Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutWater Board - Minutes - 01/18/1985MINUTES Water Board January 19, 198S Members Present Norm Evans, Henry Caulfield, Neil Grigg, MaryLou Smith, Tom Moore, Ray Glabach, Tom Sanders, John Scott (alt.), Jim O'Brien (alt.) Staff Present Bill Carnahan, Mike Smith, Dennis Bode, Ben Alexander, Roger Krempel, Director, Department of Natural Resources, Paul Eckman, Assistant City Attorney. Mayor Gerry Horak, City Council: Water Board Liaison Members Absent Dave Stewart, Bernie Cain, Morton Bittinger Chairman Norman Evans opened the meeting. The following items were discussed: Minutes The minutes for November 16, 1984, and December 21, 1284 were approved. Chairman Evans mooed the Rate Study item to the end of the agenda because of its anticipated length. Mike Smith showed the group a videotape of the Resource Recovery Farm operation. It was well received by Board members and staff. Mr. Smith encouraged people to use the tape to show to other groups because it portrays a positive image of resource recovery. Election or Appointment of Conservancy District Boar- Members Henry Caulfield, chairman of the Legislative and Finance Committee, to which this item had been referred, reported on the status of the assignment. Mr. Caulfield plans to draft a statement which will serve as a basis of discussion for the committee. They will meet on Monday, January 28 at 3:00 in the Light and Power Conference Room. Assistant City Attorney Paul Eckman will attend the meeting to help with any legal matters. Norm Evans announced that the intergovernmental agreement with two special Districts which the Board had discussed at length at their last meeting, was officially renewed recently and approved by the City Council, incorporating the Board's suggestions. Staff Reports Mike Smith indicated on a map the pretreatment site for Anheuser-Busch. In the master agreement, the City agreed to the possibility of providing a site adjacent to Wastewater Treatment Plant No. 2. The situation with regard to A-B's owning the plant and the City operating it has not yet been resolved. Some members had questions about A-B's wastewater operations. Mike Smith assured them that this item will be discussed further at next month's meeting. He added that construction of the water line for A-B will be put out to bid. Everything seems to be going well with these proceedings. Other Business Norm Evans reported on a letter he had received from Mayor Horak regarding conflict of interest related to board and commission members. The City Council is reviewing the policy statement on ethics: No. 5 and No. 6 of that statement currently read= No. 5 -- "A Board or Commission member should avoid any action which is or has the appearance of being a conflict of interest. For the purposes of this policy, a conflict of interest is defined as engaging in any transaction or having any financial or personal interest, which is incompatible with the proper discharge of official duties in the public interest." and No. 6 -- "A Board or Commission member should refrain from representing any person or interest for compensation before the City Council or any Board or Commission of the City." The Council would like to have the Board respond in writing how potential conflicts of interest are currently handled. Bill Carnahan assured the Board that all the City Boards and Commissions had received this letter, not just the Water Board. He explained that, although people with conflicts have declared them and do not participate in discussions relating to them, apparently many boards and commission members are still listening to the discussion. It is the Council's policy, if one of their members has a conflict, he or she leaves the room until the discussion is concluded. The members think. that No. 6 is too restrictive for a number of reasons, and would like this put into the response to the Council. Chairman Evans will draft a response to the Council stating the current practice with regard to this policy and express the Water Board's concern about item No. 6. Moreover, it should be noted that the majority of the members think it is a good practice for the member with the conflict to leave the room during the discussion. Dr. Evans also brought before the Board, the suggestion that the City, the Water Board officers and the Southside Ditch Companies' officers meet and begin to establish the ground work for what lies ahead in ways that will be sensible for the City and acceptable and reasonable to the Ditch Companies. -2- Henry Caulfield asked if this goes along with what the Water Commissioner wants. Paul Eckman responded that this is a little different track. The Water Commission simply wants the cities to make application to change the points of diversion and use so the ditch company water can be used for municipal purposes, which is not the case now. Henry Caulfield contends that, if the City is using a significant portion, of the ditch water for Parks and Recreation, as was mentioned at the last meeting, we are using the water: it is not just being left there. The discussions with. the Ditch Companies which Dr. Evans is proposing, would be based on methods the City could use when receiving more stock from the Ditch Companies for future use. Furthermore, he is convinced that continuing dialogue is important. Dr. Evans introduced another related .matter which concerns renting our excess water. We have limitations on hormuch of the excess water irrigators want to lease depending on if it is a dry year or not and what we charge for it, etc. There is another potential market which concerns the augmentation, plans that are becoming important within the entire basin depending on the availability of water and many plans were built on leasing to provide augmentation Water. This ,,may be an outlet for some leasing that we ought to explore. The rate now is approximately $10 to 15 per acre foot per year. The argument has been, how do we determine a market price? None of us has a magic formula. What Dennis Bode has been able to do is add another g5 or $10 above the assessment value and the irrigators have accepted that. Mr. Bode clarified that this depends on the stock. The staff will be providing some proposed prices in February or March. Norm Evans asked Paul Eckman if he had anything further on the Windy Bap annexation issue. Mr. Eckman said that he still had not heard anything from the District. Dr. Evans asked Mr. Bode if he had looked into CST prices because there were rumors of some good values. Mr. Bode replied that the people he talked with said the price is still around $900 per unit. These sources also related that there doesn't