have
kept up with that as we've come along," Mr. Bode replied. MaryLou Smith recalled that we
took that into account when we did our projections 3-4 years ago.
"The 40,000 Ac-ft that I mentioned, is the safe yield of our supply system today," Dennis Bode
explained. "As a result, there is an additional 10,000 Ac-ft. of demand that we could take on
without running into problems," he added. Dr. Sanders was particularly concerned about peak
day demands in the summer months.
Mike Smith explained that when A-B began operations, they started out with 4200 Ac-ft. About
a year ago they said they wanted to increase their demand by 1250 Ac-ft, and to do that they
provided us with cash equivalent to about 3,000 Ac-ft of water. "As far as making projections,
as they increase their demand, they are going to give us water," Mr. Smith assured Dr. Sanders.
When we are using water more efficiently, with meters and with additional demand management
measures, it will affect return flows, Dave Frick began. "Does that impact any water rights we
have, since we are committed to a certain return flow?" Dennis Bode said he doesn't think it
will be a problem since it will be a very gradual process. In general the return flow will still
be a larger percentage than what the agricultural return flows would have been. "We can
consider that in the transfers we do," he added.
Mr. Bode acknowledged that the more efficient people are in watering their lawns, the less
return flow there is from lawn irrigation. In the transfer cases, that is becoming more of an
issue. "For future transfers we will have to look at that issue," he said, but he doesn't think it
will affect any past transfers.
Neil Grigg had a question about Section 3 in the resolution where staff is directed to implement
12 measures in order to meet the stated goals. "Has staff done a financial impact statement on
those items, or is this something the Utility can absorb?" Mike Smith responded that staff hasn't
determined the financial impact yet. He expects there will be some impact with some of the
Water Board Minutes
October 18, 1991
Page 4
measures, "but we haven't put a dollar figure on it yet." There will also be some impact on
other City departments, he added.
Dr. Grigg observed that although all of the measures are excellent things to do, it will require
additional time for staff to monitor all of them.
Tom Sanders asked what a "qualified water conservation measure" is under the zero interest loan
program. Staff hopes that the Conservation and Public Education Committee of the water Board
will help to determine that. MaryLou Smith explained that there wasn't a firm agreement on
the part of the Demand Management Committee to have this be a part of the resolution. The
compromise was that zero interest loans would be part of the resolution, but the Water Board
and staff would decide what would qualify. Obviously it is very loose, she said. "We will be
considering it on a category by category basis over the next few years," she concluded.
Paul Clopper was curious about one part of the recommendations. "What has been the reaction
from other City departments about the installation of meters and charging the departments for
their water use?" he asked. Mike Smith pointed out that most of the City facilities are already
metered. The City Manager has set up a program where, over the next 5 years, the City is going
to begin pledging more money each year to pay for that water use; eventually water use will be
tied into the budget. As for the reaction of City departments to this plan, "they seem to think
that as long as they have money in the budget to pay the bill, they aren't that concerned."
MaryLou Smith returned to the question of whether staff has put money aside for the demand
management recommendations. She said the Committee did look at the cost of the leak detection
program and determined that it would require a couple of people. The Committee also
discussed, with each of the measures, whether the return would be enough to justify the greater
expense and additional staff time. "That was the major reason that the Committee deferred a
number of the measures," she pointed out.
Ms. Smith went on to say that the big issue is if the Council approves the resolution, will they
also be willing to raise the rates to pay for some of these measures. Mike Smith recalled times
in the past when the Council passed a policy, and then due to changing circumstances, decided
not to fund some provisions in the policy; or sometimes they said, "we passed this so we'll go
ahead and do it." He pointed out that all of the measures will probably appear in various areas
of the budget, so the Council will make a decision one way or another at that time. He
cautioned that just because it appears in a resolution, doesn't mean it's a pre -approval by the
Council to do anything you want to do. It still must go through the budget process, he
emphasized.
The question was called. The Board voted unanimously to approve the proposed resolution
recommended by the Demand Management Committee.
