HomeMy WebLinkAboutWater Board - Minutes - 09/14/19730 0
WATER BOARD
September 14, 1973
3:30 P:M.
Present: Ward Fischer
Harvey Johnson
Fred Feit
Everett Richardson
Bernard Cain, Jr.
Owen Moore
Norman Evans
Robert Brunton
Absent: Karl E. Carson
James Waltz
Dugan Wilkinson
Staff members present: Charles Liquin
Ed Hilbenberg
Charlie Cain
Verna Lewis
Chairman Ward Fischer called the meeting to order at 3:30 p.m.
Water Board to recommend to the City Council acceptance of shares
of Arthur Ditch Water to satisfy raw water requirements of Inter-
national Investments and Management Corporation, and to recommend
reopening discussion with Arthur Ditch Company.
Chairman Ward Fischer outlined the request, and brought the Board
up to date on the problem as follows:
Mr. Ken Anderson, who was present, representing International
Investments and Management Corporation, had purchased a portion
of the property owned by Mr. Ed Johnson, and the sale of the
property.had been preceeded by certain letters, one addressed to
Mr. Bill Hansen, realtor, from the former City Manager, Tom Coffey,
which read in part:
"This letter is written in confirmation of our conversation
at noon today. Arthur Ditch water yields 4.42 acre feet
per share and the City requirements are two acre feet per
acre if you settle on the gross acreage; thus, if you
develop 110 acres, you would need 220 acre feet of water
or approximately 50 shares in the Arthur Ditch.
If you develop the same amount on a net basis deducting
the paved area of the roads from your gross acreage, then
the City requires three acre feet per acre, however, unless
r
9 Page 2
you are putting more roads than normal, your best deal
is to go gross and two acre feet".
There was some additional correspondence; the sale of the property
was consumated, and there had been certain Arthur water turned over
to Mr. Anderson and his associates; in the meantime, the City had
proceeded with its plan of augmentation on the Arthur Ditch and
other ditches, which were protested and in the course of things,
with the consent of the Arthur Ditch people, the City imposed a
moritorium on the further acquisition of Arthur Ditch stock, which
moritorium is still in effect. The question was whether the above
mentioned letters constituted a contract.
City Attorney March, after looking over the correspondence, had
advised that in his opinion, they did not. Mr. Fischer further
stated that as the correspondence disclosed, Mr. Johnson was a
client of James Beatty's and that he would not vote on the pro-
posal, he did have other thoughts in regard to this water which
seemed to be worthy of investigation; the matter was put on a
moritorium with the understanding that the City would start
having discussions with the Arthur Ditch and the other ditch
companies; there was no reason why this Arthur Ditch stock should
not be accepted by the City, and there is no reason why the Arthur
Ditch should object to being accepted by the City. They did ob-
ject to the plan of augmentation and the City was finally able to
work it out as far as the conditions of the transfer when the
City tried to use those water rights in our exchange with North
Poudre; the City had to leave 15% of it in the ditch, which was
fine; it was felt that the City would work something out with them
and the City could leave 10% or 15% in the ditch, and it really
wouldn't make much difference to the City of Fort Collins, provided
that the City knew what the Ditch Company would accept and then
as the City took future waters, the City would adjust the water
.credits down to whatever represented what the City would be allowed
to have on top of it. The Chairman was hoping that the City would
have such discussions and possibly this very crises now would be
what would precipitate such a discussion, but as a matter of fact,
the City has not had such discussions, although Mr. Strahle, repre-
senting the Arthur Ditch Company, has indicated a willingness and
the Chairman hoped that this Board would agree, so that there is
beside the contractural question, a policy question of whether or
not the City should, perhaps use this present problem as one way
to get the discussion going with the Arthur Ditch.
Mr. Ken Anderson gave a report as to his understanding of the
written correspondence and the willingness of International Invest-
ments to transfer to the City 49.03 shares of Arthur Irrigation
stock to meet the raw water requirements.
Mr. Norman Merfield, President of International Investments, stated
he would like to emphasize that they had been operating under the
0
• Page 3
assumption that this water would be acceptable to the City based on
the correspondence from Tom Coffey; they were unaware that there
was any problem until the apartment taps became necessary, and if
this water were not accepted, it would have a substantial impact
on the company.
The Chairman stated he could think of three possible courses of
action that the Board might take and there might be others and
he did not mean to suggest any of them.
1. The Water Board could recommend that under the circumstances,
the City accept the water.
