HomeMy WebLinkAboutEconomic Advisory Commission - Minutes - 07/15/2015MINUTES
CITY OF FORT COLLINS
ECONOMIC ADVISORY COMMISSION
Date: Wednesday, July 15, 2015
Location: CIC Room, City Hall, 300 Laporte Ave.
Time: 11:00am–1:30pm
For Reference
Wade Troxell, Mayor & Council Liaison
Josh Birks, Staff Liaison 221-6324
Dianne Tjalkens, Minutes 221-6734
Commission Members Present Commission Members Absent
Sam Solt, Chair Denny Otsuga
Kim Dale (arrived 11:50) Linda Stanley
Ted Settle Glen Colton
Ann Hutchison
Kristin Owens (arrived 11:20)
Staff Present Staff Absent
Josh Birks, Economic Health Director
Dianne Tjalkens, Admin/Board Support
Donnie Dustin, Water Resources Manager
SeonAh Kendall, Economic Policy and Project Manager
Tom Vosburg, Policy and Project Manager
Guests
+Dale Adamy, citizen
+Eric Sutherland, citizen
Councilmembers
Wade Troxell, Mayor (arrived 11:45)
Meeting convened without quorum at 11:16am (Quorum reached at 11:50).
Review and Approval of Minutes
Delayed until end meeting.
Agenda Review—no changes.
Public Comment—Eric Sutherland: Fundamental components of economic health are adherence to law
and support of children in education. Failure of Boxelder Stormwater Authority which received tax
increment financing that diverted funds from education and subsidized growth. Judge recently reversed
decision and decided authority could not condemn lands, which killed their project. As a result possibility
of developing I-25 corridor drops to zero. Reflects disrespect of rule of law. Timnath’s participation with
schools and Poudre School Districts long range plans: PSD plans are dependent on building in Timnath.
Boxelder project is necessary to provide service to school in that location. Mixed up priorities. Needs to
be resolved. Alternatives have been proposed. Flood water problem, ensure development adheres to high
standards, etc. Immense protests against Boxelder project. City Attorney does not follow law.
1 | Page
Commission Member Updates—
• Kristin Owens, new board member. Semi-retired, faculty at several colleges and a writer.
Experience managing complex organizations and big budgets.
o Board members and staff introduced themselves to Kristin.
• One vacant seat on the board. Interested people can fill out application or nomination form. Clerk
will wait for several applications then begin interviews.
AGENDA ITEM 1—Water Supply Planning Policy, Donnie Dustin, Water Resources Manager
Utilities provides water, waste water treatment, stormwater systems, and light and power to Fort Collins.
Donnie’s division is in charge of getting raw water supply to treatment (water rights, water law, storage,
etc.). Have been providing overviews to Council regarding water supply and storage projects, notably the
enlargement of Halligan Reservoir. Have been in permitting process for 10 years. Draft environmental
statement due about 1 year from now. In June gave presentation to Futures Committee. September 8 will
talk to Council about water development fees and potential changes. Addressing recent concerns from
developers in difference in cost of three main water providers in the city. Asking Council if should
explore options to address water supply needs for all of GMA and about providing water to affordable
housing. There are five districts that serve all portions of the GMA. Focusing on Utilities, ELCO and Fort
Collins-Loveland Water District because new development is primarily occurring in those areas.
Stakeholder concerns include development limitations from raw water supply and cost, inconsistent cost
and service from different providers. The Utility is guided by Water Supply and Demand Management
Policy: ensure adequate, safe, reliable supply of water. Utilities has diverse water rights portfolio, while
other districts primarily rely on CBT (Colorado Big Thompson project). Planning criteria and fees vary
among the various districts. Utilities fees are related to water rights values and cost to acquire storage.
ELCO requires developers to provide water rights and have a policy that growth pays its own way;
developers assume risk of obtaining supplies. Fees increase with scarcity and increase in market value of
water rights. CBT allocation comes with storage, so higher value. Utilities is trying to acquire storage.
Districts and Utility have distinct water supply boundaries and governances. Have had boundary disputes
in the past, which resulted in collaborations and agreements. Firm yield is what can provide in 1 in 50
drought. Projecting firm yield will not meet future demand, but if complete Halligan expansion can
provide storage to firm to demand. In early 2000s had drought and saw 25% reduction in water use. Last
5 years have been fairly wet and cool. Most water rights are only available in the summer, so still need
storage in wet years. Have explored potential of using excess water rights with districts in wet years. Will
take significant time to further investigate. Utilities could provide water for Affordable Housing projects
in districts’ portion of GMA. Small demand. Have history of collaboration, and agreements. Will
continue to engage with districts in finding solutions.
Discussion/Q & A:
• What caused spike in cost in 1998 and 2012 of CBT price per unit?
o Development. Recently has tripled in value. Most districts tie raw water value to CBT
cost.
o In this time frame, other cities started looking to northern Colorado for water supply.
o CBT had excess in system previously. As reach capacity cost increases.
Always 310K units in the project. Used to be 30% agriculture and 70%
municipal. That has flipped. Not much left to purchase.
