Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutWater Board - Minutes - 04/20/19900 Water Board Minutes April 20, 1990 Members Present Henry Caulfield, President, Ray Herrmann, Terry Podmore, Tim Dow Tom Moore, MaryLou Smith, Tom Brown, Mark Casey (alt.) Paul Clopper (alt.) Staff Mike Smith, Dennis Bode, Andy Pineda, Linda Burger, Molly Nortier Guests John Bigham, Agency Coordinator, Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District Dorothy Huff, Observer, League of Women Voters of Larimer County Kari Van Meter, City Planning Members Absent Tom Sanders, Vice President, Neil Grigg, Dave Stewart President Henry Caulfield opened the meeting. The following items were discussed: Minutes The minutes of March 23, 1990 were approved as distributed. John Bigham distributed the snow precipitation update as of April 20. The South Platte basin is still above 100% which is good news. As most of the Board was aware, the District Board set the quota at 50%. There have been mixed reactions on the decision, but the primary reason for setting it at 50% was an attempt to conserve and bring the storage up in the CBT system. The Board has the right to review the quota at a later date and could, if conditions warranted it, issue an additional quota. If the District board would have issued even a 70% quota "we would have lost what storage we now have, so CBT would have been almost at zero," Mr. Bigham emphasized. He reported that Granby Reservoir is only at 14% of active capacity with only about 60,000 AF of water left that could be moved out by pump. Tim Dow asked what the current estimate is for refilling Granby. Under average precipitation for the rest of the year, it probably will be brought back up to about 60%, Mr. Bigham replied. "We'll never fill it by the end of the year," he predicted. It will probably take a couple of years to get the storage back to normal assuming the drought doesn't continue, he concluded. Water Board Minutes April 20, 1990 Page 2 Mr. Bigham also announced the summer tour schedule that the District will be conducting for the east and west slopes. He provided copies of the schedule for those interested. He suggested that those wishing to take the tours, get their names in early because the tours fill up very quickly. Mr. Caulfield encouraged Board members who haven't taken advantage of this opportunity to do so because "you get a good understanding of what the system is all about." Mr. Caulfield commented that the idea of the 50% quota is relatively new. "It used to be that the farmers argued that they would rather have a 100•/ quota and have enough water for a full crop. If the next year was also dry, they would "simply go out of business for that year." The question now is whether the farmers can make a full crop with this situation. This year the soil moisture on the east slope is good, so they are taking advantage of the 50%. Mr. Bigham added that basically local storage is up, "so with that storage up and a fairly good supply from the other side and good soil moisture, the growers will, in fact, make a crop." Kari VanMeter, with the City's planning department, reported that on Tuesday, April 17, the City Council adopted a resolution which endorsed the findings and recommendations of the Poudre River NRA Task Force. Those findings and recommendations essentially said: "We could do an NRA if we really wanted to, but what is more appropriate is National Heritage Corridor designation." The task force recommended that the purpose of the Heritage Corridor be an examination and interpretation of the social and environmental outcomes of water development and river basin management. "The City Council thinks that's a marvelous idea," Ms. VanMeter stressed. They approved an appropriations ordinance on first reading as well, which gave planning a certain amount of money with which to undertake immediate implementation work, "and that will get us through 1990." she said. One of the first items that needs to be addressed is an adequate partnership with a federal partner. A working relationship in this respect with other involved governmental entities, also needs to be looked at, certainly including the City of Greeley, Weld County, the Northern District and Colorado State University as well. "It looks like we have a fair amount of public support for this," Ms. VanMeter concluded. Mark Casey asked what the key difference is between the NRA and the National Heritage Corridor. Ms. VanMeter explained that Heritage Corridors were developed expressly to allow national recognition of important local resources and technical assistance for a local effort which is a plan to integrate cultural, historic and natural resource management into a program. They were created to allow complex local programs multi - jurisdictional programs without federal intervention. Water Board Minutes April 20, 1990 Page 3 Mr. Caulfield explained that the word heritage is of some significance too. While it doesn't