2. The Water Board could advise the Council that the acceptance
of the water violates their policy and if there were some
exception to be made, because of some action of the admin-
istration, the Council should do it.
3. That the Water Board suggest that it take the initiative
in attempting to work something out with Arthur Irrigation
Company in regard to the possible use of the water.
Director of Public Works, Charles Liquin, was asked by the Chairman
if he had any recommendation on the matter. Mr. Liquin stated
he felt the City had a commitment and sopke to the 431 acre feet
of water still owing to North Poudre in fulfillment of the con-
tract, adding if the. Arthur Ditch water and other water in the
south side ditches were added up, the City could make a transfer
and pay off the amount to North Poudre.
The Chairman stated there was still the question of the shrinkage;
should it be 10%, 15% or 25% in the Arthur Ditch; at the time of
the augmentation and the City did not want, at that time, to get
into another conflict with the Arthur Ditch Company, but were
hoping to work it out as part of their discussion.
Board member Harvey Johnson spoke in favor of the City's honoring
this commitment. Dr. Norman Evans also stated he felt this was
a commitment prior to the moritorium and that the City should now
go to Arthur Ditch and get into discussions with them again.
Board member Owen Moore made a motion, seconded by Harvey Johnson,
that the Board recommend to the Council that notwithstanding the
moritorium, which will otherwise remain in effect, this water be
accepted on the basis of the City's having made a prior commitment,
to accept it and that if the Council agrees, we further recommend
that the City, because of its ownership of this additional water,
commence negotiations with the Arthur Ditch Company in an attempt
to amicably resolve the differences between the City and the
Arthur Ditch Company, if any, and in any event, with or without
such resolution of differences, that the City proceed to further
augment our plan of augmentation and to use this water source to
• • Page 4
satisfy with other waters, the North Poudre contractual obligations.
The Chairman put the motion which was approved. (Ward Fischer
abstaining.)
Report of Denver Water Board Meeting
Chairman Ward Fischer stated Board member Karl Carson had attended
a meeting of the Denver Water Board. Dr. Carson was unable to
attend the meeting and Mr. Fischer would briefly report to the
Water Board, and Dr. Carson would get more information and report
in more detail at the next regular meeting.
Basically what the Denver Water Board is concerned about is Eagle -
Piney Project where they put their wilderness area to such a point
to where they can now be allowed to go in and construct with the
Selby's to divert all of the water upon which they have filings.
The question, however, under discussion, is somewhat broader and
they were talking about the position of all of the front range
cities in regard to all of the ecology/versus/resources problems;
the attempt was to arrive at some policy or have the cities arrive
concurrently in some general approach, to where the cities could
protect their own water interests.
The Chairman was reluctant, at this particular time, to encourage
the Water Board to get terribly involved with the problems that
really concern the City ofDenver and that it is a fine project,
yet he was sympathetic with some of the other aspects of it and
he had written to the Denver Water Board and received just today
some additional information, as to what they had in mind.- Dr.
Carson will attend the next meeting and it will be prior to the
next meeting.
Election of Officers
Board member Norman Evans nominated Ward Fischer for President.
Motion was made, seconded and passed that nominations cease; by
a majority vote of the Board (Ward Fischer abstaining), Ward
Fischer was elected President.
Board member Harvey Johnson nominated Norman Evans for Vice President.
The Chairman inquired if there were other nominations. By unanimous
vote Dr. Norman Evans was elected Vice President.
Chairman Ward Fischer then appointed Verna Lewis to serve as
Secretary.
The Chairman stated a regular meeting date for the Water Board
meetings had been set and that it was now proper to establish rules
of procedure; especially the number required for a quorum to ac-
complish the following:
• • Page 5
1. To make sure that the action taken by the Water Board
is representative of the whole Board.
2. To make sure that the Board can take action when action
is needed.
Board member Everett Richardson started discussion on the quorum
required for a special meeting and the Board continued discussion
on notices for such meetings.
Board member Everett Richardson made a motion, seconded by Owen
Moore, that a quorum of the Water Board for any regular or special
meeting would be five members, the ex-officio member may be counted
in computing the five members to constitute a quorum. The Chairman
put the question which was unanimously adopted.
By consensus of the Water Board members present, September of each
year was set for the time of election of officers.
Board member Everett Richardson inquired into who would appoint
representatives to other special committees, such as the Six City
Water Committee. City Manager Brunton inquired who had appointed
Norman Evans to the Six City Committee and Harvey Johnson stated
a committee of three had been appointed, by Council action, the
committee consisted of Owen Moore, Norman Evans, Harvey Johnson
and Tom Coffey. It was decided that appointments would be made by
the chair.
