Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutWater Board - Minutes - 08/23/2007Fort Collins Utilities' Water Board Minutes Thursday, August 23, 2007 Water Board Chairperson City Council Liaison Doug Yadon, 484-3611 David Roy Water Board Vice Chairperson Staff Liaison Gina Janett, 493-4677 DeEtta Carr, 221-6702 Roll Call: Board Present: Chairperson Doug Yadon, Vice Chairperson Gina Janett, Steve Balderson, John Bartholow, Mike Connor, Eileen Domfest, Phil Phelan, Dave Pillard and Gary Wockner Board Absent: Johannes Gessler and Reagan Waskom Staff.• Dennis Bode, Terri Bryant, DeEtta Carr, Carrie Daggett, Laurie D'Audney, Matt Fater, Kevin Gertig, Joyce Grenz, Susan Hayes, Jim Hibbard, Brian Janonis, Karen Manci, Owen Randall, Dean Saye, Bob Smith, Bill Switzer, Ellen Switzer and Carol Webb Guests Brad Anderson, Anderson Consulting Engineers Andrea Faucett, Ayres Associates Meetine Convened Chairperson Doug Yadon called the meeting to order at 5:10 p.m. Public Comment Eric Sutherland, a 15-year resident of Fort Collins, attended the meeting to express his concern with an advertisement that has been circulated through local media and national magazines. He is concerned that the advertiser is using an issue that is currently under a lot of debate to sell more of their product from the river they are supposed to be saving. Mr. Sutherland feels it is most important to live in a society that appreciates honesty in social communications. Chairperson Doug Yadon confirmed with Mr. Sutherland, for the record and for Water Board understanding, if he was offering his personal commentary on this matter. Mr. Sutherland stated he is representing himself and his views. Water Board Meeting Minutes August 23, 2007 Page 2 Board Member Gina Janett asked Mr. Sutherland, who is unhappy with a corporation in Fort Collins, what he feels should be the City's roll. Mr. Sutherland said the Water Board should be concerned about the advertisement. As for a specific response, he is not asking the City for anything at this time. As far as future actions, he hopes everyone in the Water Board meeting will agree that honesty in communications about issues that are before the public deserve honest treatment. They shouldn't be characterized as something they are not for the hope of supporting one position or another. Approval of Minutes — July 26, 2007 Board Member Mike Connor made a motion, seconded by Board Member Gina Janett, to approve minutes from the July 26, 2007, meeting. The motion passed unanimously. Groundwater Monitoring Project — Department of Agriculture Regulatory and Government Affairs Manager Carol Webb introduced Troy Bauder from Colorado State University (CSU) who is representing the Colorado Department of Agriculture at the meeting. They are asking the Water Board to recommend to City Council that they grant the Colorado Department of Agriculture access to a number of parcels owned by the City of Fort Collins, including four natural areas, eight City parks and one City golf course, where monitoring wells would be installed to conduct groundwater testing for a long-term testing program. Mr. Bauder reviewed the Agriculture Chemicals and Groundwater Protection Act, a legislative program that has been around since 1990. Three agencies cooperate in the implementation of this program: Colorado Department of Agriculture (CDA), Colorado State University Cooperative Extension (CSUCE) and Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE). CSU's role is mainly training, education and applied research on practices that prevent groundwater contamination by pesticides and fertilizers. The Act defines agricultural chemicals as all pesticides and commercial fertilizers used in both urban and rural settings. Mr. Bauder's role focuses on education and training of the general public and agricultural chemical users to prevent contamination. He also interacts with the CDA monitoring program and helps design and interpret data. His title is Water Quality Specialist. The primary focus of the program is on the state's irrigated agriculture. The Act does specify, and they have a mandate, that they also are to work with the urban area, which includes homeowners using pesticide or fertilizer. They have completed some monitoring along the Front Range. The CDA is responsible for monitoring groundwater to detect the presence of agricultural chemicals. They are trying to develop what they call a dedicated, monitoring well network, either of their own wells or someone's existing well. For example, in the City and County of Denver, they are going to use 30 existing wells mostly in parks and golf courses. Well samples are analyzed for selected pesticides and basic inorganic elements including nitrate. The pesticides are selected based on the frequency of use in an area and the physical and chemical properties of the pesticide. The groundwater monitoring program provides a baseline upon which to gauge trends in groundwater Water Board Meeting Minutes August 23, 2007 Page 3 quality. The CDPHE is responsible for analysis and interpretation of the groundwater sample data. Mr. Bauder's proposal is to develop a network in Fort Collins because there does not seem to be an existing system of monitoring wells in the public -owned areas of Fort Collins. The