Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutWater Board - Minutes - 12/18/1987C] 11 MINUTES Water Board December 18, 1987 Members Present Norm Evans, president, Henry Caulfield, vice president, Neil Grigg, John Scott, Jo Boyd, Tom Moore, Marylou Smith, Tom Sanders, Ray Herrmann, Dave Stewart, Jim Kuiken (alt.), Chester Watson (alt.) Staff Rich Shannon, Mike Smith, Dennis Bode, Andy Pineda, Ben Alexander, Paul Eckman, Assistant City Attorney Guest Brian Werner, Information Officer, Northern Colorado Water Conservancy Dis- trict Members Absent None President Evans opened the meeting. The following items were discussed: Minutes Ray Herrmann had corrections on p.5, paragraph 4. The paragraph should read: "Ray Herrmann said that the Forest Service is the lead federal agency on this. He explained that it is part of a general adjudication in Division I. It wouldn't get to the state attorney general until it has passed through the water master, he said. If the attorney general is involved, they may already be involved in an appeal." With the corrections, the minutes of November 20, 1987 were approved as distributed. Norm Evans expressed thanks and best wishes on behalf of the Water Board for the Christmas treats that were provided by the Utility staff. Dr. Evans distributed a revised list of Water Board standing committees. The list included the Program Evaluation Committee which was given the task of refining the Water Board goals initiated at the Water Board/staff workshop. The list of the standing committees with the new appointments is attached to the minutes. Norm Evans explained that there are five standing committees that are pro- vided for in the Bylaws: Engineering, Utilities Service, Conservation and Public Education, Legislative and Finance and Program Evaluation. Dr. Evans has designated a special committee named Regional Supply Coordination. Water Board Minutes December 18, 1987 Page 2 Jim Kuiken asked if this committee's task would be to work on regionalization of various water Utilities. "Yes, that's correct," Dr. Evans replied. "It would try to encourage regionalization and move us ahead in this area." Mr. Kuiken said he has a keen interest in that concept and would like to serve on that committee. Chairman Evans assured Mr. Kuiken that there would be no objections and appointed him as a member. Henry Caulfield explained that due to a consulting commitment in Pennsylvania for the past six months, he has missed several Water Board meetings. He was pleased to announce that the job was recently completed so he will now be attending meetings on a regular basis and will be able to serve on commit- tees, etc. The Board welcomed him back. Dr. Evans asked for a motion to confirm the appointments to the standing committees. Tom Moore moved to confirm the appointments. After a second from Ray Herrmann, the motion was approved unanimously. MaryLou Smith asked for a clarification of the role of these committees. "Are we to assume if something comes up that those committees should look at, that we will be informed or are the committees to be looking pro -actively at the areas they should be addressing?" Dr. Evans' recommendation is that the committees function pro -actively and bring the need to act to the Board's attention. The committees should be allowed to take the initiative on what they wish to do. MaryLou Smith cautioned that the committees need to be in close contact with the staff in order that the committees aren't pre-empting what staff has in mind. Dr. Evans strongly agreed. "Coordination with the staff is essen- tial," he stressed. Mr. Caulfield added "and bringing recommendations back to the entire Board." Ray Herrmann asked if the committees have standing charges. "We don't have stated charges," Dr. Evans replied. Neil Grigg proposed that each committee chairperson develop a statement of their charge. Dr. Evans agreed to Dr. Grigg's excellent suggestion and asked each chair to develop a charge or a work statement and make it a goal for our next meeting. Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District Update Brian Werner, Information Office from NCWCD reported that the District thought the meeting on November 8 with the City Council, Water Board and staff went well. The major emphasis that emerged from the meeting was the need for a cooperative attitude among all of the regional entities. Henry Caulfield asked if there were minutes of that meeting for those who weren't able to attend. Molly Nortier said she would send those members a copy of Larry Simpson's remarks which he provided for those in attendance. Jo Boyd explained to Mr. Caulfield that Larry Simpson brought the Council up to date as to the District's background, function and its current activities. "It was almost a repetition of the very informative meeting when he brought the Water Board up to date on NCWCD activities," she added. Water Board Minutes December 18, 1987 Page 3 Chairman Evans reiterated that those kinds of dialogues like the Council work session are very important. "We ought to encourage more such meetings, because it is becoming increasingly critical that we have strong, close com- munications between the Northern District and the rest of us who are the con- stituencies of the District." What the Water Board is doing by having a representative from the District at our meetings is very helpful, he added. "Our views do get transmitted back," he assured. Henry Caulfield suggested that the District Board provide the Water Board with something in advance, "so we know what issues are coming up that could be important from our perspective. Then we would be able to react positively before the District takes action." He added, "I know you can't anticipate