Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutWater Board - Minutes - 09/21/1984• MINUTES Water Board September 21, 1984 MEMBERS PRESENT Norm Evans, Chairman, Tom Moore, Dave Stewart, Bernie Cain, Mary Lou Smith, Mort Bittinger, Neil Grigg, Tom Sanders, John Scott (alt.), Jim O'Brien (alt.) STAFF PRESENT Mike Smith, Dennis Bode, Andy Pineda, Paul Eckman, Assistant City Attorney MEDIA Mark Radtke, KCOL MEMBERS ABSENT Henry Caulfield, Ray Glabach (both excused) Chairman Norm Evans opened the Meeting. The following items were discussed: Minutes Bernie Cain was erroneously listed as absent. The minutes of August 17, 1984 were approved after this correction. Update on Halligan Norm Evans related that Mike Smith, Roger Krempel and he met recently with Mr. Stieben, the president of the North Poudre Irrigation Co. He requested the meeting to determine the City's approach regarding negotiations with them on Halligan. North Poudre had not seen the Water Board's resolution prior to this meeting. The North Poudre Board believes that they should proceed with negotiations with the Judson's and other private interests. There were, moreover, some feelings from the Board that they had an obligation to those parties. Nevertheless, they wanted to give the City an opportunity to provide input. Mr. Stieben emphasized that it is North Poudre's desire to maintain an harmonious relationship with the City by being open and keeping the City informed. But, at the same time, the Board believes, in their own interest, they they should proceed with negotiations, particularly those concerned with recreational rights to the reservoir. Essentially, North Poudre is allowing the private enterprise to conduct a feasibility study of the Halligan Project without making any commitment to them. Mike Smith added that because of these proceedings, the City's involvement has been "put on the back burner" for the time being until North Poudre explores some options with the Judsons and other private investors. The staff will keep the Water Board informed of any developments. Election of Water Board Secreta The Bylaws call for an election of a Water Board secretary. Bernie Cain nominated Molly Nortier to continue in the position. After a second and no further nominations, the Board elected Molly Nortier unanimously. Water Board Minutes September 21, 1984 Page Two Committee Appointments Norm Evans explained that the Bylaws call for six standing committees with options to set up special committees when circumstances call for establishing a new one. The Bylaws list the following standing committees: Engineering, Conservation, Utilities Service, Finance, Future Program and Evaluation, and Legislative. Three committees that have been added in the past few years are: Planning & Zoning, Education, Water Credits, and Poudre Area River Concept Review. Chairman Evans suggested revisions, reorganizations, and mergers which required the approval of the Water Board. Tom Moore moved that the Utilities Service and Planning and Zoning Committees be combined to form the Utilities Service Committee. Mary Lou Smith seconded the motion. It carried unanimously. Mort Bittinger moved that the Legislative and Finance Committees be combined. Bernie Cain provided a second; the vote was unanimous. Dave Stewart moved that the functions of the Water Credits Committee be combined with the Engineering Committee. Tom Moore seconded the motion and again the vote was unanimous. Next Mary Lou Smith moved that Public Education be combined with the Conservation Committee. After Dave Stewart's second, the motion was approved unanimously. Tom Moore moved that the Poudre Area River Concept Review Committee be dissolved. Dave Stewart provided a second and the vote was unanimous. The following appointments were made to the reorganized standing committees: Engineering Neil Grigg, Chairman Mort Bittinger Ray Glabach Jim O'Brien Tom Sanders John Scott Dave Stewart Water Credits functions will be absorbed by this committee Utilities Service Committee Bernie Cain, Chairman Henry Caulfield Ray Glabach Tom Moore Mary Lou Smith Regionalization and Metropolitan concerns will be addressed here. Water Board Minutes September 21, 1984 Page Three Legislative and Finance Henry Caulfield, Chairman Neil Grigg Mort Bittinger servation and Public Education David Stewart, Chairman Bernie Cain Jim O'Brien Tom Sanders Mary Lou Smith Program Evaluation Committee Ray Glabach, Chairman Bernie Cain Henry Caulfield Mary Lou Smith Dave Stewart Staff Reports A. Treated Water Production Summary The summary was distributed to Board members in their packets. Dennis Bode noted that August was a fairly dry month. Consequently, production was about 2% above what was projected. For the year we are still at 93°% of the average year projection. Committee Reports Mary Lou Smith announced that the Drought Study Committee had a very good meeting with the consultant. Dennis Bode said the meeting was held to review what the consultants had accomplished up to that point. They have analyzed the hydrology of the Poudre River and made some comparisons with the Laramie, the Big Thompson, and Colorado Rivers. They have generated a number of long term traces from those statistics and analyzed some of the drought periods that came out of those traces. Andy Pineda brought in the chart which the consultants had produced. This impressive chart showed a 500 year period of synthetically generated flows which reflects periods of drought and wet years. The statistics of the Poudre River are reproduced on the chart. From this data, the consultants can begin to analyze what kinds of droughts these are and what the effects are. They have