seem to be much action,. Tom Sanders strongly urged that the City purchase CBT water at this lower price. Tom Moore asked if the City has been approached with any sizeable blocks. The answer was, no. Tom Sanders inquired about the amount of money that is currently in the water fund. Mike Smith answered that there should be over $200,000. After considerable discussion and suggestions and amendments to his motion, Tom Sanders offered the following motion: "I move that the Water Board recommend that the City look into and purchase units of CET water for up to SI50,000, at no greater than $900.00 per unit as it might become available." Henry Caulfield provided a second. Before the members voted, MaryLou Smith asked for staff comments on this question. -3- 0 • Mike Smith explained that we won't have audited figures until March. We can't spend over the $172,000 until the audit is completed. Dennis Bode is fairly certain that the price is not going to rise rapidly: part of the reason for that is because much of the market for CST water has come from surrounding cities. These cities now have a large commitment in the Wind;: Gap Project. As a result, they probably will not be buying CST water. Henry Caulfield contends that this should not be an argument for our not buying the water now, because it certainly can't be going down much more. Ray Glabach asked what interest we are getting on the money in the fund. Mike Smith said close to 10% which is about $lS,000 a year. Mr. Glabach just wondered if this might be something to weigh in the process of making our decision. Mike Smith commented further that since the water fund is for water projects and water rigts, etc. we may want to wait until the drought study is finished to see if that gives us a direction.: if the water market didn't come back up. Henry Caulfield stressed that whatever the drought study shows, Horsetooth water is a good water right. Marylou Smith brought up the concern that we may be competing with agriculture for the water. The response was that we rent excess water back to agricultural users. Also, someone is usually selling the water because he needs the money, so the City would not be driving someone off his farm. Mayor Horak suggested that the political timing may not be good because of the Water Rate Study, etc. We may be giving a "mixed message." Following these further comments, the secretary polled the members which is a requirement if the vote is not unanimous. The vote count is below: Tom Sanders - yes, Ray Glabach - no, Norm Evans - yes, Tom Moore - no, Henry Caulfield - yes, MaryLou Smith - no, Jim O'Brien, - yes. The motion carried. Water Rate Study Since the consultant was not able to be at the meeting and because there was so little time, the Chairman asked if the Board should proceed with the discussion. The Board can discuss the report with the consultant at another meeting. As far as time is concerned, Bill Carnahan explained that the staff had divided the presentation into two parts. He suggested that the staff go through the first part since it would not take very long. _Q_ At 'cast the „embers would have something to think about between the meetings. The staff had prepared an outline titled, "Development of A Conservation Program." The main headings were: Overview of the Process; Water Utility Goal: Overview of Water System Components: Reduction of Peak and Annual Use: Options to Reduce Water Treatment Plant Capacity: Preservation of Green Lawns: Phased Metering Options: and finally, A Recommended Program. Henry Caulfield asked Mayor Horak who is the City Council/Water Board liaison, if the outline the staff had prepared along with some adjustments from the Water Board is the kind of thing the Council wants. Mayor Horak replied that it is but he was certain that they would want it "fleshed out" more. He also wanted to make it clear that the focus of the Council is not on a conservation program, as the title of the outline suggests. Another item he wants addressed is the equity question. Jim O'Brien asked if the outline would go to the Council with a recommendation. Bill Carnahan explained that there is no way we can have the report in the time frame that the Council had originally requested, so we will give them what we can: namely, the approcah we plan to take, the fact that we are taking a comprehensive strategic look, and what we think the issues are. We hope this will suffice in -lieu -of having a completed report. Tom Sanders requested that facts be included in the annotated outline that realistically explain if we have a problem with peak demands and what the problem is: also do we have a problem in the short term regarding water demands exceeding capacity etc, and our time frame for building extra capacity, etc. He also wants facts about the equity question, if that is possible. Regarding the equity question, Henry Caulfield asked the mayor how many complaints the City actually receives about this question. Mr. Horak responded that we don't receive complaints per se, but in conversations, people who move to Fort Collins are stunned when they learn that residential customers are not metered. Mr. Caulfield agrees, but he wanted to know if there are actual complaints about the equity of the rates. The Mayor said there are. Therefore, the Council is asking for an analysis of this question to see if there is an inequity problem. After going through the outline and discussing it point by point, Henry Caulfield made the following motion: Return the outline to the staff to redraft into an annotated outline considering the equity question and change the title to more truly reflect what we are try ing to accomplish which is a water program for Fort Collins, not the development of a conservation program. The -5- outline should be available to the Board prior to the regular February meeting. After Water Board deliberation, the final results will be transmitted to the City Council. Following Tom Sanders' second, the Board approved the motion unanimously. Or. Evans asked if there was any further business before adjournment. Tom Sanders asked at what point will the Water Board be involved in a review of the Water Treatment Plant design? Mike Smith said that it is the staff's intention to make the design memorandum available to the Water Board following a plant design meeting with Black and Veatch in February. It was decided that the Board needs an additional meeting with the Consultant to consider the Water Rate Study itself. The meeting was arranged for Friday, January 'IS, at 3:00 in the Light and Power Conference Room. Since there was no further business, the meeting was adjourned at S:3S p.m. Water Board Secretary