everything." Mr. Werner said the Water Board meeting is "about half way between our meeting, so you would need next month's agenda. Sometimes they haven't put it together, but they could send out an early version and get it to the Water Board secretary. Dr. Evans believes this is a direction we could go. Norm Evans referred to an item in the minutes of the last meeting regarding the Southside Ditches; specifically that we need to be going to court as soon as possible to change points of diversion and the use of these ditches (p. 7, par. 2 of the minutes). "With respect to moving water out of our ditches, we need to move cautiously," he stressed. If we move too rapidly or at the wrong time, we might get ourselves into a tough situation. As it is now, when we move water out of some of those ditches, the best we can expect to get is about 40% of the volume that's there. The balance of it we can't get because of the objections by other users on the river and because of potential damage to others. If we wait until the proper time when the ditches are no longer used primarily for agricultural uses, we can probably move closer to 100%; "not to say we shouldn't be moving ahead, but I want to assure that we don't take precipitous actions!" "I understand your point," Henry Caulfield began. "On the other hand, we are running into a rather perilous situation here apparently with respect to legal claims and rights, and far fetched schemes to take away water that we have thought of as being pretty, secure. That would argue in favor of getting our legal situation straightened out soon and early in terms of what is ours; clearly and unmistakably. Mr. Caulfield asked Paul Eckman if there was a way to get some legal changes made subject to some kind of side bet agree- ment as to how we would operate the ditches in order to preserve them as long as they want to stay in business. It would remove opposition, but, on the other hand, it would get us through the water courts in a more timely fash- ion. We need to transfer our rights in a timely fashion. For example, we wouldn't want someone coming in and buying 40% of Pleasant Valley and Lake Canal, even though we have 60% of that company. We might buy the 40% now and lease that water back to them, for example, as long as they want to remain in farming. Those are very early water rights. Part of the Arthur Ditch has early water too. We need to get our legal rights secured, he emphasized. Tom Sanders agrees strongly. "This was an issue we talked about 5 or 6 years ago," he recalled. Water Board Minutes December 18, 1987 Page 4 John Scott asked if there is a list of all the water rights that haven't been adjudicated -- changed in point of diversion. Mike Smith identified the three Southside Ditches: New Mercer, Larimer No. 2, and Arthur. Part of Pleasant Valley & Lake has been changed. North Poudre and Water Supply and Storage Co. have not been changed. North Poudre has a lot of CBT associated with it, so it doesn't have to be changed right away, but it is very impor- tant to do something about the river rights and storage rights, he cautioned. Jim Kuiken requested that when making the list John Scott suggested, that staff would also put the percentage of ownership. Mike Smith agreed to do that. Mr. Caulfield stated that the only ditch company where the City is the major- ity is PVL&C. Dr. Sanders asked if we are the major minority in any of the others. Mr. Smith responded that we are the major minority holder in all but WSSC. Of course Thornton holds the majority there. Andy Pineda pointed out that Water Board members having a copy of the Utility Annual report will find all of that information listed there. Mr. Smith said that staff will be updating that. "Our intention for 1988 is to get the engineering work done and start the legal work on changing use on the Southside Ditch water," he assured the Board. Tom Moore asked if this would be an appropriate time for Paul Eckman to com- ment on the Reserve Rights issue. Mr. Eckman referred to the communication which Ward Fischer prepared. It was included in Water Board packets. He pointed out one correction on the first page; "natural forests" should be national forests. Norm Evans announced that the Cache La Poudre Water Users Association is pro- ceeding, with the backing and assistance of the City and the Northern Dis- trict and others, to try to get that case scheduled in the District Court in Greeley very soon. Paul Eckman acknowledged that the City is cooperating with them to help to defray expenses. WSSC and the City are sharing equally in this, and some of the other ditches are sharing to a lesser extent. He added that Ward Fischer is the special counsel for the CLPWUA. Ray Herrmann asked questions that he thought were not clearly addressed in the letter. When did the state start the general adjudication in Division 1? Where are we in the process? Norm Evans said he met with the attorneys and representatives of all the major entities and it was clear that the initia- tive has been taken by the attorneys for the Cache La Poudre Water Users and Fort Collins and that initiative is to get the judge to set a date. It didn't leave Dr. Evans with any doubt that the federal government will be part of that process. Jim Kuiken asked how this relates to the case that the Colorado Attorney General was pursuing on this issue. Are the Water Users joining with the Attorney General or are they doing something different? Paul Eckman said we are not involved with them in any case unless they are also involved in this case. Water Board Minutes December 18, 1987 Page 5 In the 1987 court decision for the State of Colorado, who was the party for the State on that, Mr. Kuiken wanted to know. Ray Herrmann was