HomeMy WebLinkAboutWater Board - Minutes - 09/16/2010Fort Collins Utilities Water Board Minutes
Thursday, September 16, 2010
Water Board Chairperson City Council Liaison
Gina Janett, 493-4677 David Roy, 217-5506
Water Board Vice Chairperson Staff Liaison
Steve Balderson, 223-7915 Brian Janonis, 221-6702
Roll Call
Board Present Chairperson Gina Janett, Vice Chairperson Steve Balderson, Board Members
Brett Bovee, Eileen Dornfest, Brian Brown, Mike Connor, and Duncan Eccieston
Board Absent Board Members Phil Phelan, David Pillard, Johannes Gessler and Reagan
Waskom
Staf Present Kevin Gertig, Phil Ladd, Rita DeCourcey, Robin Pierce, Susan Strong, D. A.
Black, Bill Switzer, Diana Royval, Carol Webb, Jenny Lopez-Filkins, and Dennis Bode
Guests None
Meeting Convened
Chairperson Janett called the meeting to order at 3:03 p.m.
Public Comment
None
Minutes of August 19, 2010, Meeting
Board Member Brown moved to approve the minutes from the August 19, 2010, meeting. Board
Member Connor seconded the motion, and it passed unanimously.
Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) Permit Annual Update
(Presentation available upon request)
Susan Strong, environmental regulatory specialist, provided the annual update on the MS4
Stormwater Permit as required by the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment
(CDPHE) under the Colorado Discharge Permit System (CDPS). The City’s program received
the 2009 Community Award from the Colorado Alliance for Environmental Education Citizen.
Public Education and Outreach: Common complaints in 2008 related to commercial carpet
cleaning businesses disposing of wastewater into the gutter, SC) a business outreach plan was
developed to target carpet cleaning businesses (62 in 2008).
Staff is in the process of implementing a new permit tracking program, PermiTrack. This tool
will improve the construction sites program and provide a means to track inspections.
Water Board Minutes
September 16, 2010
As a result of an internal audit, Scott Olson, Altitude Training Associates
(http://ww.altitudeta.corn/), was hired to develop recommended program changes around a
formal process to ensure all City projects are reviewed. In addition, additional training will he
provided to the Regulatory and Government Affairs (RGA) staff.
Ms. Strong reported on the City’s response to the State Water Quality Control Division’s
windshield screening of 14 sites.
Board discussion:
1)oes staff have understanding of what the State is interested in when perrming the screenings?
The State has not always been clear about what they’re screening for, hut their intentions are
becoming clearer now. They provide direction to entities to have programs in place, hut do not
prescribe specific details.
Where does vegetative matter like leaves fit into the program? Trash collects in the first forehay
of the Udall Regional collection ponds and can he cleared from there. Staff has also observed
companies vacuuming leaves in Old Town.
2011-2012 Budget
(Presentation available upon request)
Water Resources and Treatment Operations Manager Kevin Gertig thanked Phil Ladd and Rita
DeCourcey, utilities financial analysts, Ellen Switzer, utilities financial operations manager, and
Bill Switzer, utilities rate analyst, who have put in very hard work on this year’s budget during
the absence of a Utilities Finance and Budget Manager.
Board discussion:
Water fund 2011 operating revenues are projected to be 6 percent lower than budgeted 2010.
Revenue projections for 2011 have been revised down to 150 gpcd (gallons per person per day)
compared to the previous projections of 155 gpcd. Projections were decreased to recognize the
significant drop in consumption in 2009. Projected 2009 use was 155 gpcd and actual consumption
was 135 gpcd, a 13 percent decrease. Most of the drop in demand is attributed to the wet summer
(precipitation was 140 percent of average), although water conservation and the economy likely
played a part in it as well. After reviewing revenue collections through July 2010, demand is
projected to be at 140 to 145 gallons per capita per day for 2010.
Is conslunption only going down due to conservation? What about weather, leak detection, etc. ?
It’s difficult to tell what allis driving this, hut the weather, water conservation and likely the
economy are all factors. The number of customers likely plays a part as well, hut it is difficult to
determine due to student fluctuations and seasonal irrigation customers.
Utilities will lose our largest wastewater contract customer at the start of 2011, costing $ 1 .7
million in lost revenue annually. They’ve elected not to discharge to our system due to the
success of their own system which they have developed over time. Other commercial customers
have the option to meter their flows now, which will also result in reductions. Rates for typical
users are still based on domestic loads.
The Wastewater fund is not keeping pace with our cumulative rate increases on total operating
revenue.
Water Board Minutes
September 16, 2010
The Legislative, Finance and Liaison (LFL) Committee met on September 14 to discuss the
2011-12 budget. During that meeting, there was discussion as to why Fort Collins’ monthly
residential rates are higher than other regional cities. Committee members felt these cities may
be borrowing from the future and not providing a good example to follow.
Stormwater operating revenues are stable. Debt issues were paid off in 2008 and 2009; four
remain for future pay off. Capital projects decrease from $3.5 million in 2011 to $1 million in
2012 with the last installment of the Canal importation and Pond Outfalls (CIPO) project taking
place in 2011.
Stormwater revenue does not see much growth, but some will occur with taking on a few more
customers in the Southwest Annexation. Stormwater revenues do not change unless there are rate
changes or developable areas increase.