City Manager authorized to respond to request for water service
for Mill Canyon Development by Spangler and Cambell Associates
Charles Liquin reviewed the reason and request had come to the
Water Board as follows:
The agreement with the West Fort Collins Water District, which
dates back to approximately 1966, defines the boundary of the
District; they were given permission from the City to serve that
area, but that any enlargement of the area within their District
had to come to the City for permission. Administratively they had
allowed the expansion to a single customer, now the request was
to serve 400 additional customers, and he felt it should go to
the Water Board and the Council to allow the District to expand
to this extent.
The Chairman inquired if this request would have more to do with
the planning functions of the City rather than with water service?
Board member Everett Richardson inquired who was going to furnish
sewer service to them and was advised that the LaPorte Water and
Sanitation District would handle the sewer, in which case it would
come back to the City, their capacity was for about 700 taps.
The Chairman stated that perhaps it would be the proper function
of the Water Board to suggest to the Council that from the stand-
• • Page 6
point of the water resource utility, the Board was not concerned,
but this is a matter which involves the development of land to
the foothills and that they should seek the advice of their own
planning department within the City in considering whether or not
they would give consent to this. The Chairman requested that the
City Manager so recommend to the Council.
Report of September 10, 1973 Six City Municipal
Subdistrict Meeting
Dr. Norman Evans gave the following report:
The adjudication procedure is going on and will go on for a long
time. Mr. Sayer's estimate is two years, the State of Colorado
has entered into proceedings in opposition to the US claims, but
the Defense Department has apparently a solid claim on 200,000 acre
feet that is destined for oil -shale use, Mr. Sayer did not think
there is much chance of interfering with a US claim but others, he
is optimistic about.
The covenance contract with the Bureau is apparently in good shape
but slow in being signed in the Interior, but appears not to have
any hurdles toward signing, they think that will occur almost any
day, and they have for several months, however, there does not
seem to be any obstacles. The judgement of all of the representa-
tives, which included all six, including Longmont, seems to be
that we should not move, at this point, in investing into the
project until the adjudication is cleared more fully so that we
could judge better what we really have.
The earlier attitudes were sort of mixed on this point but in-
clined a year or two ago to be more optimistic. The feeling now
is that we should push ahead toward getting engineering works
going in spite of not having the adjudication settled and more or
less to follow the pattern that had been used before successfully
by Denver and others in that regard. The attitude is more definitely
changed now and is 'far more conservative on that so that in sum-
mary, the cities wish, at this time, to merely keep the adminis-
trative and legal processes alive and active for the purpose of
the proposal and wished to recommend to each of the City Councils
an assessment of $6,000 again this year. That is a recommendation
that I am going to propose that the Water Board make to the City
Council because I think it is important to say with it and keep
that much alive.
So far as the sub -districts business activities are concerned,
they have to make up a budget and add certain legal requirements
in respect to that budget, one of which has to do with budget
changes and I guess it isn't easy to change the budget once it is
established, for that reason they are putting into the budget an
• . Page 7
item of $150,OOO as an increase item, in case everything happened
at once; adjudications jelled and a good project was in sight and
the cities or some of them decided to push ahead into engineering
design and acquisition of right-of-ways and other steps that will
have to be taken once the project is definitely solidified, so they
put into their budget an item which is large but without any as-
surances or perhaps without even any intentions that it will be
used.
The Chairman inquired if the sub -district was planning, in con-
nection with the oil -shale, any engineering studies to see what
effect that would have on the project. Dr. Evans stated it was
suggested that the CORSIM model is about operational. It is his
impression that they were thinking of using a little of the $30,000
or the $6,000 per city to do it with, and he thought they should,
and Mr. Barkley's estimate was some where in the few hundred
dollar range for a run of some kind with the model, but in any
case, that would be the way it could be done, and he would suggest
that it should be done.
Board member Norman Evans made a motion to recommend to the Council
the contribution of $6,000 for 1974 to the Municipal Sub -district,
seconded by Owen Moore. The motion was passed.
Director of Public Works, Charles Liquin, stated that not directly
involved with the Six Cities, but discussed at the meeting was
the prevailing price for Horsetooth water. It was stated Boulder
had paid $265 a unit a year ago, Estes Park had authorized $256
to $275, Greeley had paid $300, Kodak is paying $300 plus a finders
fee, Loveland has just recently paid $260 and Longmont just recently
purchased some for $280. The last purchase the City of Fort Collins
made, at the recommendation of the Water Board was $250.