still con- fused. "This letter talks about Division 2 and about 4, 5 and 6 and estab- lishes the framework but it doesn't tell us what the status of Division 1 is. Dr. Evans reiterated that the understanding he has is that the case might end up in Division 2 or 3 if it doesn't end up in Division 1 and if we take the right initiatives, it will end up in Division 1. That's what they feel is most favorable, he added. John Scott stated that he thinks District 1 was first on the Greeley Court docket in 1983. "I don't think anything has been done," he inferred. "Unfortunately we can't answer all the questions involved with this," Dr. Evans stated. However, Water Board members will be kept informed about the Federal Reserve Rights issue. Discussion Regarding Conflicts of Interest Paul Eckman had forwarded several articles which contained information that he thought would be of interest to the Water Board with regard to conflicts of interest. These were included in the Water Board packets. He pointed out the section which is included in the Boards and Commission handbook regarding Standards of Conduct and the Policy Statement on Ethics. Each Board member receives a manual with this information in it. The articles Mr. Eckman dis- tributed had been published in the Colorado Bar Association Journal. Most are primarily directed towards Council members and in an ancillary way, to Boards and Commission members. He cited two cases which had pretty dismal consequences due to conflicts. Henry Caulfield explained that he had looked at this issue as a member of a committee at Colorado State University about 5 or 6 years ago. The important distinction here was between conflict of interest as a concept and abuse of power as a concept. Conflict of interest, at that time at least, in terms of the university situation and what he understands to be the law, was that you were taken care of if everyone was aware of what your conflicts were. On the other hand, if you used your conflict and abused power --for example voting on something that was in your interest --then you could get in trouble for abuse of power. Is that distinction still intact? Paul Eckman responded that he didn't see in those cases cited, abuse of office or abuse of power. He explained the California case where a board member conveyed property to the City. Everybody knew he owned it; he abstained from voting; he did not par- ticipate in meetings when the subject was discussed. He had even sought the advice of the city attorney in that regard. The city decided later that they didn't like the deal and sued to get their money back; they ended up getting their money back and kept the land too. In another case, a consultant over a period of years had done $60,000 worth of work for a district. He abstained whenever there was any discussion about voting on how much compensation he should be paid and abstained when there was a vote as to whether he should be hired in the first place. Later the district became dissatisfied, sued and got its $60,000 back, plus interest and kept all the consulting reports too. It left him with one remedy; to sue his lawyer for malpractice. Water Board Minutes December 18, 1987 Page 6 Jo Boyd commented that if you take all of those reprints at face value and apply them locally, it would mean that nobody on this board in their right mind would do any work for the City of Fort Collins. It also means that you shouldn't have a Realtor on any planning commission, and almost anyone in any profession who had reason to deal with anything involving the City "should avoid City Boards like the plague." That in turn will lose many competent members of City Boards, so what are people to do? Paul Eckman quoted the final paragraph of one of the articles: "Courts recog- nize the importance of attracting competent persons, including business people, to public service; yet they place a higher value on the fundamental principle that a public official must serve the public interest unfettered by any personal interest." Jo Boyd countered, "That's a public official! These are people who are get- ting enough income from their job to live on, but no one would say even City Council's salary is anything but a token and therefore, how should people react to those reprints?" "It's hard to give a firm answer because there are so many gray areas," Mr. Eckman responded. He gave an example of a former council member. Council member Knezovich's wife was employed by EDAW. "Whenever that company was involved in something for the City or they were presenting something to the Council for consideration, he would abstain and leave the room and explain that his wife was an employee, even though her salary was set and she wouldn't benefit directly." Mr. Eckman contends that any board member would have to think very carefully about doing work person- ally for the City of Fort Collins. Chester Watson asked if Mr. Eckman sees any distinction between being on an advisory board such as the Water Board and actually being in a position where you have authority. Mr. Eckman replied that "you may be in a safer position because you won't be voting on whether to hire the corporation that you may own stock in, for example." Since many members of this Board and others are in jeopardy, is there a way, when the City advertises for board members, to put a footnote stating some- thing about conflicts of interests and the problems they could cause, Dr. Boyd proposed. "This would be the fair way to do it. I found those reprints of the documents Mr. Eckman sent to be almost shocking," she exclaimed. Mr. Eckman admitted that those are probably extreme cases, or they wouldn't be printed up like that. Are these all California cases, Mr. Caulfield asked. "No, one