The residential customer impact with a 10.1 percent electric rate increase, 9.0 percent wastewater
increase and 3.0 percent water increase means a high bill month would increase about $9.76 or
6.17 percent.
Mr. Gertig shared about the future challenges for Utilities:
• A succession planning initiative is beginning, which has an indirect impact on the
budget.
• Nutrient requirements are coming for removing phosphorus and nitrogen from
wastewater. Neither plant is set up for advanced removal of these elements. Staff
will bring this to the Board and Council with impact to rates.
Board Member Connor shared the LFL Committee’s recommendations with the full Board:
1) A 3 percent water rate increase is appropriate or perhaps too low. A
progressive increase in rates is the favored approach, and the Board may want to
consider recommending a 3 percent rate increase in 2012 rather than 0 percent, and
recommending more than 3 percent in both 2011 and 2012.
2) Utilities staff undertakes long term analysis of future needs and develops
projections, given the future climate of revenue decreases.
3) The committee recommends that serious consideration for going to a “pay as
you go” system to retire debt.
Board discussion:
How iiiiich debt is the water svsteinfrzced with now and are reserves being used? Reserves are
not being used. Ms. DeCourcey will forward the debt data to Board members.
What is the time frame and anticipated cost on the nutrient requirements?
A 5-8 year time frame is coming on the nutrient requirements. The upgrades could run around
$50 million for each plant.
Board members discussed concepts for how an incremental increase might he devoted, such as
early debt retirement versus incentive programs.
Water Board Minutes 3
September 16, 2010
Motion: Board Member Connor moved that the Water Board recommends to City
Council that they support the proposed 2011-2012 budget for the Water, Wastewater,
and Stormwater funds. Board Member Brown seconded the motion.
Discussion on the motion:
Vice Chairperson Balderson remarked about the expectation in business that budgets remain flat.
It’s not a matter of failure to recognize that it takes that much to run the Utilities and address
these critical needs, but the organization must not do some other things if necessary.
Vote on the motion: It passed unanimously.
Staff note (not included in minutes): In follow up with Water Board Chair Gina Janett, the above
motion recommending the overall budget was intended to include the recommended rate
increases for both water and wastewater.
Motion: Board Member Connor moved that the Water Board recommends to City
Council that they support a 3 percent rate increase in the Water fund for 2012 and
consider small increases both in 2011 and 2012 in all three sectors of the Water Utility —
Water, Wastewater, and Stormwater — in anticipation of future needs and to avoid large
rate increases in the future. Board Member Eccleston seconded the motion.
Discussion on the motion:
Board Member Connor understands the issues caused when increases happen, but feels it’s
important to avoid significant increases all at once. By getting ahead of the curve and eliminating
interest payments, it allows lower rates in perpetuity. The interest payments are over and above
the money needed to keep pace with future needs.
Chairperson Janett noted we will be learning about the cost to address deferred maintenance
when more data comes forth from the asset management initiative.
Vote on the motion: It passed unanimously.
Motion: Board Member Connor moved that the Water Board recommends to City
Council that they take a portion of the increased rates to accelerate debt service. Board
Member Brown seconded the motion.
Vote on the motion: It passed unanimously.
Board Member Dornfest left the meeting at 5: 11 p.m.
Chairperson Janett inquired about the 1 percent of construction capital projects donated to Art in
Public Places funding. For Utilities’ capital projects where art cannot be directly associated to
the project and the public has no access, such as underground pipe replacements, pumps, etc.,
can this requirement be eliminated in those cases?
Water Board Minutes 4
September 16, 2010
Motion: Chairperson Janett moved that the Water Board recommends to City Council
that they consider eliminating the Art in Public Places funding for Utility projects not
accessible to the public. Board Member Bovee seconded the motion.
Discussion on the motion:
Staff was asked to develop the figure represented by this type of change.
Vote on the motion: It passed unanimously.
Committee Reports
No committee reports were given.
Engineering Committee (Vice Chairperson Balderson):
Water Conservation Committee (Board Member Phelan):
Legislative, Finance and Legal Committee (Board Member Pillard):
Instreamn Flow Committee (Chairperson Janett):
Water Supply Committee (Board Member Gessler):
Staff Reports
Water Resources Manager Dennis Bode noted water use has stayed flat due to the warm, dry
weather. Statistics reflect 91 percent of projected use to date. Mr. Bode expects us to end at 93
percent.
Other Business
Chairperson Janett forwarded the Urban Stream Quality Report (for the Engineering Committee).
Open houses on Plan Fort Collins are scheduled for October 12 and 14. The Board will consider
a recommendation on the Draft Plan at the October meeting.
Board terms were discussed.
Work will begin soon on the 2011 Work Plan, due November 30.
Related to the emerging issue of phosphorus and nitrogen removal, it was noted that 17 states
prohibit phosphorus in cleaning and other products and have already passed legislation.
Legislation may be another approach to consider; Chairperson Janett will ask the LFL
Committee to work on this.
Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 5:25 p.m.
Submitted by Robin Pierce, Utilities Administrative Services Supervisor, Fort Collins Utilities
Approved by the Board on O(’7[ /),‘ .
, 2010
Signed:
Lg/
///)
Board Secretary Date
Water Board Minutes 5
September 16, 2010