The Chairman stated it had been the thinking of the Water Board
that until such time as a determination was made on Windy Gap or
Joe Wright that it would be just to save money.
Mr. Charles Liquin next stated, an item not on the agenda, was the
consideration of a change in the ordinance as regards the raw
water requirements, which the City Manager had recommended to the
City Council. No action was requested at this time.
Board member Harvey Johnson spoke to the history of the water
requirement at the time it was established. It was the feeling,
at that time, that the requirement was insufficient, and the recom-
mendation had been to raise the requirement from two acre feet to
three acre feet.
The Board discussed at length the requirements of water districts,
and the shrinkage involved and the units per acre as applies to
condominiums and apartments.
• Page 8
Board member Bernard Cain, Jr., stated he felt the situation should
be delved into to see if three acre feet were required, or four was
more realistic.
Everett Richardson responded that this item had been discussed at
other meetings and that it was the feeling that the City is not
being adequately compensated for new land coming in.
The Chairman stated that with the enlarged Water Board, one of the
advantages was the input of different view points and perhaps Mr.
Cain would like the opportunity to table action on this recommendation.
Board member Bernard Cain made a motion, seconded by Norman Evans,
to table a recommendation to further examine the costs and what is
involved and at that time arrive on the need to increase the price
per acre and units of water. Roll was called. Yeas: Cain and
Evans. Nays: Moore, Feit, Fischer, Johnson and Richardson.
Motion was made by Everett Richardson, seconded by Owen Moore,
that the Water Board recommend to the Council that the requirements
for furnishing water to the City be changed, when convenient to do
so, from two acre feet to three acre feet on f5w basit and from
three acre feet to four and one-half acre feet on a a basis
with required payments in lieu of water of $300 per unit for units
not furnished and to include that the foregoing is reasonable and
necessary to adequately compensate the City for the service. Roll
was called. Yeas: Evans, Moore, Feit, Fischer, Johnson and
Richardson. Nays: Cain.
Report on Status of Rate Increases
Chairman Ward Fischer started discussion on the item and, stated
"in connection with the rate increase, I very much appreciate
having your very thorough report on the Council's actions.
There were some particular questions, . . . I want to make sure
that my comments are only so that I understand and that the Water
Board understands the view of the Council. I think that the Water
Board is, from its expressed views, perfectly in accord that the
Water Board makes recommendations to the Council and that then the
Council takes such action as it in its independent judgement
decides, taking into account whatever political or other matters
that it wishes. My questions in regard to what the Council did
are not to be interpreted in any way as critical of the Council's
judgment, but so that we can have a complete record of what the
Council's policy decisions are so that in future actions we can
comply with it. In that regard, I would like to know several
things: one, did they wish us to make a study concerning water
meters? Two, do they wish a rate recommendation? In connection
with the water meters to be provided free by the City to low in-
come citizens, will this be paid out of the General Fund or will
this be paid out of the Capital Improvement Fund that is included
in our Capital Improvements Program for the Water Fund? If so,
to what extent will that interfere with our'Capital Improvement
• • Page 9
Program that the administration suggested to us in the form which
we made our recommendations?
In other words, if that is going to be paid out of something other
than the General Fund, what items of capital improvement, that we
were recommending is going to be deleted? What projects specifi-
cally were moved back to allow the lesser rate increase, and if
it is Michigan Ditch and Joe Wright, is there anything in the
budget for preservations of those rights? In regard to the number
three sewer plant, what is the Council's policy in regard to the
ability of the City to control growth in the south, considering
that the Water Board had assuemd, in our past discussions, that
the existence of the number three sewer plant would allow us to
control the growth in that area and how does this affect our
expressed policy of resisting the formation of sewer districts
in that area, which is our present policy?
City Manager Brunton reviewed the background on his perception
of council's position, their concern for keeping the increases
as low as possible and to try to give relief to the low income
elderly. Mr. Brunton stated further that Council did desire the
Water Board to proceed on the water rate study in the one year
outlined, under guidelines that can be modified in order to start
discussions some time in October and get the information to the
Council by November. City Manager Brunton also stated that as the
Administration wrestled the problem that it was felt that a
regional type of sewer facility should be approached on a regional
basis rather than by the City of Fort Collins. Further, the
administration was getting feedback from the districts, that the
City was superimposing the City's value system on them without
having input from them; that the City did not have a monopoly
on the desire for quality growth and that a joint effort should
be made to work out the problems by either a metropolitan sanita-
tion district or a metropolitan water district, with the emergence
as a group decision. The question of water meters and how they
are to be financed and the need to get across to the public the
City's water and sewer story was also discussed.