was California and two were in Colorado," Mr. Eckman replied. Mr. Eckman stated that what might come up with a board like this is policy statement No. 6: "A member of a board or commission should refrain from representing any person or interest for compensation before the City Council or any board or commission of the City on any matter which pertains to the function or activity of the Board or commission on which such member serves." It would be prohibited under that language for any member of this board to represent, for compensation, a client before the City Council if it pertained to a matter that was also an activity of this board. "If it's a planning matter, that's different," Mr. Eckman explained. i Water Board Minutes December 18, 1987 Page 7 Dave Stewart remarked: "Even a planning matter --look at MDC in Boulder which is trying to buy water rights from Estes Park. If you were working on that project and you were on the Boulder Water Board, you would have that same conflict. Mr. Stewart cited an example with his firm. Stewart & Associates was retained by Water Supply and Storage Co. to do the water quality study regarding the Thronton return flow plan, and "I did the work," he said. "I couldn't have one of my staff members explain what I did, when we were asked by the City Council to explain it." That's a real dilemma. Mr. Stewart's firm also did the Water Rate Study for the City. Is that a conflict? Certainly the consulting community at this table needs to be aware of these situations. "If that is perceived a conflict, that precludes us from doing any work for the City," he insisted. Mr: Caulfield asked Mr. Eckman if the City Council has taken the position of enforcing what he has been talking about. "I have not heard any complaints," he said. He recalled that Dave Stewart was "under the gun" at one time from the Council when some of the members were asking him questions. "Exactly," Mr. Stewart replied. It came down to a very frustrating situation to try to serve the community on the Water Board yet try to function as a consultant. "Who do you get as competent members of Board if this is the case?" Mr. Caulfield recalled that at the time Dave Stewart was hired, the Board approached this in a very careful, proper manner. Mr. Stewart avoided even attending the meeting, let alone not being involved in the decision. He didn't attend the meeting when his firm was selected over the other appli- cants. Furthermore, former Water Board Chairman Ward Fischer followed the same procedures when a client of his was involved and Mr. Fischer had many clients. He was Water Board chairman for more than 20 years. Mr. Eckman pointed out paragraph No. 4 of the statement of ethics: "A board or commission member should disclose any personal or financial interests which would tend to impair independence of judgement of action in the perfor- mance of official duties." "That's what Dave Stewart and Ward Fischer did." He then read paragraph 5 of the ethics statement" "A board or commission member should avoid any action which is or has the appearance of being a con- flict 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." Henry Caulfield related that at the federal level, when you are on a commit- tee of the National Research Council, one of the first things you do at the beginning of a newly formed committee, is state what your possible conflicts of interest are, and everybody has conflicts. "You are not a very knowledge- able person in your field unless you have all sorts of connections," he contends. Mr. Eckman believes that Water Board is beset by these problems more than most boards. "As I read this policy statement on ethics," Mr. Eckman continued, "I was prepared to say that it seemed to me safe if you would dis- close your interests and then leave the meeting and not participate, that you would be in a pretty good position. Unfortunately, after reading the Water Board Minutes December 18, 1987 Page 8 horror stories cited previously in which disclosure and abstention and leav- ing the room took place, I can't guarantee that even that will work." The Board returned to Mr. Stewart's case. When he did a water quality study for WSSC, the City Council requested that Mr. Stewart's firm give a presenta- tion on the results of that study. Since Mr. Stewart was the one who did the work, he felt obligated to give the presentation. Because the results of this study also affected the City and the Water Board, Mr. Eckman suggested that paragraph No. 6 of the Ethics statement refers to this situation. He repeated the text. "A member of a board or commission should refrain from representing any person or interest for compensation before the City Council or any board or commission of the City on any matter which pertains to the function or activity of the board or commission on which such member serves." Mr. Stewart explained that he was the one who asked that conflicts of inter- est be discussed at a Board meeting, "because staff, the City and the articles that were cited obviously consider the situation just discussed to be a conflict of interest." He believes that the information given to Board members "doesn't tell us what we need to do." He contends that basically the information says that we can't do anything for the City of Fort Collins while we are Water Board members. Mr. Eckman had asked City Attorney John Huisjen what he knew about the way the Council was interpreting par. 6. Mr. Huisjen said he didn't think they were particularly enamored with that paragraph. However, it has been approved by the Council by resolution and has never been amended, "so I must read it to you and tell you that I think we have to deal with it," Mr. Eckman stressed. Jo Boyd wanted to know