exactly mean history, it includes history in the cases that have already occurred. It is not recreation in the sense that the original NRAs were almost exclusively recreation. There is a federally appointed board that oversees the NHC but the real power preserved in the statues of the three that have been created, states their control over the situation.'The reason that people must be federally appointed, is that the Justice Department considers it unconstitutional for any federally created body to not be appointed by a federal official. Mr. Caulfield went on to say that what has happened so far in the three that have been created, is that the federal officer will appoint whoever is locally nominated. The statute that creates the NHC expressly puts the power for all the things you want to do in the state and local entities. "Of course the main thing we were concerned about was local control," he reminded the Board. Mark Casey asked if those appointments typically were local people. "Yes they are," Mr. Caulfield replied. "I've seen the membership on the Michigan and Illinois National Heritage Corridors and except for the Park Service person, everyone is a Michigan or Illinois state appointee. "Furthermore, this does not contemplate federal land ownership," Mr. Caulfield assured the Board. In the case of the Michigan/Illinois canal the federal government claimed it owned the property and the states claimed they owned it. What the act did was to settle the issue by the federal government saying, in statute, that they gave all of that land to the states." The City wants the national recognition and there is a way of getting federal assistance through the Park Service in our case. The Park Service has a lot of experience with museums and educational programs. Mr. Caulfield believes that the NHC is really quite appropriate for what we want. He added that some of the questions that staff had about the NRA are now all internal issues within the government of Fort Collins, and will not have any federal involvement unless EPA gets involved. "Will Rep. Hank Brown introduce the legislation, as the next step?" Ray Herrmann asked. Kari VanMeter responded that it's another big step, but there are a lot of little steps leading up to that. "We hope to spearhead a strong local effort to lead the drafting legislation. It has to be responsive to our concerns," she stressed. Henry Caulfield brought up another emphasis that he personally has pushed, and that is the appointment of somebody to take the lead in developing a historic museum and education program. "You can't move ahead very quickly with this until it is clearer than the current documents now indicate, just exactly what a museum and education program would be like," he contends. "The components must be more specific than they are." Mr. Caulfield emphasized that this must be a Greeley/Fort Collins enterprise to be a National Heritage Corridor concept, because historically, you can't separate the two in terms of the water management of this basin. Water Board Minutes April 20, 1990 Page 4 Tom Brown asked if this designation automatically means a museum. "In my judgement," Mr. Caulfield replied, "the only way you could have national recognition is to sell the idea that this is of national importance and the only way we could do that is to have a museum and educational program." He went on to say that "we have nothing physical to preserve. The Michigan/Illinois Canal is something physical." Possible physical properties that could be included are the Munroe Tunnel and the Grand River Ditch, he suggested. Of course nobody is proposing that we are or the federal government is going to buy the Grand River Ditch, he added. It was officially suggested in the report that the old power plant be used as the museum. Mr. Caulfield proposed an idea for the large room in the power plant which would involve the use of Craig Harrison's model of the basin. Mr. Caulfield pointed out a change in concept from the early report. At that time they were looking at the corridor along the Poudre River as being the NRA. The concept for the NHC is the River basin from rim to rim. Therefore, it includes everyone in the "irrigation fraternity." The Forest Service has a large role in this in terms of being a landowner and water manager through their permit system. The Park Service also has a part in this in the sense that the Grand River Ditch is still on Park Service property. Mr. Caulfield related that if the NHC becomes a reality for us, it will be the first one in the western United States. There is no place in the Park Service historical program where western water management is featured. Tom Moore remarked that the National Heritage Corridor concept seems to be a very good idea for our area. Mike Smith explained that in 1985 the City of Fort Collins and the Fort Collins -Loveland Water District entered into an agreement to basically cooperate. Some tasks that were included in the