broken down the flows into monthly numbers and are almost into the beginning phase of modeling. Neil Grigg said that the Rate Study Committee met with consultant Dave Stewart recently. The survey at that time had been completed but not yet analyzed. The committee looked at all the preliminary survey data and made observations about some of the questions and how to interpret them. The main action Water Board Minutes September 21, 1984 Page Four was the scheduling of a meeting with the Council for a progress report which was set up for Tuesday, September 25. Dennis Bode announced that the meeting will be postponed tentatively to October 9. Dave Stewart explained that the presentation was not quite as polished as they wanted it to be and there were some other concerns that emerged recently which needed to be cleared up. Anheuser-Busch Update Mike Smith informed the Board that A-B has sent two letters asking us to proceed with the design of the water line from Water Plant No. 2 to the Brewery site, and to begin the wastewater treatment improvements at Wastewater Treatment Plant No. 2. The water line "trigger letter" was specific enough that Water Utilities is currently putting out an RFP for a consultant. Proposals are due from the consultants on September 28. They will be evaluated and a consultant selected to do water line work. The wastewater letter, on the other hand, created more questions than answers. Basically, the letter said to begin on wastewater improvements. Hence, we are meeting with Busch to try to get some issues clarified; specifically what those wastewater improvements are supposed to be. Both letters specified a time period of 27 months from start of design to construction. Torn Sanders asked what Busch is asking for wastewater treatment. On waste treatment, their facilities include a line from Plant No. 2 to the pre- treatment facility. The design of the pretreatment facility is their responsibility as well as the line from the brewery to the land application site. What Water Utilities is doing is making modifications to the plant to handle the discharge from the pre-treatment facility. Mr. Smith emphasized that the improvements to our facility will be paid for through the tax increment by A-B; our utilities do not have to pay for them. Mr. Smith went on to explain that A-B's discharge is now estimated to be 1.8 MGD. The maximum BOD is approximately 12,000 pounds per day. Both have been reduced from the original estimates. They are sending most of the high strength material to land application. Moreover, we understand that they will be discharging their sanitary wastes to the Boxelder Sanitation District; there will be no sanitary wastes sent to our system or to land application. Apparently, there are some benefits to Busch, both economical and practical, that make this an advantage. Someone asked if Boxelder is capable of handling the additional waste from A-B. Evidently, they can handle the small sanitary load the brewery will produce. Mr. Smith explained that, eventually, when Boxelder reaches capacity, they may ask the City of Fort Collins to treat their excess wastes. A Board member asked if Busch will be using the old treatment facility. Mr. Smith said that the land they will be using is west of the present drying beds on the north side of the site. It will be new land, which the City will probably sell to Busch. Tom Sanders asked if the Brewery will own the process facility and staff it with their people. Right now, Mr. Smith answered, their preference is that we will operate it. Mr. Sanders is concerned that we would employ 12 people to operate it and if the company decided to operate it themselves, what would happen to the 12 people? Mike Smith said that the Water Board Minutes September 21, 1984 Page Five City has made A-B aware of that problem. would employ the 12 people, but before the this problem must be ironed out. They have said verbally that they City proceeds any further on it, Mike Smith informed the Board that water for A-B will come from Water Treatment Plant No. 2. He explained that the water lines are all the City's to design and install whereas the sewer lines are all Busch's to design and install. Mr. Smith also clarified the water rights issue. Busch was supposed to send a letter to start acquisition of those. They have decided not to do that right now. Tom Sanders asked if that means they are doing it themselves, or just waiting. Mr. Smith said that they are probably lining up some more water themselves. Basically, the reasoning was that they aren't completely certain the brewery will actually be built, so they do not want to spend a lot of money and not get it back. The City had informed them that once the water rights were given to the City, they would not be returned. Most of the water they are acquiring is CBT and North Poudre. Tom Sanders contends that A-B is doing what we had hoped they wouldn't do; focus strictly on that water. On the other hand, Mr. Smith said that Busch has suggested that the City look at other options; for example Water Supply and Storage water. The City currently has an agreement with WS&S not to take any more water. Nevertheless, A-B would like the City to talk to WS&S to explore changing that, which the City is looking into now. Mike Smith announced that at the last meeting he told the Board that we have about $130,000 in the water fund. Shortly after the meeting he checked that and found that some of the water fund money had been incorrectly placed in the wrong reserve account. Thus, there is actually $160,000 to $170,000 in the fund. General Concerns and Questions Tom Sanders related that he had read an article in the Rocky Mountain