if Council can be asked to clarify it. There ought to be a way, Mr. Eckman responded, if Council wants it as a part of the policy statement. "How does one go about that, Dr. Boyd asked. Can we ask them to consider some of the dilemmas that statement puts forth for many people on many City boards," she asserted. Mr. Eckman replied that an amendment to the policy statement may not be effective to change the common law that is pronounced in those cases that were cited. "You still have to deal with that," he cautioned. Neil Grigg suggested that there might be a principle here, even though it may require an adjustment that we might be able to follow to comply with that. It appears to Dr. Grigg that what Dave Stewart was doing in the Water Rate study was like an extension of a staff activity. A rate study could be done by the staff. When a consultant on a board like ours is doing work which isn't really an extension of staff, and is intended to result in some kind of policy, that consultant could say, "according to this I'm not supposed to present the material. I have provided advice to staff and Board and they should present it to you." Mr. Eckman agreed that this solution might avoid the problem of paragraph 6. It might not avoid the problem, however, if you have done some work for the staff with compensation and you are on the Board. Mr. Caulfield asked how the P&Z Board and other boards cope with this prob- lem. Mr. Eckman advises the P&Z Board too. The P&Z Board is a quasi- Water Board Minutes • December 18, 1987 Page 9 judicial board, he explained. They receive fact and make decisions like a court, in a sense. If any Board member lives within the 500 foot radius of whatever property they are discussing, he/she does not participate. At other times there have been attorneys on the board who have represented architects. When the architects appear before the board trying to promote some planning project, the attorneys leave the room. Mr. Eckman doesn't recall any members of that board with any contracts or anyone who would have gained financially by virtue of a contract with the City. Chester Watson referred again to paragraph 5. He is not working for the City but he is working for the State Attorney General's office as a consultant on the Federal Reserve Rights issue. "As far as I know it's the same case the City is involved in," he said. He abstained at the last Water Board meeting when they voted to support the Cache La Poudre Water Users. Mr. Eckman assured Dr. Watson that he didn't have to do anything more than abstain, because there is no risk of his having to give money back to the City since he has no contract with the City. "You have covered your conflict by abstaining and by disclosing the conflict," he added. "Is your bottom line avoiding contracts," Mr. Caulfield inquired. "If I were a consultant, I would be very cautious about contracting with the City based on the reading of those cases you cited." Mr. Caulfield added, "But not when Mr. Stewart was working for WSSC; that would be alright?" "Yes," Mr. Eckman replied. I would avoid a contract on a project that would be related to the Water Board, he advised. All projects that relate to the Water & Wastewater Utility concern the Water Board "whether we see them or not," Mr. Stewart remarked. In a town of 80,000 people, you don't have that many experts although Fort Collins is blessed with many. If you are going to have a Board composed of people who aren't experts on the subject, why have a Board, he contends. Chester Watson asked if any member has a conflict, should he/she disclose it to the Council. "Yes, or you take it to the staff, or call me or the mayor," Mr. Eckman advised. He also related that Council has an internal ethics committee that reviews all perceived conflicts brought to them by Council members. The committee decides if it is a conflict. Mr. Caulfield proposed that the Board follow the National Research Council's policy and have the Water Board disclose their conflicts once a year or every six months. "We would have it written in the minutes as to what we are engaged in that relates to this Board," he said. "We could send the minutes of that meeting to the ethics committee or whatever it is; thus, we would have established a record. This might be a way of helping to protect our- selves." Jim Kuiken sees a major problem here which concerns him greatly. In the case where the man had to turn back the property, he was not sued by the council, but by the taxpayers. "We can disclose all we want to the Council, but if somebody out there says he is getting ripped off, you are going to get sued." Water Board Minutes December 18, 1987 Page 10 Jo Boyd remarked that according to Paul Eckman's interpretation, no matter what you do, common law can take precedence, so you can disclose all you want, and the "Council can give you their blessing and you still can be had!" Jim Kuiken stated that there is a clear difference between the people on this board and the two court cases that were cited. Those people were city coun- cil members who have the authority to make decisions and act upon them. Our Board is just advisory. Mr. Kuiken related that he has a major conflict if board members are viewed the same as council members. "My firm is currently doing two projects for the City --what do I do, quit and walk out right now?" Tom Sanders asked if a Board member is sued by the taxpayers, does the City pay the attorney's fees? Mr. Eckman wasn't certain but he doesn't think the City has any legal obligation to pay those fees. The City may assume moral obligation, however. Mr. Kuiken asked about the financial interest issue. Suppose this Board con- siders a project such as Halligan Reservoir which the Board