Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutWater Board - Minutes - 11/20/1992i WATER BOARD MINUTES November 20, 1992 3:00 - 4:25 P.M. Water and Wastewater Utility Conference Room 700 Wood Street City Council/Water Board Liaison Loren Maxey Members Present Neil Grigg, President, Tom Sanders, Vice President, Tim Dow, MaryLou Smith, Terry Podmore, Mark Casey, Tom Brown, Dave Stewart, Paul Clopper Staff Mike Smith, Dennis Bode, Wendy Williams, Scott Harder, Andy Pineda, Molly Nortier Guests Loren Maxey, Council Liaison John Bigham, Agency Coordinator, Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District George Reed, Citizen observer Members Absent Ray Herrmann, Dave Frick President Neil Grigg opened the meeting. The following items were discussed: Minutes Tim Dow moved, Paul Clopper seconded the motion, and the Board voted unanimously to approve the minutes of October 16, 1992 as distributed. Report from Council Liaison President Grigg welcomed Loren Maxey, the Council/Water Board Liaison. He said he went to the Council meeting on Tuesday night and didn't envy Mr. Maxey's task of having to explain a Water & Wastewater Utility rate increase to a citizen. One of the reasons Mr. Maxey attended the Board meeting today was to commend the Water Board on the time and effort they give to serve on the Board. He appreciates the vast amount of knowledge and expertise that is available in its membership. Water Board Meeting November 20, 1992 Page 2 He is looking forward to serving on the Council/Water Board Water Quality Committee also represented by Council members Gerry Horak and Bob Winokur, and Water Board members Tim Dow, Tom Sanders and Paul Clopper. The Committee will begin meeting in two weeks. He announced that the Council will be appointing a new Council member from the southeast district because of the recent death of Cathy Fromme. He pointed out that six of the seven Council seats will be up for election next year. It appears there will be at least three new people on the Council. Along with Cathy Fromme's seat, Dave Edwards will not be running again, and Ann Azari will probably be running for mayor. He isn't certain what Mr. Horak's plans are and Mr. Maxey hasn't made a decision at this time either. "The composition of the Council next year could be very different," he observed. Mr. Winokur's seat is the only carryover. Tom Sanders asked if that many seats up for election at once will be the norm now. "No," Mr. Maxey replied. The current situation developed because the citizens voted that Council members be elected from their districts. "In order to get a sequence, one district this next year will be a two-year term, and that happens to be district 6." The Mayor's seat of course is up every time. Normally there would only be 4 districts up for election. The Council will discuss the Halligan Agreement at their December 15th meeting. MaryLou Smith announced that she will be taking her Girl Scout troop to that meeting, so she hopes to see a number of Water Board members there. Because Mr. Maxey gets his water and wastewater service from a district, he has occasion to "rub shoulders" with personnel from districts. He hopes that there will be a willingness on the part of the districts, in both water and wastewater, to get together with the City for services and mutual problem situations. Dr. Grigg pointed out that one of the items the Water Board has on its work plan, and is kept on the agenda every month, is reviewing the issues with the regional water and sanitation districts as needed. The Board has had discussions as to whether some policies followed by particular districts might be impeding the economic development in parts of the City, and whether the Board should be getting involved in some different manner, "but we haven't delved into that very deeply," he explained. Mr. Maxey said that was a good point. He said there is a district that is impeding development in an area that is very desirable. He knows of businesses that are re -locating elsewhere in the community or not coming at all because of that sanitation district. He encouraged the Water Board to look at that issue. All the areas surrounding the City are entitled to services that the rest of us enjoy, he stressed. "That's the kind of an issue on which the Board needs to work closely with the Council," Dr. Grigg stated, "so we can be informed and coordinated on how we deal with those districts, and the political feelings of different groups." Water Board Meeting November 20, 1992 Page 3 President Grigg thanked Mr. Maxey for the update and for taking the time to attend the meeting. "Perhaps the Water Board should encourage you to run for re-election. We like to have somebody who has a practical mind, a business sense, and an interest in water systems on the Council; that helps us a lot," he added. Update: Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District John Bigham delivered copies of Last Water Hole In the West, which the W&WW Utility purchased for Council and Water Board members. He said, as he travels around the state, people appreciate having a quality regional history book like that available. He related that in the initial stages of the Big-T project there was considerable conflict between the east and west slopes. "The book brought back memories for a lot of people," he added. Mr. Bigham brought copies of the agenda for a meeting on water quality concerns in the CBT project, scheduled for