CDA is proposing to drill up to 12 wells. Mr. Bauder's colleague, Karl Mauch of the CDA, who was not able to attend this meeting, has worked with City staff to develop the agreed upon locations. The CDA would like to work with the City or another public entity on this project because government -owned land or publicly owned land is not turned over much. They do install monitoring wells on private land, but have to keep track of the land if the property sells and work with new owners to ensure access. Another reason they'd like to work with the City is because of the city -owned land along creeks and shallow groundwater in areas that intersect domestic use of agricultural chemicals as well as use by the City itself or other entities. Board Member Mike Connor asked what course of action the CDA pursues if the levels are beyond the threshold. He was told the first time data is collected from a well, they run a routine screen of inorganic chemicals or things found in the water all the time. These are not their primary interest. The primary interest in analyzing data is in nitrate nitrogen and a sweet of about 100 pesticides. They have taken about 2,000 samples out of about 1,200 Colorado wells, and so far have only found three hits above the drinking water standard for pesticides. About one-third of the wells have had some pesticides detected at a very low level. If pesticide above the drinking water standard was found, which is very rare, the Commissioner of Agriculture would notify the manufacturer of that pesticide that it's been found above the drinking water standard (required by law). CDA would also inform the City of Fort Collins. Beyond that, they would work with the City to see if education was needed, but the CDA does not have any enforcement policy. Chairperson Doug Yadon asked if the data collected would be public information. Mr. Bauder stated that by its nature the information collected has to be public information since it is collected with public money. It would be in their annual reports, data reports and in a fact sheet they would develop from the data. There is an online water quality database where the information would be kept at no cost to the City. Staff Recommendation Regulatory and Government Affairs Manager Carol Webb recommended we allow the CDA to monitor the wells for testing. The Land Conservation Board has already approved it and is recommending well testing in the City of Fort Collins to the City Council Board Member Mike Connor moved that the Water Board support the proposal to approve the monitoring of wells in the City of Fort Collins to City Council. Board Member John Bartholow seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. Water Board Meeting Minutes August 23, 2007 Page 4 2008 — 2009 Budget Budgeting for Outcomes Finance and Budget Manager Terri Bryant discussed the recommended 2008-2009 budget for Water, Wastewater, Stormwater and the proposed Wastewater rates and plant investment fees. Budgeting for Outcomes focuses on results and emphasizes accountability. The City Manager's recommended budget will be presented to City Council September 4, 2007. Several work sessions are scheduled with Council to review the budget before the first reading October 16, 2007. The final reading will be November 20, 2007. Stormwater Budget Notes Ms. Bryant stated there are no rate increases for the 2008-2009 budget. The budget was developed with a 3% inflation estimate, labor adjustments projected at 4% and growth projected at approximately 1%. The 2008 proposed budget is 17.8 % greater than the adopted 2007 budget, an increase of $2.6 million. Two major capital projects, the Canal Importation Basin and the Dry Creek Basin, will be in the construction phase in 2008 and account for $6.6 million of the $7.6 million Stormwater capital projects budgeted. Operations and maintenance remains steady with minimal increases in 2008. Reserves are projected to decrease by approximately $6 million due to major capital project programs ramping up. Water Budget Notes There are no projected rate increases for Water. Labor adjustments are at 4%, inflation is estimated at 3% and growth is projected at approximately 1%. The 2008 budget is projected at 26.4% less than the 2007 adopted budget. The huge decrease is primarily due to capital project expenditures related to the Halligan expansion. The Halligan budget in 2007 was $13.7 million, whereas in 2008 it's $190,000. This project is funded 100%by cash -in -lieu of water rights revenues. The operations and maintenance budgets increased overall by approximately 4.3% with the largest increase showing in the purchase of vehicles and equipment. The Utilities is fine-tuning replacement planning and funding for vehicles and equipment to better facilitate future financial strategies. Reserves are projected to decrease by about $3 million in 2008 due to a reduction in beginning working capital from the prior year. Water fund revenues in 2006 were greater than expected, approximately 10.3%. There are three primary reasons for this outcome: the total number of customer increased due to system growth, even though this was not significant; average water use per customer increased due to drier than average year; and the water rate for residential customers is an