Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutWater Commission - Minutes - 05/19/2022 WATER COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING May 19, 2022, 5:30-7:30 p.m. Hybrid in person at 222 LaPorte Ave and online via Zoom 05/19/202 2 – MINUTES Page 1 1. CALL TO ORDER 5:30 p.m. 2. ROLL CALL • Commissioners Present: Jason Tarry (Chairperson), Greg Steed (Vice Chairperson), John Primsky, Jordan Radin, Kent Bruxvoort, Paul Herman, Tyler Eldridge • Commissioners Absent - Excused: Rick Kahn, Randy Kenyon • Staff Members Present: Jason Graham, Richard Thorp, Gregg Stonecipher, John Song, Kendall Minor, Matthew Fairchild (US Forest Service, CO), Boyd Wright (Colorado Parks and Wildlife), Rachel Geiger (US Forest Service, CO) • Members of the Public: None 3. AGENDA REVIEW • Chairperson Jason Tarry briefly summarized items on the agenda 4. COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION • None 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES CHAIRPERSON TARRY ASKED FOR COMMENTS AND REVISIONS ON THE APRIL 21 MINUTES. Commissioner Herman moved to approve the April 21 minutes. Commissioner Steed seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: it passed unanimously, 6-0 Commissioner Eldridge abstained due to his absence from the April 21 meeting 6. NEW BUSINESS a. Staff Reports (Attachments available upon request) i. Financial Monthly Report (meeting packet only) WATER COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING 05/19/2022 – MINUTES Page 2 ii. Water Resources Monthly Report (meeting packet only) Discussion Highlights A Commissioner was happy to see that Horsetooth Reservoir was at 94% capacity in the case that the Poudre supply shows trouble from burn scars from the previous fire. Technical Services Supervisor of Water Production Gregg Stonecipher added that there had been high turbidity in the river, so the Poudre source has been cut off, and they may see extended periods where this year’s runoffs may not be able to be treated. Jason Graham added, however, that they are not expecting any water shortages in the upcoming season as of now. iii. Consumer Confidence Report (meeting packet only) Discussion Highlights Gregg Stonecipher noted that there had been a tier-2 monitoring violation when the water quality lab was off in their sampling schedule and samples had been taken two days early at the end of April rather than early May. Corrective actions had been taken—one being to notify the public through the Consumer Confidence Report—and documented in a report with a robust root cause analysis, even using the corrective action as a teaching tool for how to perform a corrective action. iv. Drinking Water Quality Policy Annual Report (meeting packet only) Discussion Highlights Mr. Stonecipher highlighted the extensive fire mitigation efforts that involved several City staff and cooperating agencies, such as airdropping mulch in the burn scar to mitigate the effects on runoffs from the burn scar, as well as physical inspections on the ground for what the drops intended to accomplish. Mr. Graham also pointed out specific metrics in the report, such as the rate of valve and line replacements, which align with Council priorities. Mr. Stonecipher also noted that the Water Treatment Facility is still operating under its capacity at about 54% which reaches the required public demand. Due to requests from other communities for wholesale water sales, however, Plant Director Mark Kempton had commissioned an intensive look at the master planning, and within the City’s 50-year planning horizon, it may require the entire capacity of the plant, thus ruling out wholesale water. A Commissioner inquired what drove the demand, to which Mr. Stonecipher responded that it was directly due to population growth. Another Commissioner inquired about how the plant’s “energy efficiency was less than the American Water Works Association (AWWA) energy benchmark,” WATER COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING 05/19/2022 – MINUTES Page 3 but Mr. Stonecipher clarified that lower than the benchmark indicates good performance, meaning there was less energy consumption, and thus more efficiency. A Commissioner wondered if that included renewable, which Mr. Stonecipher clarified it did. v. US Fort Service Poudre Headwaters Project Watershed Program Manager Richard Thorp introduced Matthew Fairchild and Rachel Geiger of US Forest Service (USFS), and Boyd Wright of Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW), who gave an overview of the Poudre Headwaters Project. This is the largest native trout restoration project in Colorado in hopes to restore the native greenback cutthroat trout, which had experienced endangerment due to several factors, including pollution from mining. The project aims to restore 37 miles of habitat with the native trout, but they’ll first use rotenone to remove non-native species from the Poudre River, a naturally occurring substance from the root of the Cube, a plant in the bean family. It will enter the Poudre River and then be detoxified to ensure that it will only be applied to the areas requiring treatment. Discussion Highlights A Commissioner inquired if the detoxification process of rotenone ensures that the water returns to its native quality. Mr. Wright responded that it does, as rotenone quickly breaks down in natural environments, and they also neutralize the rotenone with a strategically placed detoxification station, with an emergency station further down the river that he assured he’d never had to employ. A Commissioner asked who the lead agency was in this project. Mr. Wright responded that the USFS takes the lead in partnership with CPW who brings a lot of the expertise on rotenone. Another Commissioner asked about the role Fort Collins Water Utility or the Commission can play in this, to which Mr. Wright and others responded that water users should be informed, as well as citing some misinformation that had circulated regarding a link to Parkinson’s disease. Mr. Graham added that the health and diversity of the river directly impacts and are impacted by the City’s regulations and how it stewards that water, and so the City needs to be aware of these types of projects to align in value and goal. Mr. Fairchild added that a lot of industries depend on the quality of the river, and so they wanted to be ahead of the curve to get the correct message out to the community, that the tool is safe with no health concerns. Mr. Thorp added that this group had presented the information nearly a year ago to him and others, including Utilities’ communications and public relations staff, and he overall feels satisfied with the