Chairman Ward Fischer inquired what capital projects had been
deleted and if it was Michigan Ditch or Joe Wright, if there was
anything in the budget for them.
City Manager Brunton replied that they were deferred for a year
or two with some money spent for retention of them, he also spoke
to the questions of a temporary permit towork on the ditch, the
$20,000 in the budget for maintenance and the notification given
the City on the required environmental studies. He stated there
would be sufficient money available to do necessary work to pro-
tect all of the City's rights.
Board member Harvey Johnson stated the first need was for a
master plan; to proceed with the environmental studies. Board
member Richardson stated the City should not be intimidated by
the Forest Service.
• . Page 10
Chairman Ward Fischer stated the purpose in raising these questions
was not in any way to criticize the Council, but that it was es-
sential that the minutes reflect some result which followed the
.Board's recommendation so that in future years, as the Water Board
changes, they may refer back and keep a course; there has been
difficulty in the past to keep track of things; and he restated
what the Board understood to be the Council's position on, some of
these things, and requested that if he was incorrect, that the
City Manager make corrections to get the items right.
The Chairman stated: "We are informed that the Council does
request the rate increase study as we recommended". City Manager
Brunton responded "yes". "We are informed that in regard to
our recent recommendations, that the Council does request a water
meter study as.we recommended". City Manager Brunton responded
"right". "We are informed in regard to water meters, that attempts
are being made to explore revenue sharing and other sources of
finance". City Manager Brunton stated that he did not think any
definite action had been taken by the Council on this, that in the
ordinance that was passed on first reading, this is a "whereas",
pending further study. The Chairman continued "in the event that
water meters are to be paid out of water funds, the Water Board
requests to be advised as to what projects from the capital con-
struction fund are to be deleted to pay for such water meters."
City Manager Brunton stated the administration did not know the
ansr.
The Chairman requested, on behalf of the Borad, that when Council
does make a decision, on that matter, that the Water Board be
advised.=p,
The Chairman continued "in regard to the water capital projects,
which were deferred, we are advised that the Council has elected
to defer for a year or two, certain of the capital improvement
projects planned for Michigan Ditch and Joe Wright Reservoir,
but that we are further advised that there are funds available
for planning and maintenance to the extent that they are necessary.
In regard to the elimination of the number three sewer plant, we
are 'advised that the Council recognized that the deletion of that
plant constitutes a change in policy, that by deleting such plant,
the Council is turning to a concept of a regional solution to the
problem rather than the concept understood by the Water Board of
City control of growth south of the City; the Council further, by
deletion, recognized that it effectively terminates the present
Policy understood by the Water Board of resisting the formation of
new sewer districts in the area"7
City Manager Brunton stated there were six sewer districts, with
two being formed in the last six months, and one water district
in the last six months, and that the Council felt that the previous
Policy had not been effective.
. • Page it
The Chairman continued his remarks as follows: "I prefaced my
remarks by stating that my comments were not to criticize the
Council, the Council is the one that properly makes decisions.
We had in the past, long before the present Council and before
the present administration, had a continuing problem of communica-
tion between the Water Board and the Council. They would go oft
one way and we would go off on another way because we never com-
municated, our minutes were never reflective, we never knew what
the Council's policy was and the Council never knew what our
policy was. I want to make sure that as the Council makes policies,
that we understand them; I had honestly thought that our policy was
understood, whether right or wrong, whether effective or not ef-
fective, that the number three plant was going to be utilized if
growth south of Fort Collins could be controlled, and I had honestly
thought that we had made a clear decision to resist the formation
of water districts in that area. If I am in error in stating our
policy, then what I said should be stricken from the minutes,
because I was merely trying to state what I thought was the Water
Board's understanding. I have no objection to any policy decision
that the Council makes in this regard, but if I am in error -- from
what I understand our policy reflects, is so that we will not in
the future go under some misapprehension or what the policy of the
Council is in the problem. The Council is the elected representa-
tive of the people in this community and they are the ones to
properly make decisions, if they elect to have no capital improve-
ments program in water or sewer, that is their absolute privilege-
-so my remarks were not meant to be critical --I know that the policy
has not been effective --all I am trying is to get our policy in
accordance with the Council's policy which this Water Board, as
long as it works for the City, will attempt to follow".