December 4th at 9:00 A.M. in the District hearing room. "I'm sure there will be interest from municipalities in attending that meeting," he said. Mr. Bigham reported that the NCWCD fail water users meeting in Greeley drew over 100 people. He said there were a lot of good questions and comments from the participants on the agenda items. He went on to say that the District minutes indicated there would be 80,000 Ac-ft of carryover storage, but "now it looks closer to 70,000 because there was water drained out of Lake Loveland and put into Boyd for recreational purposes." The District is currently into a late run on the river and they anticipate that approximately 8500 Ac-ft. will go back into Lake Loveland to bring it up to a reasonable level for the winter. The pumps at Carter Lake will be started again on Monday, December 7th. By then the 8500 Ac-ft. should have been run into Lake Loveland. They will start pumping back into Carter again. Carter to date is at 47.6%, "so it's coming up." Horsetooth is at 67.5 %, and the overall system is at about 55 % of active capacity. One of the programs at the users meeting was an in depth presentation on the integrity of Horsetooth Dam. Karl Dreher discussed all of the efforts used to determine if the sink holes and any of the solution cavities were within the dam area, and if there was any liability. The evidence indicates that the dams "look pretty solid," which relieves some of the concerns about their integrity. The District is anticipating, however, that there could be sink holes on the south end of the dam along the recreational area, because that seems to be where there is more fluctuation than in other areas. He also reported that the District hopes to begin its precipitation enhancement program this weekend (Nov. 21st and 22nd). The National Park Service was asking for a delay in issuing the permit because the District's enhancement program could carry over into the park, and "that is not natural precipitation," they said. There were also comments about the permit from the Water Board Meeting November 20, 1992 Page 4 Division of Wildlife. The last the District heard was that any substantive comments would be considered for the issuance of the permit, but considerations for delays due to some of the "emotional or hypothetical" arguments, probably would not be granted. He won't know until he checks back with the office if anything has happened with the permit. Mr. Bigham learned at a meeting in Denver this morning that once again the proposed water related legislation for the coming legislative session appears to be substantial. There will probably be basin of origin, water quality and transfer issues, as well as other potential bills that haven't emerged yet. "There are some interesting coalitions that are starting to develop already on several issues," he pointed out, "and we anticipate a very active legislative season." Mr. Bigham than asked for questions. Tom Brown asked if we know what causes the sink holes. Moisture and seepage in the cracks dissolve the lime or calcium deposits that were in those layers before the uplift of the mountains perhaps millions of years ago, "so the dam didn't have a lot to do with it," Mr. Bigham explained. Neil Grigg pointed out when dams are built, the fissures are grouted. Dr. Grigg asked if Tom Norton, being elected president of the senate, is going to help us on some of the environmental legislation; is he going to be working with us, or is he going to be neutral? "I suspect that Tom Norton will be relatively easy to work with," Mr. Bigham replied. Tom Sanders referred to an article from the Nov. 10th Denver Post by Bill Homby, who sees a new era of water cooperation in Colorado. He says that "if the Cold War of foreign policy can end maybe the Cold War in Water can end too. It's vital to the future of Colorado that it does," he concluded. Dr. Sanders asked if there is any more movement going on that perhaps we aren't aware of as far as Big T water? "I can't say there is anything official," Mr. Bigham began. "I can tell you that Ken Salazar, Director of Natural Resources, has approached me at one of meetings in Denver and said, 'why don't you extend the pipeline on to the northern part of Denver?'" If our Dept. of Resources director thinks that way, and it appears our governor does too, Mr. Bigham suspects that the issue is gaining momentum, "but right now it's just a lot of rumblings," he added. Dr. Sanders asked if extending the pipeline would require a federal statute. Mr. Bigham said he wasn't sure how far the District could go, but "we can't move the water out of District boundaries." The parent District is only allotted a total of 310,000 Ao-ft of water. "If we take in more inclusions, we would be diluting the supply that each one of you is counting on, and the Board has said they will not go beyond that Boulder/Weld County line. As far as the Sub- district and Windy Gap, that water can be moved by just inclusions of the sub -district, which is a different entity. If we could develop more water, obviously we could supply more water to those entities, he concluded. 