increasing tiered structure. Wastewater Budget Notes The Wastewater labor adjustments are projected at 4%, inflation is estimated at 3% and growth projected at approximately .25%. The projected rate increases are 12% across the board in 2008, and 11 % in 2009. Utilities staff is proposing rate increases in the 2008- 2009 Budget, which are needed to help fund the improvements at the Mulberry Treatment Facility built in 1946 with upgrades in 1958 and 1972. Water Board Meeting Minutes August 23, 2007 Page 5 The improvements, including design and construction, will cost $31.8 million and will allow for upgrading the facility for future regulation -based improvements. The 2008 proposed budget is 64.1% greater than the 2007 adopted budget due to the resources needed to fund the Mulberry plant improvements. The operations and maintenance budgets are stable. While the 2008 proposed budget includes a 4% labor increase and 3% for inflation, the overall operations and maintenance budget in 2008 is .2% less than the adopted budget for 2007. Plant Investment Fees Increases to the plant investment fees (PIFs) are proposed in the 2008-2009 budget to comply with the City Council's direction to review the fees annually and update the fees every budget cycle. The Wastewater PIF increase will include the final phase of the three- phase increase directed by City Council for the 2006 fees. Summary In summary, the reserve policies for all funds are met. Debt coverage for all funds is met. No monthly rate increases for Water and Stormwater are planned. Wastewater monthly rates are proposed to increase 12% across the board. Plant investment fees have been revised and updated per City Council direction. Discussion Board Member Gary Wockner asked where the Board is now, where does the Water Board fit into the development of the budget? Ms. Bryant said the role the Water Board has played in the past is to look at what Utilities Finance and Budget presents as the budget and if the board has questions they can answer them. Ms. Bryant said that Utilities staff asks that the Board recommend the budget as proposed. Mr. Waskom then stated that it sounds to him that City Council has made some policies, the staff has created a budget based on the Council's guidelines and policies, and then the Water Board is asked to review the budget and recommend it to City Council. Ms. Bryant said that this is the only time the Water Board sees the proposed budget other than when it is presented to the Finance Committee. Ms. Bryant stated the Water Board is free to do as they wish with either recommending the budget to City Council or not recommending the budget to City Council. Regarding a budget item related to Halligan, Chairperson Doug Yadon said the payment of $190,000 in 2008 seems very low. Interim Fort Collins Utilities General Manager Brian Janonis stated that payment covers the annual payment to the irrigation company for the Utilities purchase of Halligan. Mr. Yadon asked about the Mulberry plant failure: Was there a plan to replace the plant? Mr. Janonis said the Master Plan, at one time, called for replacing the capacity at the Drake plant rather than the Mulberry plant. The Mulberry Plant deteriorated faster than was planned and the capital project has to be moved up in time. The Mulberry plant provides an important flow contribution to the river, and it would not be practical for the Mulberry plant to cease operation. Water Board Meeting Minutes August 23, 2007 Page 6 John Bartholow reported on the conservation meeting just prior to the Water Board meeting. He proposed that it was apparent that the Water Conservation Program could benefit from some extra funds. Mr. Bartholow would like to be in a position to encourage City Council to increase the budget for the Water Conservation Program by a factor of four along with careful evaluation of program effectiveness. The goal would be to find out what it costs to buy down (or reduce) our water use. This can fit into the water supply and storage planning in relation to the expansion of Halligan. It would help determine the most cost-effective way to get water for rate payers. He would like to interject this into whatever motion the Board approves. Mr. Janonis said the Water Conservation Plan will be reviewed in September and has put some costs benefits to conservation measures. Another question was about plant investment fees increasing and what are the potential alternatives to fee increases. Mr. Janonis said the plant investment fees have been lagging behind. Three years ago, City Council was presented with a major plant investment fee increase, and at that time, the City Council did not allow for plant investment fees to increase all at once, but to be phased in over three years. A big chunk of the current increase is to make up for not getting the increase three years ago. The plant investment fees are lagging behind about six or seven years since the prior study. Water Engineering and Field Services Manager Jim Hibbard stated Stormwater is going up because of the heavy investment into the infrastructure ($5 million a year). New customers benefit from the system and that benefit is reflected in the plant investment fees. Board Member Mike Conner made a motion that the Water Board approve the