Water Board Minutes
October 18, 1991
Page 5
Approval of Code Change
Mike Smith explained that the code change is the result of a problem that arose because of the
volunteer metering program. There have been a couple of instances where customers who
volunteered for a meter decided that they wanted it taken out. If anyone inquired about the
possibility of removing a meter when people volunteered, staff informed them that the meter
could not be removed. Mr. Smith said there has only been one person who is adamant about
having her meter removed. When staff informed the DMC about this, they agreed that once a
meter is installed the City should not remove it. The City Attorney's office then revised the
code as follows:
A residential customer who is receiving unmetered water service may elect to have a
meter installed by and at the expense of the utility, upon application to the utility for such
installation. Any such election by a residential customer to install a water meter shall
be permanent and the residential customer may not elect in the future to return to
unmetered water service.
Ray Herrmann moved that the Water Board recommend adoption of the code change. Paul
Clopper seconded the motion. The Board unanimously approved the motion to amend the code.
Interim President Neil Grigg thanked MaryLou Smith, Terry Podmore and Tom Brown for
serving on the Demand Management Committee. He recognized the considerable effort that was
involved in coming up with the final recommendations. He pointed out that once the City
Council approves the resolution, the Committee will disband.
Videot=s of Proposed Heritage Corridor and Poudre Basin Footage
The first videotape on the proposed Heritage Corridor, was produced by the City to use as an
educational tool for promoting the concept. The video showed the area being considered and
gave background on the process since the time when the upper Poudre River was designated
Wild and Recreational. It also explained the process for designation and what will occur if it
is approved by Congress.
The next video was the uncut version of footage taken from the air of the Poudre Basin to the
confluence of the Platte River. Loren Maxey flew the photographer over the area to get a
perspective of the river basin for the Heritage Corridor video. Mr. Maxey pointed out areas of
interest.
Neil Grigg said that the Utility has numerous videotapes taken through the years, which have
great educational value. He suggested creating a library of tapes that the Water Utility could
combine with other items of historic significance. For example, he said, it would be helpful at
the University if these could be checked out for educational purposes. Linda Burger related that
Water Board Minutes
October 18, 1991
Page 6
the Utility is in the process of putting together an internal library. There is no reason the Utility
couldn't have items that could be checked out, she said.
Amendment to City/District Water Service Agreement
Each Board member received a cover letter and a copy of the Addendum to the Agreement for
Sale of Treated Water. Mike Smith explained that in December of 1990, the City entered into
an agreement with the Fort Collins -Loveland Water District for the sale of treated water to the
District. Since entering into that agreement, a couple of issues have arisen that make it
necessary to modify the agreement.
Point No. 1
When the agreement was signed, the District anticipated they would be able to construct
the necessary improvements to their system to take delivery of water from the City
before the summer of 1991. Because of delays in equipment delivery and land
acquisition, the District was not able to complete construction of the necessary
improvements until just recently. As a result, the District can not take delivery of the
amount of water specified in the agreement and has requested that the agreement be
modified to reflect such. The amended paragraph 5 (a) in the addendum eliminates the
minimum amount of water to be purchased by the District for this year and lowers the
peak day flow from 2 mgd to I mgd. The cost of water remains the same.
5. The District shall pay the City all water delivered to the District in accordance
with the following provisions:
a. For the period of January 1, 1991, to December 31, 1991, the District
will pay the City fifty cents ($.50) per 1,000 gallons of water delivered.
The peak day delivery of water from the City to the District will not
exceed one (1) million gallons per day during this time period.
Tom Sanders asked what the City is charging for producing the water. Mike Smith first made
it clear that Fort Collins -Loveland is providing the raw water. The Utility is treating the water
and transporting it via pipeline to them, he said. Treatment costs are between 22 and 25 cents
per 1,000 gallons, plus the per rata share of the transmission cost and the use of plant capacity.
"That's how we arrive at the $.50 charge." Every year in the fall, the District informs the City
how much water they want for the next year. Mr. Smith pointed out that as they use less water
and have a higher peak, they pay a higher rate. If they use more water they pay a lower rate.