0 i Water Board Meeting November 20, 1992 Page 5 Dave Stewart related that the Natural Resources bill that Pres. Bush just signed allows the District to move those boundaries very easily. Mr. Bigham agreed that it's easier than it was. However, "if our directors did that, I don't think many of them would be left on the Board." The allottees in the District would make sure of that, he stressed. The CBT project was built and paid for to serve the current users in the District, and they are going to protect their rights. Dr. Grigg pointed out that the proposed 1993 work plan is on the agenda, and one of the items on that plan is to review the regional water supply study. It seems to him that the Board ought to have a discussion sometime soon about everything that's going on related to that, "so the Board can take a position and advise the Council on it." He said that Ken Salazar has already scheduled a workshop on January 4, 1993, on inter -basin transfers. If he has in mind trying to exert some leverage in northern Colorado, "we ought to be ahead of that," Dr. Grigg asserted. MaryLou Smith added that regional water supply strategy is on the Water Board's agenda each month, "and we need to star moving on it." Mr. Bigham doesn't know how much backing Mr. Salazar has. At this time he hasn't heard from many people who feel very strongly about it. Terry Podmore also pointed out that there was a segment in the latest Water Intelligence Monthly where Ken Salazar speaks out on a future water transfer policy. 1993 Water Board Work Plan President Grigg introduced the proposed work plan by saying that it is very important for the Water Board to follow a good work plan so "our meetings can be more meaningful, and also be able to grapple with the issues that are important to the City." Dave Stewart moved that the Water Board adopt the 1993 Work Plan. Tom Sanders seconded the motion, and President Grigg asked for discussion. Dr. Grigg began by saying that with the Committees focusing on the most important topics, it helps the Board each month to concentrate on substantive items, even though they don't happen to be in a crisis mode. For example, one of the big items the Board needs to work on, and one we briefly discussed today, is the regional water supply issue. That fits in the Water Supply Committee as the home committee, but it's such a big issue that "we haven't thought that the Water Supply Committee should have to initiate everything related to it." Of course in the Water Supply Committee, Halligan Reservoir is another big item. Mike Smith announced that the Halligan Reservoir Agreement is scheduled to go to the Council on December 15th. He encouraged any Water Board member who can, to be there, because Council may be looking for some comments from the Board. Water Board Meeting November 20, 1992 Page 6 Regarding the Conservation Committee, one of the things Dr. Grigg wanted to discuss, in terms of the work plan is, with the public being concerned about financial issues, and other issues too that relate to water supply and the wastewater system, he thought it would be good to be briefed on what we are doing in the arena of public education. Our committee is conservation and public education, and the work plan only says water conservation. "We have been relying on staff to do the public education, and staff has done a great job, but I think the Water Board needs to be involved more in education." Dr. Grigg learned recently that the new Electric Board had held an open house for citizens who might have questions about what is going on with Light and Power. The Water Board may want to consider whether it wants to enter into a public education project, or whether it thinks that staff activities are adequate. He believes it would be helpful if staff gave a presentation at one of the Board meetings on what is being done in public education, and that might precipitate some attention to what more the Board could be doing. MaryLou Smith, chair of the Conservation and Public Education Committee, agreed that it would be good to have staff give an update in that area because her committee heard that presentation recently, and based on that, the Committee decided that it was not an area that needed to be "beefed up" right now. There is so much staff is doing in that area now; not just in water conservation, but about water in general. Dr. Grigg recently visited Japan where they have outstanding public education programs. Brian Werner, public information person from the NCWCD, has expressed an interest in learning more about what they do in water related areas. "I believe there is plenty for the Board to talk about in this area," he concluded. Staff agreed to include "public education" along with water conservation in that segment of the work plan. Under the heading "Water Supply," Tom Sanders wanted "purchase of water rights" inserted as "A", and removed from "Routine Items." "One of the most important things we need to do is keep an eye out for good deals in water acquisition, and better ways to own and control water," he asserted. Staff agreed to make that change. Terry Podmore inquired if the listing as A,B,C etc. implies priority, and Mike Smith replied, "no." Dr. Sanders said, "I'm sure it wasn't implied, but it is implicit here." Dr. Grigg proposed that since this is going to be a critical year for legislation, perhaps the Legislative and Finance Committee could schedule a meeting early enough that the Water Board could have some input. Mike Smith announced that the staff person in charge of legislation this year will be Tom Gallier, and he will try to keep the Committee chairperson current. However, timing is a problem, Mike Smith said. Perhaps we should try to schedule the meeting in January, Dr. Grigg suggested. r • Water Board Meeting