Water, Wastewater and Stormwater 2008-2009 budget and rate increases. Water Board Member David Pillard seconded the motion. Board Member Mike Conner said he feels if he has done his math correctly looking at interest charges only just for 2008 budget, Utilities is spending over $4.5 million in interest. Mr. Connor would really like to encourage City Council to move to a cash basis. A water facility in the area is writing a check for a huge building project. He realizes the situation Utilities is in, but he would really like to see some momentum built up to move away from paying interest in the future. The 2009 budget has some large borrowing and he feels that will drive rates up. Mr. Connor would like to see some progress toward this in 2009, and Board Member John Bartholow said he feels the same way Board Member Gary Wockner said he will not be supporting the recommendation to approve the 2008-2009 budget as proposed because: (1) he wants more invested in water conservation programs and feels there is a significant opportunity, especially now, to start investing quite a bit more in water conservation and demand management to get at our water supply issues, and he feels this budget woefully under -budgets this issue; (2) this budget is tied to the $7.9 million for budget for Halligan for 2009, and he is not sure the demand has been presented successfully that will argue that we need to spend the money right now. He feels there are many other ways to get at that demand management that are not being addressed in this budget; (3) he has spent considerable time talking, over the last few weeks, about the Stormwater Master Plan, the CIPO Project and Red Fox Meadows Water Board Meeting Minutes August 23, 2007 Page 7 which is highly controversial. He does not support the budget in these three issues but he supports everything else. Board Member Gina Janett asked Mr. Janonis if he could update the Water Board regarding Halligan. Mr. Janonis said they hope to have a draft environmental impact statement out in 2008, comments in 2008, and starting design and maybe construction in 2009. Board Member John Bartholow asked Ms. Bryant for a timeline on the budget. She responded that the first reading of the budget is on October 16, 2007. City Council will get their packets a week before October 16, 2007. Discussion of the budget will start from September 4, 2007, and go until the first reading. Sometimes the discussion goes beyond the October 16, 2007, reading. The final reading is on November 20, 2007. Board Member John Bartholow then recommended an amendment to the motion. He wanted to approve this budget, but that the Board encourages City Council to adjust the allocation for water conservation by a significant amount (suggests four times the amount) and demand management. Board Member Eileen Dornfest seconded the motion. The amendment passed unanimously. The amended motion to approve the budget for 2008-2009 with the encouragement to City Council for allocation for water conservation by a significant amount (four times the amount) and demand management was then voted on. The Water Board voted with eight in favor of the amended motion and one against. Mr. Wockner said he feels that with the amended motion being passed, not all of his comments would go away, but he feels this is an exciting opportunity for City Council, Utilities, and the Water Board to really consider conservation and demand management that would save money and water. He feels that if we go about conservation correctly, it may reduce demand enough that Halligan may not be necessary. He still has some problems with the CIPO Project and Red Fox Meadows and wants that to be noted. A motion was made to recommend to City Council to have a pay-as-you-go basis in the next 10 years. The motion was seconded. The motion was defeated stating the need for more discussion on the issue. There was one yea, one abstained and seven nay. It was decided to have this discussion, of a pay-as-you-go basis happening in the next 10 years rather than borrowing money and having to pay interest, at a future meeting. 100-year Design Rainfall Water Engineering and Field Service Manager Jim Hibbard announced that Fort Collins Utilities Water Department was awarded the 2006 Pisces Award for the Oak Street Stormwater Outfall Improvement project given by the United States Environmental Protection Agency. Water Board Meeting Minutes August 23, 2007 Page 8 The 1998 Rainfall Frequency Study — Staff Presentation Mr. Hibbard gave a presentation on the 100-year Rainfall Design Standard. Mr. Hibbard stated City Council is concerned that the design standard was adopted during a period of high emotion following the flood of 1997. The design standard is used to: • Predict runoff; • Map floodplains; • Use as criteria for private development; and • Design major public drainage facilities o New o Retrofit when cost effective. In 1998, after the flood of 1997, a Precipitation Frequency Study was launched. One of the objectives of the study was to respond to criticisms from citizens and elected officials that the rainfall standard was too low. At that point in time, staff had no idea whether the rainfall standard was high or low. A second objective was to have a solid foundation for going into the future. Changing