agreement have been accomplished. That five-year agreement expired in February 1990 and both parties believe that the agreement should be renewed. The second agreement before the Board is nearly identical to the first one, with the exception of paragraphs 9 and 10. The subject of paragraph 9 is adequate water supply. Basically, the City and District agree to: (1) adopt a raw water policy maintaining a raw water supply capable of meeting demands during a I-in-50 year type of drought, without imposing water restrictions, and (2) adopt a plan to implement said policy. The City has essentially accomplished that. Paragraph 10 is called Transfer of Customers and says that "within one year after the execution of this agreement, the Steering Committee shall develop a policy and plan to address the transfer of various District customers, which are presently located within the City's service area, to the City." That has been an issue which has surfaced two times in the last 5 years, so it was decided that the Steering Committee should develop a policy on it. 0 Water Board Minutes April 20, 1990 Page 5 The first agreement included the sanitation district also. This one does not because the City will probably negotiate a separate agreement with them. There aren't any pressing issues with the sanitation district at this time. Terry Podmore asked if there was any indication of how long the transfer of customers will take. Mr. Smith replied that the actual transfer could take a long time. Some customers are in an area where the City may not be able to serve them right now --some of them are. The timing would depend on the availability of service from the City, and also working out any rate differences that may be a problem. The most difficult part is what the compensation will be for taking these customers. "In other words, if we take a customer, are we going to be paid PIFs and water rights; are we going to compromise on that, etc.?" Mr. Caulfield explained that the equivocal language in Paragraph 9 reflects the fact that the District Board does not wish to be "under the gun" immediately to have to buy water. "We told them that we thought it was prudent to buy early," he stated. "As we all know, water prices are going up, he added. Mr. Bigham, from the Northern District, verified that there were recent transactions for CBT water that were above $1200 per unit. Mike Smith clarified that a couple of recent transactions took place at an auction. Mr. Caulfield said that the District Board is reluctant to move very fast on buying water but they agree with the idea that we ought to have equivalency; implementing it is another story. "It's somewhat ironic," Mr. Smith remarked, "that after the last meeting with the District, about a week later the NCWCD announced their 50% quota, and then the Water District approached the City to rent water for next year because they may be short of water." It is Mr. Caulfield's opinion that the Fort Collins -Loveland District Board thinks more in terms of bargaining. "Unless they want something from us, we have no ability to bargain," he contends. A law suit may be the only alternative, and that's not a good alternative. The Water Board needs to know that, in this case, we can't just think in lofty terms of principles and sharing; bargaining is the key. Mr. Smith verified that when the City negotiated the first agreement 5 years ago, it was partially involved with the settlement of pending law suits, so they had some motivation to negotiate. Mr. Caulfield remarked that paragraph 10, on the transfer of customers, "is absolutely that." "We don't have anything to give them that would make them want to give us treatment capacity and water." When it comes to the transfer of customers, they have no real reason to get out of that situation. Tom Moore moved that the Water Board approve the agreement. Terry Podmore seconded the motion. The Board approved the motion unanimously. Water Board Minutes April 20, 1990 Page 6 Thornton Update Henry Caulfield announced Thornton's annual spring water meeting, and sent around a copy of a letter with information about the meeting. Anyone interested in attending may contact Molly Nortier. City Manager Steve Burkett, Rich Shannon, Mike Smith, Dennis Bode and Andy Pineda met with representatives from Thornton the first part of the week. An executive summary of the Thornton Northern Water Supply Project Completion Study, prepared by Thornton, was distributed to the Board. Mike Smith posted a couple of maps from Thornton's engineering report showing proposed routings and pipelines and how they plan to move the water from northern Colorado to Thornton, and back again. Mr. Smith asked if Board members would like Thornton to give a presentation of their plans to the Water Board, or would it be the Board's preference for staff to update the Board as Thornton's lengthy engineering report is reviewed. Mr. Caulfield reminded the Board that an Ad Hoc Thornton Strategy