• What are main drivers of increased water supply need?
o Large contractual/industrial use within heart of city. Obligated to provide. Also,
greenfield growth.
o What is split between residential and commercial use?
Unsure. Will find out.
Probably handful of big users in commercial.
• Projections for firming only include Utility boundary?
o Yes. Projected growth plus commercial usage already obligated.
• What was Council response to exploring options to address water supply for GMA?
o Direction was to better coordinate citywide with planning, affordable housing, districts,
etc. to make a more cohesive plan.
o General support for holistic approach.
2 | Page
o Northwest quadrant is largest area of available land in GMA. Outside of Utility service
area. Developers aren’t experts in solving water issues. Creating compression in
accessing vacant land as community grows.
Market increase on resource, but ELCO policy has not changed.
Market has been pushing growth into that part of town.
o No silver bullet. As long as ELCO depends on CBT as water source.
They do accept other shares, but all highly sought after water rights.
• As long as focused on small number of resources, stuck with cost.
Water supply planning is slow moving. Third district: North Weld County Water
District. Have purchased water rights that run through town. Must have storage
as rights only come in 3-4 months and need to meet demand year-round.
o If City expands Halligan, could ELCO buy into storage?
Core will only allow us to build what we need. They were in project, but dropped
out in 2009. Part of permitting process is looking at alternative. Other alternatives
are more expensive and have greater GHG impacts. Trying to do least expensive
option. Glade could be built larger than what we need. FCLWD is participating
in NISP.
NISP is looking at building Glade Reservoir between Owl Canyon and
Livermore.
• If built and FCLWD is 7.5% of project that is 12K acre feet additional
storage that district would get. That is more than we are being allowed to
build at Halligan.
• Included in report on supplemental draft?
o Yes.
• Usage going up and opportunity for conservation are incompatible concepts.
o Using current water use levels, and projected growth with large contractual use.
Uncertainties in water supply planning, including climate change. Stress on resource
from other water rights use. Policy approved to plan to current demand level out 50 years
to allow play in the system.
o Changes taking place. Impressed with ability to manage usage. Continue conservation for
better use of existing resource.
o Fort Collins has very little storage of its own, mostly in CBT system. More than growth
issue, also vulnerability issue. Other cities have much greater control of storage of own
water. Only have Joe Right Reservoir. If there was issue with CBT, need to protect
against that. Halligan is not a great expenditure to give redundancy we need. NISP
concerns have been around impact to river. Want healthy river and ecosystem.
• Council conversation about next steps; sounds like continue to focus on service area and
collaborate as you can. But should we be taking over ELCO and growing service area to include
that?
o Difficult political reality. They are quasi-municipal entity. Work with them toward
ensuring good water future for the community.
o Is there a way to amalgamate these districts?
They need to be willing to do that. Very difficult to take on the demand without
causing a burden. Had discussions about combining water treatment, which
resulted in continuing to be separate.
They are working in best interest of their own districts. Align goals, priorities.
• Barrier to our long term success. Proposed housing project could have built part of needed road
infrastructure but has been put on hold due to water costs. No longer financially viable. All-
encompassing to long term economy: infrastructure, attainable housing, commercial development
opportunity.
o Include other departments in discussions.
o Utility has island of low cost for raw water as it is well established and has good water
rights. Other communities are at prices districts are at. Won’t be getting any cheaper.
o How much it costs is not function of cost, but of scarcity.
Innovation and technology for reuse. Underground water storage is alternative to
reduce loss from evaporation.
3 | Page
AGENDA ITEM 2—Broadband Strategic Plan, SeonAh Kendall, Economic Policy and Project
Manager
Broadband Strategic Plan was funded through BFO process. Have consultant (Magellan) and looking
closely at SB-152 which limits ability of municipality to provide internet. Can get exemption through
vote in November. Proposing new timeline of working on benchmarking case studies as though SB-152
has been exempted. Feasibility study to be complete Q2 of next year. To get to November election need to
engage community. Council Work Session will provide update, and Council will look at possible ballot
language. August 18 Council will refer ballot language. All engagement must be before August 18. City
staff will not be able to advocate against SB-152 but can communicate around what has and hasn’t
worked in other communities. Market analysis will look at what is currently available in Fort Collins.
Internal preparatory work. Even if voters choose not to exempt, there are other limited things that can be
done. Environmental Services and Social Sustainability have been included in conversations. Core team
met with Longmont to discuss what they have done. Attending conferences. Open House about Comcast
Franchise Renewal and Broadband had good attendance. Staff has presented to Energy Board and
Chamber. Joined Next Century Cities, local group of cities trying to do broadband. E-newsletter available
at fcgov.com/broadband. Met with Loveland about their initiative: collaboration, commonalities,
challenges. Benchmarking and engagement by Magellan happening now. Citizen Champion Team would
support election. Other outreach includes CSU Lagoon Series, Chamber, NFCBA, SFCBA, and New
West Fest. Open Houses July 16 and August 12. Superboard meeting July 29. Requests in to present to
New Tech Meet-Up and HP. In order to do feasibility study, must build knowledge about what other
communities have done. System is unique to community and funding sources are unique to communities.