approved a few weeks ago. In another case, suppose the City goes through a selection process to hire a consulting engineer, after the Board recommended the need for a new treatment plant. "Any one of us on the Board could be considered, and what if one of us was selected?" We voted for it because, prior to being involved, we thought it was the thing to do. "Have we put ourselves into the position of gaining financially because we voted for the project?" "That's exactly what happened with the Water Rate Study," Marylou Smith recalled. Dave Stewart was present when the Board voted for a study and subsequently, his firm was selected to do the study. Mr. Kuiken clarified that at the time Mr. Stewart voted, he had no conflict. That would be the situation in the fictional case that Jim Kuiken cited too. Tom Sanders commented that in his seven years on the Board he hasn't seen any evidence that anyone on this Board was in it for financial gain. Dave Stewart strongly agreed. He believes that people generally apply for boards to help the community in which they live and not because it could help them financially. The two times he was involved as a consultant and had potential conflicts, it was frustrating for him. "How can we resolve this issue," he asked. Dr. Sanders believes that the greatest concern for conflicts is when people have the advantage of knowing about projects coming down the road and are thus postured correctly for a proposal for general bidding purposes. Specu- lating on land by knowing ahead of time about a project could also be a prob- lem. "Certainly the minimum to do is disclose the conflict, and abstain and don't participate," Mr. Eckman reiterated. "Another thing to look at," he added, is that contracting with the City can involve some risks." Even though you feel confident about the Council and City staff you can't be sure that there wouldn't be a taxpayer who would raise the issue, he stressed. Mr. Eckman thinks there is a place in the City Charter that prohibits employees or officers of the City from having an interest in the City financially except Water Board Minutes • December 18, 1987 Page 11 as an employee or officer. Would the Water Board be considered officers? "You may be officers. I'm not sure if that is limited to the Council," Mr. Eckman responded. He wanted to check the exact language to be certain. Chairman Evans asked if the Board would like to have him contact the Council about paragraph 6 of the policy statement which was discussed previously. He could express the Board's concerns and give the Council the option of looking into it. There was general agreement on the Board that it would be a good idea. Dr. Evans said he would bring it up to the Council. Mr. Stewart asked if staff had any opinion on this subject. Mike Smith believes that what has been discussed is "right on." He commented that Dave Stewart and Jim Kuiken are in awkward positions because they are members of firms that have worked with the City and in Mr. Kuiken's case, is working with the City now. If for some reason Mr. Kuiken's employer decides that Mr. Kuiken needs to manage the project he can't because he is a member of the Water Board. There isn't a problem if the firm is involved with the City, only if a member of the Water Board represents that firm, Marylou Smith wanted to know. "In other words, if we are part of a firm doing work for the City, that is not a problem, but if we are actually doing the work, that is? Mike Smith clarified that it isn't a problem "as long as you weren't involved in any way with them getting the work." Mr. Eckman found the part in the charter he was looking for and it reads: "No officer or employee of the City shall be financially interested directly or indirectly in the purchase from or sale to the City of any land, materials or supplies or of services except personal services as an officer or employee. Any violation of this section with the knowledge express or implied of the person or corporation contracting with the City shall render the contract voidable by the City Manager or the Council. Any violation of a provision of this charter shall be deemed a misdemeanor." "Now define officer," members of the Board requested. "It's not defined," Mr. Eckman replied. He promised to supply a definition of officer at the next meeting. Mr. Caulfield offered another item for discussion. In the University, if for example, a faculty member gets in trouble, the State does not automatically defend that person before a court. They do look into the substance of what it is the faculty member has been charged with to see if, in the opinion of the Assistant Attorney General, if that person was properly acting as a faculty member. In that case the State will defend him/her. "Perhaps we could get a commitment from the City Council that in proper circumstances of knowledge of everything that was going on, that the City would defend us against a third party (a taxpayer suit)." Mr. Eckman believes that this is the position the City has taken with respect to its employees too. "Say the Water Board decided something," Mr. Caulfield asked hypothetically, "and then someone brought suit and they named the Water Board. Would the City defend the Water Board?" Mr. Eckman replied, I think we would, unless the Water Board had "gone off on a frolic." Water Board Minutes December 18, 1987 Page 12 Chairman Evans determined that the Board had a very valuable and productive discussion on this subject, and since Mr. Eckman is planning to get back to the Board with some specific items, he suggested that they end the discussion and proceed with the rest of the agenda. Staff Reports Andy Pineda reported that at the end of the calendar year the City has used 24,589 acre