Committee was appointed at the last meeting comprised of Neil Grigg, Paul Clopper, Tom Brown and Ray Herrmann, with Paul Clopper as the chairman. It is Mr. Caulfield's understanding after talking with Steve Burkett, that the impression is that Thornton is anxious to sell Fort Collins on the merits of their plans, and thus speed up the water court proceedings. Tim Dow explained that the Court in the Thornton case had a status conference on Thursday. The purpose of that was for Thornton to try to have the court set this case for trial at the end of 1990. Virtually all of the objectors, led by the NCWCD and the City of Fort Collins, objected to that since all of them had just received the engineering report after Thornton had been working on it in excess of 4 years. Mr. Dow believes Judge Behrman will probably set the trial for late 1991 to give us at least one full irrigation season. What the City and the Northern District are proposing is obviously detailed analysis of the engineering report, including a lot of field work on individual farms; specifically to look at return flow analyses, the effect on groundwater, and also a lot of water quality concerns because of the proposed returns. "Thornton has been aggressive in terms of trying to push this thing through," Mr. Dow contends, "now that they have their preliminary engineering work done." He stressed that he isn't in favor of having Thornton come to the Board to try to convince us into thinking that it's a good deal. He would be a lot more comfortable having the City staff and City attorneys handling that and updating the Board regularly. Mr. Dow went on to say that it's interesting to note, in the summary they provided, that they are talking about nearly 70,000 AF. "That's a lot of water out of the basin!" The scope of the project, because of various exchanges that they are trying to work out, may really have a significant impact. They are also talking about a project cost approaching a half Water Board Minutes April 20, 1990 Page 7 billion dollars,"so it's not small potatoes," he concluded. Henry Caulfield added that Thornton may also be lining up Aurora and other municipalities to join them on the project and share some of the liability. Tom Brown sees value in having Thornton here, so the Board can talk to them but he would not want to do that until he has a fairly good idea of the layout ahead of time --a better idea than he can get from the 2-3 page summary that was distributed today. "I'm not saying that sometime in the future, after the staff has had a chance to look through their report," Mr. Caulfield said, "and we find it in our interest to question them on key technical points or clarifications; then we could have them here." Mr. Smith reiterated that staff's effort currently is to review the engineering report and identify issues. Our special legal counsel and our consultant are also working on that. Paul Clopper asked if there was something his committee could get started on other than the 600 page report. Mr. Smith responded that it's either the large report or the 3 page summary, but he would try to get additional copies of the report if the committee requests them. It was the consensus of the Board not to invite Thornton to meet with them at this time. Staff Reports Treated Water Production Summary Dennis Bode reported that with all the moisture in March, water use was somewhat below average. "That should help us to keep demands down," he said, "and we hope they won't pick up for another week or two." Mr. Bode also reported on the status of supply and demand for the Utility. There has been considerable interest in renting water, he began. An estimated 20,000 AF has been requested. "We have had to examine that very carefully," he stressed. "A lot of North Poudre shares have been requested, so we broke those into categories and reduced the amount that we are offering for rental to about 70% of what they requested, for those who haven't rented from the City in the past," he explained. With CBT requests, except for lease -back agreements, we have basically held off on those until we see what our demands are in the next month or two, he continued. At that time staff will re-evaluate what those demands are. He concluded by saying that staff will continue to monitor the situation, so the amount of water the City needs will be reserved. "What does the District's 50% allotment mean for us?" Henry Caulfield asked. Essentially it means that we will have some less water, Mr. Bode replied. "We may have to hold back on the CBT water and also cut back somewhat on the North Poudre requests. In terms of the City requirements, we shouldn't have any trouble meeting those, he assured the Board. Water Board Minutes April 20, 1990 Page 8 When you figure City requirements, is use of Joe Wright considered in that to any degree? Mr. Caulfield inquired. "Yes, we anticipate using some water from Joe Wright and the Michigan Ditch," Mr. Bode replied. We