Tom Sanders also wanted to know if there is anything in the agreement that says the Utility can
hold back on the District's delivery if the City is in a bind for treated water capacity. Mr. Smith
explained that the City has made the commitment to provide the District with that amount of
water. "It's up to the Utility, just as we would accommodate more growth, to make certain that
there is enough capacity," he stressed.
0
Water Board Minutes
October 18, 1991
Page 7
Point No. 2
As the District was giving thought to how they would operate their new improvements
and handle the delivery of water from the City, they became concerned about how
closely they could predict the peak day flows specified in the agreement. Presently there
is not any provision in the agreement which addresses what happens if the District
exceeds the predetermined peak day flow. The new paragraph 5 (f) in the addendum
addresses this issue. More specifically, if water deliveries to the District exceed the
predetermined peak day flow, the rate paid by the District will be re -calculated and will
apply to all water delivered to the District for that calendar year.
f. If the peak day delivery to the District exceeds the peak day amount specified by
the District in accordance with paragraph 5.b. above, then the rate paid by the
District shall be re -calculated using the higher rate factor from Table A. The
increased rate shall apply to all water delivered to the District for that entire
calendar year for which the rate has been re -calculated.
Mike Smith provided an example of this modification. "If the District is using 400 million
gallons and their peak day is 3 mg, and for one day they hit 3.5 or 3.1, for the whole year they
have to go up to the next rate." On the other hand, this leeway provides them with the option
of saying they will take 2 million, even though they may need 3 million. "They can always play
it safe." The potential problem for the Utility is that the District may underestimate their peak,
"so we have to assume almost the worst case," he concluded.
Point No. 3
After reviewing the new EPA coliform and lead rules, it became apparent that the
agreement was not specific enough regarding water quality monitoring and reporting
requirements. The new paragraphs 7, 8, and 9 in the addendum are intended to clarify
responsibilities for water quality monitoring and reporting.
Mike Smith explained that with the new federal regulations, the Utility wanted to be very clear
about who is responsible for monitoring, reporting and public notification. "We didn't want to
be caught in a position of having to do any of that for the District in their system," Mr. Smith
stressed. "When we deliver water to them, after it goes past the delivery point, it's theirs and
we're not responsible for anything that happens to it after that, regarding monitoring, or
notifying the public if they have violations, etc.
Ray Herrmann moved that the Water Board accept the amendments to the agreement, and
MaryLou Smith seconded the motion.
Tom Sanders wanted to make sure that the District's water would not be coming back into our
system. Mr. Smith assured him that check valves have been installed, the water is metered, and
Water Board Minutes
October 18, 1991
Page 8
the Utility has monitoring equipment at the connections. He mentioned that there are also a
couple of smaller connections.
The question was called. The vote was unanimous to approve the amended agreement.
Election of Officers
Neil Grigg has been serving as the interim president of the Board since Henry Caulfield retired
from the Board in July. The Board needs to elect a president and vice president to comply with
the Bylaws which state that officers must be elected by December 31st each year.
Neil Grigg opened nominations for president. MaryLou Smith nominated Neil Grigg, and Paul
Clopper nominated Tom Sanders. MaryLou Smith moved that nominations cease, and the Board
concurred with a unanimous vote. The candidates were asked to leave the room during the
discussion and vote. MaryLou Smith presided while Dr. Grigg was out of the room. Those
making the nominations were asked to state their reasons as to why their candidates should be
elected. The group decided it wasn't necessary to hear comments from the candidates
themselves. After a short discussion, Neil Grigg was elected as president of the Board.
President Grigg asked for nominations for vice president. Ray Herrmann nominated Tom
Sanders. Mark Casey nominated MaryLou Smith. She respectfully declined the nomination, and
thanked Mr. Casey for his nomination. Paul Clopper moved that nominations cease, and the
Board agreed with a unanimous vote. The Board unanimously elected Tom Sanders to serve as
the vice president of the Board.
Staff Reports
A. Treated Water Production Summary
Dennis Bode reported that the water use in September was about 4% above what had
been projected. Precipitation was .85 inches for the month, which was below normal.
Mr. Bode noted that as of the end of September, water use was 93% of average, which
is an indication of some of the timely rains we have received, and, hopefully, also a
result of some of our conservation efforts.