a rainfall standard is not taken lightly and staff wanted to make sure they did it right the first time. Additional objectives were to incorporate additional rainfall data gathered since adoption of the NOAA Atlas, to make sure the study was acceptable to the regulatory agencies, and to arrive at a standard that was more specific to Fort Collins than the state-wide NOAA Atlas. The current NOAA Atlas uses rain gauges from the Continental Divide out to the eastern border of the state, from New Mexico to Wyoming. The City of Fort Collins was lumped together with Lamar, Limon, Estes Park and others. Fort Collins Utilities staff wanted data that was more specific to Fort Collins knowing some of the unique weather patterns the City experiences. In order to accomplish the study, the City selected a consultant with expertise in frequency studies, WRC Engineering, and formed a Precipitation Task Force to help guide the study. Almost a year of detailed statistical data analysis followed. The Precipitation Task Force had representation from the Federal Emergency Management Agency, Colorado Water Conservation Board, Larimer County and Colorado State University departments of Statistics, Atmospheric Science, Environmental Engineering and Facilities. The Assistant State Climatologist, representatives from the Water Board, Planning and Zoning Board, local citizens, consultants, and staff from Fort Collins Utilities were also on the Task Force. The Task Force recommended that actual rain gauge data be used from the cities of Fort Collins, Longmont, and Boulder, and that the General Extreme Value (GEV) methodology, which is a statistical method to fit a line to data, be used. The selection of the rain gauge sites was governed by the following criteria: • National Weather Service gauges; • Minimum of 15 years of data; • Hourly data available; • Meteorologically similar; and Water Board Meeting Minutes August 23, 2007 Page 9 • Topographically similar. A majority of the Task Force recommended the City use a 2-hour storm with a depth of 3.67-inches; corresponding to a 100-year frequency. There was a minority opinion on the task force that argued for a higher standard of 4.37-inches with an even higher standard of 5.55-inches on the west side of Fort Collins. At that time, the staff argued against the minority opinion. As recommended by the Precipitation Task Force, the standard was reviewed and approved by the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the Colorado Water Conservation Board. It was adopted by the City of Fort Collins, Larimer County, Colorado State University and the Town of Wellington. All of these agencies use this rainfall standard to plan their stormwater systems individually and when appropriate, collaboratively. The rainfall study began in 1998. The rainfall design standard was adopted in 1999. From 2000 to 2003, Fort Collins Utilities remapped all the floodplains in the city to the new standard. From 2002 to 2004, all Stormwater Master Plans were updated. Just last year, FEMA adopted the final floodplains for the City of Fort Collins in the basins that have FEMA floodplains. From start to finish, this project took nine years and cost over $4 million dollars. The August 2, 2007 Storm The most intense rainfall event since 1997 happened on August 2, 2007, almost 10 years to the day after the flood of 1997. This was the first significant storm event since Fort Collins Utilities has had a flood warning system. This storm dumped up to 5 inches of rain in less than two hours. The Design Standard, as currently adopted, was exceeded at three rain gauges in the upper Fossil Creek Basin and almost at a fourth. The rest of the narrow path of the storm produced between 2 and 3 inches of rain in two hours, equivalent to a 25 to 50 year frequency storm. Staff reviewed the flooding caused by the storm and presented pictures taken during and after the storm. It was noted that a storm of this magnitude would have caused significant damages in the downtown area if improvements constructed since 1998 had not been installed. Summary and Staff Recommendation In summary, it does rain very hard in Fort Collins. The current rainfall standard is scientifically, not emotionally based. The opinion of the Fort Collins Utilities staff is a new study will not result in a significantly different number. A reduction in the rainfall standard will reduce flood protection for citizens of Fort Collins. Climate change is a wild card. When the NOAA Atlas was published in 1969, the phrase climate change wasn't even on the horizon. Most experts now predict climate change will result in more weather extremes. In light of this, is now the time to reduce the rainfall standard? The Fort Collins Utilities staff recommendation is to not restudy the rainfall standard. There is a work session tentatively scheduled for October 23. If City Council wishes more detail on the rainfall standard for that meeting, Utilities staff will contact regulatory and Water Board Meeting Minutes August 23, 2007 Page 10 other government agencies for input, and prepare further costs and timelines. Staff would attempt to answer the following questions at that time. If the City recommends a revision to the rainfall standard, will FEMA, the Colorado Water Conservation