News about a corporation that is buying between 300,000 and 500,000 acre feet of water and wants to sell it to San Diego. He was surprised that a transaction like this could be legal. He is concerned that if this can work, the state will be in real trouble. How can the state prevent those corporations from buying the water and selling it on a year to year basis? Mort Bittinger responded that a water lawyer from Boulder is promoting this idea. He went on to say that Southern California and Arizona are going to be using that water anyway if we don't make use of it. Maybe it is better to have a contract which states that the party can have it for only "so long" rather than have nothing in writing. Tom Sanders replied that this is something different from just using excess water. They are actually buying water rights and transferring them to these people. Water Board Minutes September 21, 1984 Page Six Neil Grigg commented that water rights are under Colorado law and the Colorado Constitution. Thus, he presumes that it isn't possible for someone to have a water right for Colorado that could be used in another state. Paul Eckman added that he wouldn't think a party could get a new appropriation by diverting water in Colorado and applying it to beneficial use outside of Colorado. Neil Grigg went on to ask what are the pitfalls in leasing water; for example, the temporary leasing of water where the issue could become one of federal rather than state law? Norm Evans confirmed that this is a big issue. He recently attended a Western States Conference in Utah where this was an important item for discussion. The feelings of state agencies generally are that it is not a good idea. There are, however, feelings among others that suggest that the supreme court cases of exporting water between states are leading somewhat in the direction that water rights can't be held exclusively within a state except to protect the state's citizens from shortages, and that states must have a plan to show that it is necessary to deny the export of water to avoid shortages. Many think this trend tears down the notion of states' exclusive ownership of the water. Neil Grigg mentioned a case between two southeastern states, where this situation occurred. There, it became apparent that only a small legal barrier exists in these cases. Therefore, it is certainly something to watch. Norm Evans commented that this whole situation suggests to him that states need to get into the business of at least developing water plans. Neil Grigg suggested that, if this is a concern to us as a local Water Board, could one of our committees study that in order to work out any strategy we might take; for example, a letter to the governor or to the Water Conservation Board. Perhaps this could be a task for the Legislative Committee. Dave Stewart told the Board about another concern which occurred to him when he attended the AWWA Conference last week. A paper was given by the City of Boulder on their hydro -electric potential when they are "bringing their water down." Should we look at hydro -electric for our new water treatment plant now since there is such a long waiting time to get something going? Mike Smith said that we have included, in the design contract, a feasibility study of hydro power. Mr. Smith added that one of the things we must quickly address is making application for a preliminary permit so someone else doesn't file one. Dave Stewart explained that anyone can file on a place to generate electric power and get a permit, and if it were installed, it would have to be used. Mr. Smith said that the problem would be installing it. The party with the permit could not install it on City property, but the permit itself would remain a problem, since the City might be forced to purchase it. As for the new treatment plant, there would be excess energy generated with hydro power, but most would be used on site. Of course, many of the problems in this area need to be worked out. Water Board Minutes September 21, 1984 Page Seven Mary Lou Smith said she is interested in getting copies of schematics that show the ditch systems and also the district boundaries. The staff will try to provide both for all Board members. Tom Moore suggested that copies of those kinds of maps and charts be posted on the conference room walls, for references when the need arises. Tom Sanders wanted to commend the City staff for the Michigan Ditch tour on September 7. Except for the weather, he was impressed with the arrangements and with what he saw. The other Board members who were there concurred. There were also positive reactions to the Sludge Farm tour, the Windy Gap tour and the Big Thompson Eastern Slope tour. Since there was no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 4:20 p.m. m ;'2t« J Water BoOrd Secretary CITY OF FORT COLLINS • WATER UTILITIES WATER BOARD Subcommittees Engineering Committee Neil Grigg, Chairman Mort Bittinger Ray Glabach Jim O'Brien Tom Sanders John Scott Dave Stewart Water Credits functions will be absorbed by this committee Utilities Service Committee Bernie Cain, Chairman Henry Caulfield • Ray Glabach Tom Moore Regionalization and Metropolitan issues will be addressed here. Conservation and Public Education David Stewart, Chairman Bernie Cain Jim O'Brien Tom Sanders Mary Lou Smith Legislative and Finance Committee Henry Caulfield, Chairman Mort Bittinger Neil Grigg Program Evaluation Committee Ray Glabach, Chairman Bernie Cain Henry Caulfield Mary Lou Smith Dave Stewart Chairman Norman A. Evans is an ex-officio member of all committees. WATER UTILITIES 700 Wood Street . P.O. Box 580 . Fort Collins. Colorado 80522 . 1303) 221-6681 221-6685