Tom Sanders pointed out that at Colorado State they are converting entirely to metric,
and he suggested that the water production figures be presented in metric as well. Staff
said they will try to provide some metric figures for comparison.
B. Tour of Meadow Springs Ranch
Board members received a copy of a memo from Technical Projects Manager Tom
Gallier inviting them to participate in a tour of the Meadow Springs Ranch scheduled for
Thursday, October 24th, weather permitting. This time was inconvenient for most
members. Five members selected Friday, November 1st as an alternate date, again
0
Water Board Minutes
October 18, 1991
Page 9
weather permitting. The group will meet at the Service Center at 12:00 noon. Box
lunches will be provided. They were asked to confirm with Molly Nortier.
C. Reminder of Water and Economics Symposium
Neil Grigg reminded the Board of the Chamber of Commerce Water and Economics
Symposium on Monday October 21st at the University Park Holiday Inn, from 9:00 a.m.
to 1:30 p.m. Molly Nortier announced that 6 members of the Water Board and 5 staff
people plan to attend.
Committee Reports
Water Supply Committee
Chairman Mark Casey reported that the Committee met at 2:00 prior to the Water Board
meeting and discussed Halligan Reservoir. He said that he understands fairly clearly the
proposed option payments and the estimated construction costs of about $18 million.
"What I don't have a good handle on is what the economic benefit of building is going
to be," he stated. He and Dennis Bode plan to meet and discuss that aspect, and they
will also discuss the question of the transferability of our interest in the agreement with
the North Poudre Irrigation Company. He wants to determine "if we decide down the
road not to participate in the project, can we sell that interest to another party?" He
announced that the next Water Supply Committee meeting will be at 1:30 (note: a half
hour earlier) prior to the November 15th Water Board meeting.
Legislative and Finance Committee
At the last meeting staff briefed the Board on the need for a resolution that would allow
the Utility to qualify for the revolving loan program with the Water Resources and Power
Development Authority for the new wastewater treatment plant. Mike Smith reported
that the Legislative Committee of the City Council has met and has asked staff to prepare
letters to send to our state representatives asking them to support the resolution when it
comes up in the legislature this year.
Conservation and Public Education Committee
Chairperson MaryLou Smith believes that the Committee needs to decide what it is
mandated to do on the part of the Water Board. The Committee will be waiting to see
what happens with the Demand Management Committee's proposed resolution when it
goes before Council. "If that doesn't fly, the DMC will continue to work on it," she
predicted.
The Conservation and Public Education Committee has been put on hold while the DMC
has grappled with demand management issues. Once the resolution is adopted and is in
place, the Water Board committee will meet to determine what their role should be. One
of their tasks will be to provide a forum for any proposed zero interest loans that are
Water Board Minutes
October 18, 1991
Page 10
considered. She also presumes that the Committee will play an advisory role to staff in
terms of implementing some of the measures that will be undertaken when the resolution
is adopted.
Paul Clopper also suggested that the committee may want to look into working with staff
on the archives situation discussed earlier, in terms of public education.
Also, in terms of public education, Neil Grigg pointed out that over the last 3 to 4 years,
there has been an "explosion" on the part of the public in their interest in water. As a
result of that, next March at the CSU campus, a children's water festival is being
planned, patterned after a very successful children's event held in Greeley this year. Dr.
Grigg has been involved in the CSU project. Another indication of interest in water
education is a state-wide group called the Colorado Water Education Foundation which
has been organized out of the Denver Chamber of Commerce. Ray Herrmann and Paul
Clopper also pointed out that the local Environmental Fair, in which the Water &
Wastewater Utility was heavily involved, was a very impressive and well attended event.
Engineering Committee
Mike Smith mentioned that once the regional plan is out, that may be something the
Engineering Committee will want to look at.
Other Business
President Grigg said he was pleased with the attendance at the meeting today. Each Water
Board member received a copy of the Boards and Commissions attendance policy in their
packets. Dr. Grigg reminded Board members to contact the Water Board secretary if they will
not be able to attend a meeting.
Adjoum
Since there was no further business the meeting was adjourned at 4:50 p.m.
Water Board Secretary