Board and our neighbors accept it? Would FEMA want the floodplains remapped if a new standard is recommended? How much will it cost and how long will it take? If Council is satisfied with the current rainfall standard, the October work session will be canceled. Questions and Discussion Mr. Hibbard, Stormwater Master Planning Engineer Susan Hayes and Water Utilities Planning and Development Manager Bob Smith answered questions on the rainfall standards. Board Member John Bartholow asked staff to explain why the statistician on the Task Force argued for a higher number for the rainfall standard. Ms. Hayes said there was only 50 years of data from the CSU rain gauge, and that isn't a very long record when you are trying to extrapolate an event with a frequency of 100 years. The majority of the task force, who are professionals in the business, thought it was better to have a longer data set to extrapolate a 100-year event. The statistician disagreed. The majority believed it was better to get additional data from similar gauges in order to have better confidence in the resulting number. Board Member David Pillard stated actual rain gauge data from Fort Collins, Longmont and Boulder were used in the analysis to come up with the current standard. Has there been an ongoing monitoring program to see if there has been a shift in the increase or decrease of rainfall amounts at these gauges? Ms. Hayes stated there has been no review of the Longmont and Boulder data since 1998. The data from the Fort Collins rain gauge, as well as the City's flood warning system rain gauge system continues to be recorded. Ms. Hayes noted the August 2, 2007, storm is just another high point in the data set. Of the top nine storms from the three rain gauges, six of them have been in Fort Collins. Board Member Mike Connor made an observation that a lot of engineering decisions are built around this standard. It could be too low or too high. The results could be money wasted if too high, or catastrophic damage and loss of life if the rainfall standard is too low. In answer to Board Member Pillard's question, adding 10 more years of data would not change the numbers that much because the drought years and the wet years balance each other out. The August 2, 2007, storm would fit the curve very well and would not change the numbers by much. Mr. Smith said part of the answer is what level of protection the community wants to pay for. Mr. Hibbard commented that even if they miss the number a little on the high side, the money is not wasted. All that means is that instead of protecting the citizens from the 100-year flood, maybe now they are protected from the 110-year flood. Those storms will come along. It is just a matter of when. It is better to insure the protection and safety of the citizens of Fort Collins. As Mr. Smith said, it does come down to a policy decision with what level does the community want to pay for. He Water Board Meeting Minutes August 23, 2007 Page 11 said that the staff s discussion with the City Council has always been to provide the 100- year protection when it is cost-effective. Board Member Gary Wockner asked if a motion was being asked for by the Water Board this evening as to whether the 100-year rainfall standard should be re -studied. Chairperson Doug Yadon said the Water Board could offer a motion on the 100-year rainfall standard and then make a motion on the Canal Importation Ponds and Outfall Project (CIPO). If City Council does not allow the CIPO Project to proceed next week at the August 28, 2007, meeting, the CIPO Project will automatically be delayed at least one year because the construction has to be done in the winter when the canals are empty. Chairperson Doug Yadon clarified that the Utilities staff is not asking the approval from the Water Board of the CIPO Project on the merit of the project. Mr. Hibbard said the question is do you wait to build the CIPO Project or delay it in order to put to bed the question of the rainfall standard. The Water Board decided to approach the issue of the 100-year rainfall standard and the CIPO project separately. Mr. Hibbard said the City Council has already seen the CIPO Project at a work session. The project has been to the Land Conservation and Stewardship Board and will go back to the Land Conservation and Stewardship Board in September. CIPO is ajoint project between Fort Collins Utilities and Natural Areas and is already funded. City Council has already approved the Master Plan so staff is proceeding with the project unless the City Council tells them to stop. Board Member Steve Balderson mentioned that it seems to him what the issue comes down to is he comfortable that in 1999 the staff diligently developed and studied the rainfall standard and that it does not need to be addressed again. Mr. Balderson feels that it was a well done study and a lot of thought and time were put into the study. He can't see any reason, at this point, why there should be another study done now. Board Action Board Member John Bartholow made a motion that the Water Board support the rainfall standard as currently crafted for the foreseeable future. Board Member Phil Phelan seconded the motion. Chairperson Doug Yadon asked if there was a discussion. Board Member Gary Wockner said he