City Manager Brunton stated that the Water Board could do more
good if it took the leadership in making the study on the relation-
ship of the City of Fort Collins to the water and sewer districts.
Chairman Ward Fischer stated the Water Board was acting on a study,
and that it be reflected in the minutes, in connection with the
entire policy because it ties in with the regional concept and was
one that Dr. Norman Evans is heading; nothing formal had been done,
but several members of the Water Board had met with the representa-
tives of some of the Water Districts and they suggested that we
explore how we could solve our problems and get together on some
type of metropolitan water -sewer district or things of that nature.
It was very indefinite, but it had been agreed to get all the in-
formation from the sewer and water districts and trom the City
and it was given to Dr. Evans who had some graduate students working
on it with him this summer and they were putting together some kind
of a study, and hopefully, some recommendations in regard to the
whole regional concept which may well, or may well not, tie in
with what the Council has in mind.
Dr. Evans stated he would like to respond; both he and Mr. Richard-
son had both been involved, the students concluded the work that
had been assigned, and it would not amount to as much as had been
• • rays lc
hoped in terms of progress as had been described, but they did
have a start.
City Manager Brunton stated the need for both the City Council
and County Commissioners to be involved in the beginning on any
studies and the need to have more dialogue between the Water
Board and the Council on a continuous basis. City Manager Brunton
further stated the Council and Water Board should meet once or
twice a year, and perhaps the Water Board should take another
meeting on the ordinance for raw water requirements and have
those in opposition appear before the Water Board.
Chairman Ward Fischer stated the City Manager had a point and he
would not be adverse to a motion to reconsider and requested the
Secretary to advise the press and radio that at the next meeting,
it would be considered.
Board member Norman Evans made a motion, seconded by Fred Feit,
to reconsider the motion on increases for raw water requirements.
Yeas: Fischer, Johnson, Feit, Richardson, Cain Jr., Moore and
Evans. Nays: None.
City Manager Brunton stated there would be a staff report with the
agenda on this.
The Chairman stated he wanted to make sure that although there is
still a motion pending on the increase requirements, both from
the standpoint of gross and net water requirements and money, now
it may be that the administration, when developing its recommenda-
tions, will have some recommendation other than the motion that is
pending, and the administration is welcome to submit alternative
views if they wish to do so. The Water Board would very much ap-
preciate the administration having some view when we consider the
matter, but the chairman wished the administration would also make
reference to the motion which is pending and discuss the effect of
that even if the administration has different recommendations. If
Mrs. Lewis would do, the Board requested that she notify the press
and radio, that in this chamber at our next regular meeting, the
Board will discuss this proposal and that they will welcome
participation on that matter. The Chairman stated it would be the
ruling of the chair that at a regular Water Board meeting, the
Board would consider anything that anybody wished to present,
whether it is on the agenda or not•.
The Chairman also requested the City Manager to advise him as to
the recommendation on the Ed Johnson property question so that if
the Council does pass the recommendation, he could get in touch
with the Water Board representatives that would meet with Arthur
Ditch Company and get this going.
Board Member Harvey Johnson requested a staff report on how much
water is being used on an acre of ground.
• Page 13
City Manager Brunton stated, for the record, he had already sent
a memorandum to the Council regarding this subject as follows:
IX. Development of adequate water and sewer systems should
not be a deterrent to growth per se. Other controls should
be employed. Growth customers should pay their own way
by:
A. Annual review of plant investment fees and possible
changes if necessary.
B. Adoption of new participation for oversized main
construction.
C. Possible change in raw water requirements. Present
requirement -- 2 acfe..feet per gross acre or 3 acre
feet per net acre with cash credit of $250 per acre.
Possible change to 4 acre feet per gross acre or 5
acre feet per net acre with more realistic cash credit
per acre
Chairman Ward Fischer stated if there were no objection, the Water
Board would meet at 3:00 p.m. on October 12, 1973. The Chairman
also stated if it would be desirable to preceed the rate recom-
mendations by public hearings, possibly the Council would want
to grant the Board a couple of extra months on the question.
City Manager Brunton stated it would be helpful to have rate
hearings, perhaps joint hearing with the Water Board and the
Council.
The meeting adjourned at 5:45 p.m.
l!
Secretary