would expect, with the average type of year we are seeing now, that we would have a fairly good yield from the Michigan Ditch and also with the combination of Joe Wright inflow and Michigan Ditch water, that we would fill Joe Wright Reservoir. "We would actually want to move some water out. Is that right?" Yes, we would, Mr. Bode answered. Last year we used 29,300 AF of water Tom Moore began. What percent of that is commercial and what percent is residential? It's illustrated very well in the annual report in a pie chart on p. 14, Mr. Bode responded. Wastewater Master Plan Committee Update Mike Smith reported that the committee has essentially focused in on one alternative. They have discussed numerous issues and have asked staff to prepare a draft report that will come from the Committee to the Council. A draft has been sent to committee members and City staff involved in the process. The Committee will meet Thursday, April 26 at 9:30 a.m. to discuss that draft. The group is getting close to making a recommendation to the Council and various advisory Boards will also be required to review the draft. Staff has been very pleased with the progress of the Committee, Mr. Smith concluded. Mr. Smith mentioned that it is Fort Collins' turn to host the meeting of the Water Boards and staff from Greeley, Loveland and Fort Collins. Staff will try to arrange something within the next two months. Committee Reports Legislative and Finance A copy of the "Water Metering" bill, signed by the governor, was included in the packets. Mike Smith said the City Attorney is going to make a ruling as to whether the City has to comply with the legislation. What happened to the "Greenway" Bill? Mr. Caulfield asked. Linda Burger wasn't certain where it was currently, but it was her understanding that it was expected to pass. Ms. Burger also reported that the Basin of Origin Bill was still sitting in late bill status and could be resurrected. "Basically most everything else has been cleaned up except for the "Long Bill," she concluded. Henry Caulfield explained that the NRA Task Force looked at the Greenway Bill, but didn't take much stock in it as a real practical plan for our purposes. In Mr. Caulfield's view, if it passes, it is going to take many years for it to evolve into something. The Task Force thought the National Heritage Corridor idea was far more practical and useful for our area. Water Board Minutes April 20, 1990 Page 9 Linda Burger pointed out that the results of the phone poll on rates for the Mountain View Sanitation District were included in the packets. There was an endorsement by a majority of the Water Board of having the Legislative Committee look at the issue of where the City should be going over the long term with the outside City rates. As staff gets some information on that, Ms. Burger will contact Tim Dow to get the Committee together to begin looking at that issue. In the meantime, for the Board's information, there was a hearing this week on the dissolution of Mountain View before the District Court. "As a result of some personal problems that delayed the process, we were not able to get a signed agreement with the District as to what the rates will be," Ms. Burger explained, "but we did come to an agreement and the paper work is being processed." Another hearing has been set for next week and staff expects the judge to include in the agreement what the rates should be at that point. Then, it is her understanding that the election will be in the fall. Indications are, with the rate agreement we have reached, there is not any substantial opposition to the dissolution, she concluded. John Bigham informed the Board that he believes the "Diligence" Bill was signed yesterday (Thursday). "That gives us two more years on our diligence for the different conditional decrees," he said. Conservation and Public Education MaryLou Smith said she is waiting for the City Council/Water Board Committee to begin meeting. Mike Smith said that a meeting date has not yet been determined. Ms. Smith suggested that Jim Clark, the new Water Conservation Specialist, be asked to give a report during one of the summer meetings on some of the new conservation education activities he has been working on. She understands that he has been doing an excellent job and is actively involved in the education process in the community. Henry Caulfield brought the Board's attention to a large conservation conference in Phoenix in August from the 12th through the 16th. Mike Smith said that the Utility would be willing to send MaryLou Smith and other members of her committee who wish to participate. Neil Grigg and Ray Herrmann are already actively involved in the preparations for the conference. MaryLou Smith and Terry Podmore indicated an interest in attending. At this point Chairman Caulfield called for an executive session to discuss potential water purchases. Following the executive session, the meeting was adjourned at 5:15 p.m.