would like to say a few things. He said he will support the motion, and he feels the staff has done an excellent job of creating the rainfall standard and thinks it is a good one. Mr. Wockner's question is on CIPO and what is the level of protection the community should provide, not is this the appropriate rainfall standard. We can agree that this is a 100-year flood. Now does this mean that the City should fund a Stormwater project as compared to all the other things the City could fund in the community? Because there is a lot of controversy over the CIPO project and there are a lot of other unmet needs in the City, Mr. Wockner feels the CIPO issue needs to be discussed more broadly. The flood protection program was recently rated fourth in 1,069 Water Board Meeting Minutes August 23, 2007 Page 12 cities in how well it works by the insurance industry. He is asking does the City really need to spend more money in this area as opposed to other areas in the community where the City could spend its money. He just wants to point out a few things. Eighteen percent of the children in Fort Collins live in poverty according to a recent survey. Police services are under -funded and Council is talking about having a sales tax increase to fund police services. The Poudre River, a recreational and ecological economic engine, is due to be near drained through several dam/reservoir projects. Citywide staff salaries were recently frozen, benefits were cut and positions were cut in many departments. There have been recent cuts in the City budget to the Youth Activity Center, transportation for disabled, air quality programs and other budget cuts. Mr. Wockner thinks there are broad concerns that City Council needs to deal with. He does not want CIPO to go forward because he thinks City Council needs to consider other competing issues that need to be funded. Mr. Wockner said if he were in City Council's shoes he would consider funding other issues over the CIPO project. He wants to be very clear that he certainly appreciates all the City staff and all the fine professional work that they are doing and he supports the 100-year Design Rainfall Standard as is. Chairperson Doug Yadon then asked for a vote on the rainfall standard. The Board unanimously voted to support the current rainfall standard for the foreseeable future. Canal Importation Ponds & Outfall / Red Fox Meadows Restoration Project Board Member Mike Connor asked the question since the Water Board approved the 100- year Rainfall Design Standard; does the board even need to hear the presentation on CIPO? Board Motion Board Member John Bartholow made a motion, given the result of the previous motion on the 100-year Rainfall Design Standard. Mr. Bartholow moved that the construction of the Canal Importation Ponds & Outfall Drainage Improvement Project and the Red Fox Meadows Restoration Project not be delayed. Board Member Gina Janett seconded the motion. After consulting legal council, it was decided to go ahead with the presentation on the Canal Importation Ponds and Outfall (CIPO) project. Mr. Hibbard stated that in the presentation on CIPO, there was new information that the Water Board might want to hear. It was decided to table the motion and hear the presentation on the Canal Importation Ponds and Outfall Drainage Improvement Project. Staff Presentation Mr. Hibbard stated that this project was approved in 2004 as a part of the citywide Stormwater Master Plan. This is a joint project between Fort Collins Utilities and the Natural Areas Program. Since presenting this information to the City Council in March, several changes have been made after considering input from citizens. As a group, Utilities and Natural Areas staffs have worked hard to develop a good understanding of the Water Board Meeting Minutes August 23, 2007 Page 13 proposed project area and its current uses, including its role in stormwater detention and as a neighborhood natural area. In trying to be responsive to City Council, because some of them would like to see a smaller project, Mr. Hibbard presented an alternative that would provide a 50-year level of protection. This would be about a 2.9-inch storm in a two-hour period and would reduce the pipe size from a 102-inch to a 90-inch, a foot in reduction in pipe size. The excavation in Red Fox Meadows would be reduced by about 30,000 cubic yards, resulting in the average depth of the Red Fox Meadows detention area being reduced about 2 feet. In spite of the costs savings from the decrease in pipe size and reduction in excavation, a one-year delay in the project would increase costs by $430,000 due to inflation. Mr. Hibbard discussed a statement he made at a recent on -site tour, "the only reason the Fairbrooke and Red Fox Meadows detention areas were being expanded was due to the change in the rainfall standard." Mr. Hibbard stated although this was a reasonable generalized statement citywide, he discovered it was particularly not accurate in the Canal Importation Basin. The driving forces behind the expansion of the Fairbrooke and Red Fox Meadows detention areas as compared to the 1980 master plan are more detailed technologically advanced modeling techniques and application of modern stormwater practices. Summary and Staff Recommendation In summary, the