November 20, 1992 Page 7 Dr. Sanders asked if the Water Board has really had an influence on legislation through the years they have been involved. "There is a process in place which is supposed to work," Dr. Grigg replied, "and we can have an influence if we follow the process. "If all the action isn't over in January, and the Legislative and Finance Committee has met earlier, we can talk to Loren Maxey, and the Council committee and provide some input," he continued. Mike Smith said the Council is interested in the Boards' and Commissions' views on legislation, but it is the Council Legislative Committee, and ultimately the Council that makes the decision. Dr. Grigg observed that there are some issues that the Board has little expertise on, but there are others that can significantly affect, for example, our water supply, about which we need to make our ideas and direction known. Tom Sanders stated that the Board should try to prioritize some of the areas of the work plan, and try to accomplish something. Molly Nortier reminded the Board that all Board and Commission plans are required to be in to the City Clerk's office by November 30th. Dave Stewart suggested the Board use this as their plan and do the things that are measurable at another Board meeting. Marylou Smith pointed out that most of these items are on -going; "it's not like we're going to start all of them." Dr. Grigg said that the Board has to rely on staff to prioritize items that must be dealt with as we go along, and the Board needs to initiate some things that "we as a Board are concerned about too." One item that President Grigg thinks the Board ought to be more involved in is budgeting, finance, and rates. At the Council meeting he was a little surprised at some of the attitudes expressed by Council members who were reflecting their constituents. Maybe the level of trust of the staff to just manage is not as high as it may have been sometime in the past, he observed. He emphasized that it doesn't really reflect on the staff itself, it's the climate of the anti -tax, big government impetus. Dave Stewart stated that the policy of the Utility has always been cost of service, and that's an excellent policy, so the Board has endorsed that. Dr. Grigg agreed that the Board should be advocates of the Utility to be adequately financed, but "we should also be able to explain to the Council that we are running as lean as we can and still have a good utility. We need to be able to stand up and say: 'We are aware of that and we have looked at it, and we can tell you that everything is just fine.'" "On the other hand, for an advisory board to be doing micro -management is totally wrong," Dave Stewart contends. "I agree," MaryLou Smith said. Dr. Grigg related that Cathy Fromme, Gerry Horak and Bob Winokur voted against an electric utility rate increase, and they basically said "we hear what you are saying, but we're going to vote against it and see what happens." "Actually that's an interesting approach because it forces you to see if you can do it with less," Ms. Smith stated. Dr. Grigg said he isn't advocating micro -management of the budget, "but I do think that the next time the budget process rolls around, that staff make it part of the process to educate the Water Board about it," he concluded. MaryLou Smith suggested that staff thoroughly brief the Legislative. and Finance Water Board Meeting November 20, 1992 Page 8 Committee on the budget, and they then report to the Water Board what is most relevant for the Board to consider. Dr. Grigg said his thinking was that the Board ought to serve the Utility and the Citizens of Fort Collins by being a sounding board on this financial area. "I'm not talking about trying to replace the Council. "You're saying don't just be a rubber stamp," Tom Sanders added. "Right," Dr. Grigg replied, "and the way we could do that is just by having the budget presentation scheduled earlier in the year." Tom Sanders asked how amendment 1 is going to affect the City as far as its own rate structure and ability to borrow, etc. "The answer is we're not sure yet," Mike Smith replied. The amendment provides for exemptions of enterprise funds, but the definition of that is somewhat fuzzy. Under the amendment the City is looked at as a whole, not as each department, so it's total revenue and total expenditure. "We're not sure it impacts contributions in aid issues that aren't connected with providing service," he said. Another thing is it doesn't affect rates, just taxes, and what it focuses on is your spending level and revenue level, not necessarily how much you raise the rates. Mr. Smith emphasized that it's definitely not very clear yet. President Grigg asked if there were other comments on the work plan. Since there were none, the Board voted unanimously to approve the 1993 Water Board Work Plan, as amended. Staff Reoorts Treated Water Production Summary Andy Pineda referred to the 4-page summary sent to the Board in their packets. He said that for October the City's use was 2300 Ac-ft, which is 2 % over average. Year to date, that brings us up to 23,600 Ac-ft, and that's about 88% of average. "I think we'll finish up this year in that neighborhood of 88%," he predicted. Mike Smith asked how that compares to last year. "It's less than last year," Mr. Pineda replied. City Council Questions: Water and Wastewater Rates Mike Smith explained that items B and C were for informational purposes. Item B was a