project and their due diligence. Another Commissioner inquired whether they’d seen any pushback from the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE) to the project. Mr. Wright responded that the WATER COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING 05/19/2022 – MINUTES Page 4 CDPHE administered the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit, and they had not met much resistance in the process. They’re required to be accountable, starting with a pesticide discharge management plan and follow up reports. The Commissioner further inquired if there are other native fish that may be inadvertently affected by the rotenone, but Mr. Wright assured that they aren’t worried as most of the fish in the river are non-native. He and Mr. Fairchild added that other organisms such as macroinvertebrates may be impacted, but their life histories show that they should be able to recolonize, and the team has a monitoring component to the project to ensure minimal impact to other parts of the ecosystem, including a 6-year data set that prompts and guides their efforts. Ms. Geiger added that the science is sound, but there may be an impactful emotional component to the messaging, namely to hear that there are chemicals being added to the water that kills organisms. Mr. Fairchild added that their own messaging underlines an emotional aspect, that this is an effort to preserve, establish, and recover Colorado’s state fish, thus a part of the state’s heritage, and the alternate would be a travesty to lose it completely. Another Commissioner suggested the possible scenario of dead fish coming downstream, since it estimates to nearly 10,000 fish that could be eradicated. They further suggested adding the messaging on residents’ utility bill to raise awareness. Mr. Stonecipher suggested monitoring for rotenone in the public’s water for further reassurance, even though the science is dependable. Another Commissioner inquired how they’ll know when they’ve gotten all the non-native fish. Mr. Wright responded that they’ll use several methods of monitoring, including monitoring environmental DNA with several years of testing. The Commissioner inquired if that means there will be years of no fish in the interim period between eradication and re-introduction, to which Mr. Fairchild responded that there will be for a year, perhaps two, as they need to ensure that there are no non-native fish left to re-populate, in which case they’d have done the project for naught and would have to re-apply all over again. vi. Director of Water Utilities Update Water Director Jason Graham presented and led a discussion of City Council priorities, Budgeting for Outcome (BFO) offers, and Water Commission priorities as outlined in the Water Commission Work Plan to align values and cast a vision with the Commission for its foreseeable direction. Discussion Highlights As a point of reference for staff time required for Council priorities, a Commissioner inquired about the Graywater Ordinance topic and the amount of staff time it took to prepare it. Utilities Executive Director Kendall Minor WATER COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING 05/19/2022 – MINUTES Page 5 responded that it had been less than 20 hours. A Commissioner suggested that Council could be better connected to the Water Commission, especially as the mayor is the Commission’s Council liaison, and they could look into regularly meeting with the chairperson. A Commissioner inquired about the origins of the BFO offers. Mr. Graham responded that BFO offers are primarily driven by safety, regulatory, and asset management requirements, and are generated by staff based on replacement, condition assessment, or master planning needs. The Commissioner requested for more clarity on the prioritization system. A Commissioner inquired if council priorities are shared with City staff, to which Mr. Graham responded that leadership knows the priorities, but they’re not disseminated to the rest of staff until decisions are made and tasks are delegated. The discussion turned to the Halligan Project, and a Commissioner expressed disappointment that it wasn’t listed as a top Council priority, though Mr. Graham assured that the project is a part of the initiatives that protect and enhance river flow storage systems. A Commissioner asked why there isn’t an offer in the BFO to support Eileen Dornfest’s vacated position for hiring and retention, to which Mr. Graham responded that Theresa Connor has taken over the role since stepping away from the Interim Executive Director position. The discussion was to determine whether the Water Commission Work Plan priorities were still viable, or if there were other priorities, such as an interest to see a representative from City Human Resources come to speak on staff retention and recruitment; how to bridge water, wastewater, and stormwater more efficiently; how master plans are formulated; and Lance Smith could present on Capital Improvement Projects and how they’re prioritized. A Commissioner expressed concern about resource draining on staff for Water Commission priorities, and they suggested re-prioritizing so that staff time could be spent on higher value items. Commissioners agreed that the Commission could provide more benefits to City staff as a whole and be an asset to City Council, not by locking steps but by opening communication better. A Commissioner noted that Council exists to create policy to pursue community ideals, while the Water Commission Charter outlines its role to advise the City Council by being forward-thinking regarding resources that have to do with water. Mr. Minor expressed appreciation for the priority list in order to tackle tough issues, such as the aging infrastructure, so that they can determine what the things are that need to happen in the year, if it can even happen in light of resources, without overburdening ratepayers. There are certain challenges, such as lacking resources, staff burnouts, Halligan, as well as forecasting for future initiatives like achieving zero waste by 2030— just 8 years out—and the City’s stance on Northern Integrated Supply Project (NISP). Ultimately, Commissioners decided to list their individual top priorities to send to the chairperson to finalize. WATER COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING 05/19/2022 – MINUTES Page 6 7. COMMISSIONER REPORTS None 8. OTHER BUSINESS a. Staff Updates  Mark Kempton is leaving the City for a role with Soldier Canyon Filter Plant  Jen Dial is the new Water Resources Manager, Donnie Dustin’s previous position 9. ADJOURNMENT 7:45 p.m. These minutes were approved by the Water Commission on June 16, 2022.