majority of impact is due to modern modeling and stormwater practices. A change in the design standard (lower level of protection) does not have significant impact on the project or save money due to economies of scale and inflation. Delay in project schedule delays flood protection to citizens and environmental benefits of restoration. Both the Utilities and the Natural Areas staff believe this project has flood control and environmental benefits and recommended to the Water Board to proceed with Canal Importation and Ponds Outfall Project and the Red Fox Meadows restoration. Questions and Discussion Water Board Member John Bartholow asked why the connection between the Kane property and Red Fox Meadows is a pipeline rather that a surface connection. Mr. Hibbard responded it is because they have to go under the New Mercer Canal and to not have an open ditch running through the public right-of-way. The corridor between those two basins is a public right-of-way and is very narrow. Board Action Board Member John Bartholow amended his original motion to say that regardless of anyone's determination on the rainfall standard, Stormwater should proceed with construction of the Canal Importation Ponds and Outfall and the Red Fox Meadows Restoration. Board Member Gina Janett seconded the motion. Water Board Meeting Minutes August 23, 2007 Page 14 Board Member Gary Wockner stated he will be voting against the issue and he would like the minutes to show this. His perspective is that this project is just one of the competing options for spending money on public safety for the community. He is not sure this is the best place for City Council to spend money and that is why he will be voting against this motion. After a discussion by Board members, a vote was called. The motion stated that regardless of the rainfall standard, Stormwater should proceed with construction of the Canal Importation and Ponds Outfall Project and the Red Fox Meadows Restoration and that neither should be delayed. The motion passed with eight in favor and one against. Committee Reports Water Supply - Reagan Waskom, Chair - John Bartholow said the committee met and DeEtta Carr will e-mail what was covered at the meeting due to the time. Legislative, Finance, Liaison Issues — David Pillard, Chair - They met and the vast majority of the meeting was having Ms. Bryant go through the budget. The committee had lots of questions and Ms. Bryant made some clarifications for the presentation based on some of the comments made at the meeting Conservation and Public Education — Eileen Dornfest, Chair — The committee met just before the Water Board meeting and went through the Water Conservation Annual Report, which should be in each member's packet. They discussed scheduling a meeting the week of September 10, 2007, to review the Water Conservation Plan before it comes to the Water Board September 27, 2007. Engineering — Steve Balderson, Chair — Engineering had two activities although they did not meet. One was to collect all the questions about CIPO Project. He did collect these and returned them to staff. He thinks only a few received an answer. Mr. Hibbard stated the answers to the questions were done the day before the meeting. Mr. Smith compiled the answers, and they were put in the packet on the desk for the meeting on August 23, 2007. Mr. Balderson went through the work plan and put items as a priority and as for future goals and sent them out to the Water Board. He received some answers and will start to schedule these items for committee meetings in the months to come. Staff Reports They are in the packets for the August 23, 2007, meeting. Other Business Board Member John Bartholow made a motion that the Water Board recommend to City Council to not provide plastic commercial water bottles, but to provide City water at City Water Board Meeting Minutes August 23, 2007 Page 15 sponsored events. Board Member Gina Janett seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. Chairperson Doug Yadon said future agenda items the Water Board would like to see can be stated so that the agenda will reflect those topics for future meetings. A little policy change is going to be that Staff Liaison DeEtta Carr is going to state, before each meeting, a draft agenda and invite additional items for the agenda. Doug Yadon and Gina Janett, as Chair and Co -Chair, will try to look at the items and try to help Ms. Carr to sort through them and schedule the items into the planning of future meetings. Future AEenda Items A. Conservation Plan — Laurie D'Audney B. Co -Chair Janett is meeting with the four chairs of different boards on August 27, 2007, regarding NISP. C. Board Member Gary Wockner would like a future agenda item to be where will the money come from for water conservation. It was suggested to quadruple the amount in the budget. Chairperson Doug Yadon asked if this should be a committee subject first to come up with some ideas. The committee could then bring their ideas to the Water Board. This would be the Conservation Committee. D. Chairperson Doug Yadon has asked our legal department to give us a brief primer at our next meeting on running an appropriate meeting. Adiournment The Water Board meeting adjourned at 9:12 p.m. 40 Joyce G�)z, Water Board Secreta