memorandum staff sent to Council answering some of the questions that were raised at the first hearing of the budget. Staff thought the Water Board would be interested in seeing some of that information. Cost of Development Study This thick packet was also sent to the Board for informational purposes. The Council is involved in looking at the cost of development. Staff sent it to the Board because at some time the Board may be asked to offer input into this, and this is good background information to get you started. The Council hasn't asked for any input yet, because they are still trying to find direction for themselves. The City Planning Dept. is probably more involved than anyone at this point. This study was initiated by Cathy Fromme who thought that cost of development was an issue that needed to be looked into. There are some groups in the City who feel that Water Board Meeting November 20, 1992 Page 9 development is not paying its own way, and there are developers who feel like they are paying too much. You can get into questions as fine tuned as cost of growth versus cost of development. "We don't know yet if it is a high priority for the whole Council," Mr. Smith acknowledged. City staff will be doing some more work, and "we'll have to wait and see where it goes." Neil Grigg thought, as a part of the work plan, it might be interesting to look at our Plant Investment Fees (PIFs) and compare them with other communities, and talk about the issue of whether we are being "too oppressive on growth from the W&WW Utility side." Dave Stewart pointed out that we did that about 2 years ago. Mike Smith said staff did a fairly detailed report on where the money comes from, cash flow and PIFs and how they compared. "We can probably update that," he suggested. Dr. Grigg recalled that Mike Smith showed a couple of good graphs at the Council session on rate comparisons with other front range cities, and we are at the low end on water and the high end on wastewater. It might be good for us to discuss why that is, so we understand it as a board. Dr. Grigg also mentioned that Mike Smith revealed that the volunteer water metering program is producing a "Catch 22," in that volunteers are saving money and water, but revenues are going down, so water rates are going to have to increase. A graph on the last page of the memo to Council shows the anticipated effect of the metering program on revenue and expenses. Tom Brown asked how you can say expenses are going to go down. Expenses are related to water use as is revenue, Mr. Smith began. If you kept everything constant and metered everyone, the revenue would go down, but expenses go down too because it costs less. Mark Casey recalled that the argument for rates going up with meters is that there is less water being used, and you have fixed costs to spread around, which drives the cost per gallon up. Mr. Smith said that probably 90% of our costs are fixed; they don't vary with water use, so when you reduce water use those costs remain. Moreover, the Utility doesn't have a very conserving rate structure. "You can use a lot of water and it doesn't make a lot of difference," he pointed out. Dr. Grigg thinks it would be good just to air some of these questions with a briefing for the Water Board. Committee Reports Water Supply Chair Mark Casey asked his committee members to stay after the meeting to arrange for a time to meet to map out the work plan for 1993. He also reported on a 1992 Water Law and Policy Conference he attended on October 30th at the Denver University Law School. It was sponsored by Stratecon, Inc., the same group that publishes the Water Intelligence Monthly. He pointed out a couple of things that were addressed there. There were the traditional arguments made for and against the Public Trust Doctrine. Water Board Meeting November 20, 1992 Page 10 David Getches, professor from the Law School, made a good argument for that doctrine. It was countered by Fred Anderson, former president of the senate from Loveland. He argued more for the laissez faire approach, and he probably had a little more support than the law professor. He also found interesting, the WATER initiative sponsored by Senator Robert Pastore from the San Luis Valley. The initiative would have called for a vote in the basin of origin, prior to any transfers outside of that basin, with the idea of giving the people control of their own water, but it didn't get enough signatures to make it to the ballot. Senator Pastore was surprised it didn't get the required number of signatures, because it seemed, at least on the surface, that it was a concern of his constituents. As it turned out, the people who own water didn't want to give up that right. Mark Casey has notes from that conference if anyone is interested in seeing them. Legislative and Finance Committee No report. Conservation and Public Education Committee Committee member Terry Podmore reported that the Committee met prior to the Water Board meeting to talk about the staff presentation on zero interest loans. That will be reviewed by thg city attorney, and if no problems are found, the committee expects to bring it to the Water Board in January. The Committee also scheduled, in terms of the demand management aspects, a review of activities on an annual basis, and the Committee will do that at their meeting in January. Engineering Committee No report. Regional Water S=1y Strategy Ups Mike Smith reminded the Board that Council