feet of water to date. Henry Caulfield noticed in the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District material sent to Board members, that a summary was given on what everyone received out of the Northern District this year, but the reservoir levels were not given. Brian Werner said he would make certain that the Water Board receives that information. "What's the carry-over situation," Mr. Caulfield asked. Mr. Werner responded that "we are nearly average." There is a little more storage in the CBT system--Horsetooth, Granby, Carter --as opposed to the local storage, but that is due to the "carry-over program that we have insti- tuted where people are keeping the water in our system through the winter months. We'll release it to them in the April/May period if they need it." But, Mr. Caulfield continued, that is drawn down from the previous year because you were way above average in the previous two to three years. "On our 30 years of record we are about average," Mr. Werner explained. "So we have gone back to average," Mr. Caulfield added. Dr. Evans stated that our deliveries to date appear to be 10-15% above the projected level but below the dry year projection and that's where we would like to see it fall. "Is that a correct statement?" "Yes, it is below that 1-in-20 level that we look at as a dry year," Mr. Bode replied. Mike Smith reported that staff had sent a briefing recently to the Water Board by the City's special legal counsel John Carlson on the Excalibur issue. "Another briefing probably will be sent in January or February. Cur- rently nothing is happening. Attorneys are "just exchanging paper." Mr. Caulfield noticed that all the 87's in that briefing should have been 88's. Dr. Evans asked if Mike Smith had anything further on the question of manage- ment of the Boxelder Sanitation District. Mr. Smith said that staff hasn't met with them since the last Water Board meeting. Staff is in the process of preparing a proposal to Boxelder regarding the possible management of that district. The time frame on that is to have a draft completed by January 15 for Rich Shannon and Mike Smith to review. Next meeting there will be more to report. Henry Caulfield asked if the boundaries of the Boxelder District are all in the Urban Service Area. Rich Shannon said they extend outside. "So they go beyond A-B and the Country Club," Mr. Caulfield wanted to know. Mr. Smith said they go somewhat east of I-25. Boxelder is fairly small compared to ELCO, Mr. Smith continued. The ELCO boundaries extend considerably outside the Urban Service Area. Mr. Shannon indicated on a map where the Boxelder boundaries and ELCO Boundaries lie. Water Board Minutes • December 18, 1987 Page 13 Mr. Smith announced that with regard to the Districts, the Tri-District--Fort Collins -Loveland, ELCO and North Weld County --the ones that run the Tri- District water treatment plant, are in the process of designing an expansion of that plant. We have talked to them about an option of the City being a partner in that possible expansion as an alternative to future water treat- ment plant capacity. "This is in the discussion stages," he stressed. Dr. Evans reported on a discussion he had with the Tri-District. What he learned was North Weld has a problem getting involved with any cooperative effort with anything the City of Fort Collins proposes until they can develop a sense of trust of our intentions. However, it doesn't appear to be a very strong objection, he added. It seems important to know that we need to deal with North Weld very carefully, so they won't be an obstruction as they seem to be. Neil Grigg asked for a point of clarification regarding the new committee on Regional Supply Coordination. "What would you expect this committee to do relative to an issue like that?" Jo Boyd, the newly appointed chairman of that committee said, although she hasn't had much time to think about it, she hopes that the committee members would propose goals that they would like to see. Before these goals are brought before the Board, Mr. Shannon and Mr. Smith would review them "and let us know what is realistic. Then we would present this to the Board and receive their input." Mr. Caulfield said he learned that Tri-District has plans for a 20% expansion of their plant, going from 20 mgd. to 60 mgd. What shocked him about this is that earlier when we talked about a new water treatment plant and about going in with them, we talked about a realistic possibility of their going into it at the mouth of the Poudre Canyon. At that time nothing came up regarding the potential of sizing for their plant to 60 mgd. Dr. Evans related that they are still interested in the regional plant at the mouth of the Canyon. Mr. Smith remarked that he thinks "it will boil down to a dollars and cents issue." Mr. Caulfield asked how difficult it will be for them to expand to 60 mgd. "The first 10 mgd. will be relatively easy, Mr. Smith replied, "but after that they must do some major modifications." Mary Lou Smith was somewhat confused about the charge of the Regional Supply Coordination Committee. When talking about regional supply, apparently we are not talking about guarding our supply in the region from those outside the region who try to obtain our water. Dr. Boyd said the way she sees it is from the sub -heading which is "Regional Interjurisdictional collaboration." One of the first things that can be done, is knowing who people are and find- ing out what their ideas are; this has already started, of course. Then the committee could prepare their ideas and present them to the entire group and get their input, she reiterated. Ms. Smith was still confused. "Is all of this regarding the water treatment side or guarding