Looking at 15-20 cities that have implemented, ones that are similar to Fort Collins. Market analysis will
be specific to Fort Collins. Then look at cost-benefits, local assets and policies. If other groups should be
presenting to, let SeonAh know.
Discussion/Q & A:
• What is rationale behind having legislation against this?
o Argument that private industry can provide, so municipality should not be involved.
o In 2005 some cities were involved in trying to start broadband. Large providers used
lobbying to add legislation.
o Even prevents public-private partnerships.
o Platte River owns fiber in ground. City Hall pays a third party for wifi.
o Stagnates value to community. Providers making claims about speed, but not fully
substantiated.
Providers do not believe Fort Collins is an “underserved” community at this
point.
• City has to be quiet, but what about other organizations?
o Private citizens can be vocal.
o Chamber can support legislation. Also sent letter to those who can help.
Ballot Issues 1 & 2 from April had very organized groups.
o Just signed 10 year contract with Comcast for cable only. Hottest item in cities across the
state. Estes and Boulder have passed. Loveland going to ballot too.
• What keeps it from getting addressed at state level?
o Have been on teams addressing at state level. Those who helped pass legislation are
unwilling to bring forward for reconsideration. Being pushed back to local level.
o Some actions at federal level (FCC), but preempt state laws. We are empowered to ask
community, so will go ahead and do that. State level may change later.
• If approved by voters, role of City: cost-benefit analysis. How much will it cost?
o Community engagement, then determine model (public-private, municipally owned,
leasing dark fiber, etc.), and feasibility study.
o Longmont has companies locating there specifically because of broadband. Real estate
value is higher with access to broadband. Longmont is rolling out now. 45% uptake rate.
Will have short term payback on system.
o Large companies already have this. Not about providing service to large businesses;
making sure available to whole community including residential, small business,
educational institutions. Broadband is like roads: fast, reliable, affordable.
• How will senior community react?
4 | Page
o Seniors embracing advanced technologies to keep contact with family/friends.
• Why would people vote against this?
o No down side.
o Some say public entities should not be involved in private industry.
o Estes talked about operational reliability and safety as benefit to municipal broadband. In
floods lost service.
• Can library be advocate?
o Local library district. Holly Carrol sits on steering committee, along with CSU and Platte
River.
• Be clear in ballot language that about creating choice, not set that will have municipal broadband.
o Looking at other models, then at own assets. Good brand of Utility: reliability,
infrastructure, talent, etc.
• Pleased to see asset mapping as part of conversation. Should be looking at regional solutions.
Many businesses not in city limits or GMA but still part of community. Their service for light,
power, etc. is horrible. Terrible to have so close to community and still be excluded.
o Have been talking to Loveland. Presentation in front of Larimer County Commission
(regional meeting). County is excited. Will wait to see what happens with our legislation
before moving forward themselves.
• Envision testing strategy options against community desires. Outreach will find out what is
important, to score strategies against.
• If using Platte River dark fiber. Long term infrastructure cost. Be honest about cost and spread
risk among partners.
o Feasibility analysis will focus on these things.
• Should government be in private sector business? Is City positioned to be in commodity
business? What does the ramp up look like? Comcast is running 24-hour system. Government not
designed to provide 24-hour system.
o Water and electric are 24-hour.
o Except when close customer service office for lunch/meetings.
o When internet goes down though, major cost to business.
• Are commission members prohibited from taking a stance on this issue?
o City Attorney’s Office has memo on this. Josh will provide to board. As a private citizen
can do what you like. If giving public comment at Council, good to disclose that on
board, but giving private opinions.
ACTION ITEM: If other groups should be presenting to, email SeonAh.
ACTION ITEM: Josh will send attorney’s office memo to board.
AGENDA ITEM 3—Additional Commission Dialogue
Social Sustainability and Environmental Services will present on strategic plans under development at
August meeting. Also have airport director giving overview of work and financial plans. Government
structure is changing. Asking anyone who comes as presenter to provide cover memo telling how work
ties to Economic Health Strategic Plan and what seeking feedback on. Also discussing broader topic of
growth, which is hot topic in community. Josh will present strawman next month to outline potential
conversations, such as historical growth rates, etc. Almost solid 2% growth rate since city founded.
Discussion/Q & A:
• Include data on other communities and how managing growth.
• Affordable Housing Strategic Plan.
o Living document.
• September meeting hearing about community recycling ordinance.
o If don’t want to have a particular presentation that is getting scheduled, let Josh know.
• Also discussing creating executive summary of strategic plans. Would like Jackie to come to
meeting to set stage.
• July 29: Superboard meeting. Should commission attend?
5 | Page
o Open to all board and commission members. Optional. Josh will provide information to
commission as it becomes available.
ACTION ITEM: Josh will provide July 29 Superboard meeting agenda to commission.
Review and Approval of Minutes
Ann moved and Ted seconded a motion to approve the June minutes as presented.
Motion passed unanimously, 5-0-0.
Meeting Adjourned: 1:30pm
Next Meeting: August 19
6 | Page