is scheduled to consider the Halligan agreement on Tuesday, December 15th. He thinks it is important to have some representation from the Water Board there. He emphasized that the point we need to stress to the Council is that they aren't making a decision to approve the project at this time. It is merely an option agreement to keep the proposed project alive so we can study it. They will have another opportunity to see it again if it is determined to be a viable project. Regional Wastewater Service Issues Ups Mike Smith said that there is nothing new to report. Tim Dow asked if the Board can do anything to move the issue of the Boxelder Sanitation District along. The City has offered to meet with them, and talk about all kinds of different options, and they are not interested right now, Mr. Smith responded. If anyone knows any of the Board members, and feels comfortable talking with them on an informal basis, that may be an option. Mr. Smith acknowledged that one of the problems is that part of the board is so new, they aren't sure what they want to do Water Board Meeting November 20, 1992 Page 11 yet. The best option may be "to just sit tight and let them get their feet on the ground," he concluded. Dr. Grigg suggested that we could take the position that we are interested in providing water and wastewater service for development of Fort Collins. "We could invite those boards to a joint meeting with us just to view economic development needs in that part of the City and get some ideas about what everybody is doing." It would not be a threatening situation; just informational. "I don't want to spend time on this today," he said. It's just an idea to ponder. Mike Smith announced that the Utility is starting the routing study for the intercepter from Plant No. 2 to the new regional plant. Montgomery Engineers is doing the study. He also reported that the Utility is doing an RFP for a wetlands treatment study. Dr. Grigg said that CSU had a workshop this past summer on the construction of wetlands for wastewater treatment, and there was a lot of interest in it. Other Business Resolution in Memory of John Carlson The Water Board was shocked and saddened by the sudden death of the Utility's Legal Counsel John Carlson. The Board wanted to express their thankfulness for John Carlson's outstanding service, and convey their deep sense of loss to his family and his law firm. They voted unanimously to prepare a resolution in memory of Mr. Carlson. The resolution will be included in the permanent records of the Water and Wastewater Utility. Wastewater Treatment Expansion Tim Dow asked if construction is underway on the expansion of the wastewater treatment facility. "Yes, it is," Mr. Smith replied, "and it's progressing well." Board members are welcome to take a tour of the facility if they wish. The Utility is pleased with Western Summit Constructors of Denver, the general contractor for the project. Tom Sanders asked if we are running out of space at the site. There will not be a lot of space left after this expansion, Mr. Smith said. National Heritage Area Tom Sanders read recently that the Poudre River National Heritage Area is "dead." Mr. Smith said that was correct unless someone re -introduces it next year. Dr. Sanders wondered if the Utility will get back the money they invested in the project. "I'm not sure yet," Mr. Smith replied, but he expects that "we probably won't get any money back." Water Board Meeting November 20, 1992 Page 12 Mourn Since there was no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 4:25 P.M. Water Board ecretary Water Board 1 MEMORIAL RESOLUTION John Undem Carlson 0 WHEREAS, John Carlson, legal counsel for the City of Fort Collins Water and Wastewater Utility, died suddenly on November 18, 1992, and WHEREAS, John, in his position as Legal Counsel, always gave his best and provided the City of Fort Collins with outstanding service, and WHEREAS, John protected the City's water rights on the Michigan Ditch and Joe Wright Reservoir system by his dedicated preparation, and brilliant trial work, during the Excalibur Water Court Case, and WHEREAS, John served as a representative for the Utility during negotiations with North Poudre Irrigation Co. to formulate a clear and concise agreement regarding the enlargement of Halligan Reservoir, and WHEREAS, John provided valuable insight and guidance regarding United States Forest Service rights -of -way and special use permits associated with the Michigan Ditch and Joe Wright Reservoir, and WHEREAS, John's integrity, sincerity, keen mind, tenacity and sense of humor were deeply appreciated by the Water Board, and WHEREAS, John Carlson will be sorely missed. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the members of the City of Fort Collins Water Board do hereby recognize John Carlson's outstanding service to the City of Fort Collins and express their gratitude, sense of loss and sympathy to his family and law firm. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a copy of this resolution be placed in the permanent records of the City of Fort Collins Water and Wastewater Utility, and copies thereof be transmitted to John's wife Hilary, his daughters Ingrid and Christina, and the Law firm of Carlson, Hammond and Paddock, as an expression of our deep and heartfelt sympathy. Neil Grigg, W ter Board s'dent 17�c Date 700 Wood Street • P.O. Box 580 • Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 • (303) 221-6681