our water supply from outside interests? Dr. Boyd believes the committee's charge is regional cooperation on treatment. Jim Kuiken con- tends that in terms of dealing with the Thorton issue, etc., "we must look after Fort Collins' interest first, not for the region. Although, he admitted they may be the same thing, but we must address what's best for Fort Water Board Minutes December 18, 1987 Page 14 Collins." He thinks that guarding water supply belongs under the "strategy committee." (Program Evaluation Committee) Neil Grigg, Chairman of the Program Evaluation Committee said (with a smile) that one thing you can expect from his committee will be suggestions for what the other committees ought to be doing. Dr. Evans observed that if we can get the committees to draft their own sense of mission, we can get them together and know more clearly where we need to make separations. MaryLou Smith said that her understanding of the word strategy in the Program Evaluation Committee doesn't mean just strategies as to how to deal with threats to our water supply. To her it means strategies to implement the goals and objectives that we set for the Water Board. Dr. Evans said that is exactly right. Tom Moore was confused about the Council process relating to water meters. Is that it for water meters? Mike Smith explained that the issue will prob- ably be revisited sometime in February at a work session. Mr. Moore thinks it is still very necessary to think in terms of water treat- ment capacity. "We must think of ways to cut the spikes off. I didn't think meters were the way to do it, but we still have to address that problem." He proposed that we need to establish a public education program. We must fund it appropriately and approach it in the correct way, he stressed. Mr. Smith related that staff has seen some alarming things happening within the past three years regarding peak days. For about three years in a row we saw 40 mgd. peak days. Then it went from 40 to 45, 48 and 55 in the last 3 years. "That has us concerned," he emphasized. We have 64 mgd. capacity now. If things continue the way they are, we will need to build additional capacity quickly. "Or cut the peaks off," Mr. Moore insisted. "Can we start predicting those peaks and educating the public," he continued, and if an education program doesn't work, you go to restrictions." We know what time of day the peaks will occur, Mr. Smith responded. Andy Pineda had a model last year in which he was trying to predict the peak days by the weather forecasts. He was getting fairly close. "Our per capita con- sumption has been fairly high the last few years; from 200-230. That's high compared to other communities around," Mr. Smith stressed. Chairman Evans thanked Tom Moore for bringing up the point of looking ahead towards another season. He suggested that one of the committees take this up as a project. Election of Officers Chairman Evans left the room during the election of Water Board president. Vice Chairman Henry Caulfield took over during that period. Mr. Caulfield asked for nominations for president. Neil Grigg nominated Norm Evans. Dave Stewart seconded the nomination. Jim Kuiken nominated Neil Grigg who declined the nomination. Nominations were closed. Norm Evans was elected unanimously to serve another term as president. Water Board Minutes• December 18, 1987 Page 15 Dr. Evans opened nominations for vice president. Neil Grigg nominated Henry Caulfield. MaryLou Smith seconded the nomination. There were no further nominations. Henry Caulfield was elected unanimously to continue as vice president. Other Business John Scott asked if the agreement relating to Halligan was to go to Council. Mike Smith said it went to Council to acquire Judson's interest. It was approved and we have acquired that. Dennis Bode is preparing a request for proposals for some feasibility work on the dam. That will go out in January sometime. Mr. Scott also wanted to know if staff had talked with North Poudre. Mr. Smith said staff has talked with their attorney and Bob Steibens a couple of times. We will keep Water Board informed of any progress. Mr. Scott asked about the resolution on the opposition to Northern District boundary changes. Mr. Smith said that had passed and was forwarded to the District. Neil Grigg set a date for the Program Evaluation Committee meeting on Tues- day, January 5, 1988 at 3:00 p.m. in the Light and Power Conference Room. President Norm Evans, Mike Smith, Rich Shannon and Dennis Bode were also asked to attend. Norm Evans announced that Ray Herrmann had extended an invitation to Water Board members and staff to attend a Christmas open house at his home that evening beginning at 5:30 Since there was no further business the meeting was adjourned at 4:58 p.m. Water Board Secretary WATER BOARD STANDING COMMITTEES Engineering: Water Credits; System Planning; Quality Control; Hydrologic Analysis David Stewart, Chairman Thomas G. Sanders James Kuiken Chester C. Watson Utilities Service: Urban Service and City Interagency Coordination Thomas K. Moore, Chairman Josephine Boyd Neil S. Grigg Ray Herrmann Conservation and Public Education MaryLou Smith, Chairman David Stewart Neil S. Grigg Ray Herrmann Legislative and Finance Henry P. Caulfield, Jr., Chairman Thomas G. Sanders Thomas K. Moore Chester C. Watson Program Evaluation: Goals, Objectives, Strategies; Board Performance Neil S. Grigg, Chairman John F. Scott James G. Kuiken Henry P. Caulfield MaryLou Smith �1a*IIA4 161;IdIaa04 Regional Supply Coordination: Regional Interjurisdictional Collaboration Josephine Boyd, Chairman Ray Herrmann Thomas K. Moore John F. Scott James G. Kuiken Note: The president of the Board is an ex officio member of all committees. January, 1988