HomeMy WebLinkAboutAir Quality Advisory Board - Minutes - 01/24/2006MINUTES
CITY OF FORT COLLINS
AIR QUALITY ADVISORY BOARD
REGULAR MEETING
200 WEST MOUNTAIN AVENUE
January 24, 2006
For Reference: Eric Levine, Chair - 493-3641
David Roy, Council Liaison - 407-7393
Lucinda Smith — Staff Liaison 224-6085
Board Members Present
Eric Levine, Dale Adamy, Dave Dietrich, Nancy York, Kip Carrico
Board Members Absent
Bruce Macdonald, Gregory McMaster, Cherie Trine
Staff Present
Natural Resources Department: Lucinda Smith
CPES Admin: Patty Storm
Guests
None
The meeting was called to order at 5:35 p.m.
Minutes
The minutes of the December 20, 2005 meeting were unanimously approved.
Public Comment
There were no public comments at this meeting.
Welcome and New Member Introduction
Board members welcomed new board member Dale Adamy. Introductions were made.
Recognition of Departing Board Member
Longtime Board Member Linda Stanley resigned her seat on the AQAB in order to serve on the
newly formed Land Conservation and Stewardship Board. Linda has served on the AQAB for
many years serving not only as a board member but as Chair, and Vice Chair. The Board
recognized her many accomplishments over the years.
Work Planning for 2006
• Smith: Last year we laid out a schedule of when items would come before the Board. Some of
the issues have a timeframe associated with them, some of the issues have flexibility, and then
there are issues that have no timeframe. We could also talk about if we want to form any
subcommittees to work on any of these issues. If not, how do you want to incorporate some of
the other things that are on your work plan that aren't on the list that I've proposed? Smith
referred to the Draft Schedule that was included in the packet. All of the items in cryptic form
are on this one page. The actual work plan was not included, but if anyone wants a copy for
tonight, I can provide that.
Air Quality Advisory Board
January 24, 2006
Page 2
For tonight, we know what the agenda is. Next month, Melissa will report on the air quality results
— the benefits calculation from the Track -to -Win program. While the winners have not yet been
selected, they will be by the February Council Meeting. The Mayor has been asked to present the
gifts at the February 7"' Council Meeting during the Proclamation segment. They are still waiting
for confirmation.
If the Board wants some general outreach like input on marketing plans, then we could talk about
ideas for outreach. We could also talk about our plans to address ozone, both education and
incentive and get your input.
• York: I've looked at the Council's schedule and they're doing things that we're interested in.
• Levine: The Truck Mobility Study.
• York: In February, Council is meeting the same night we are.
• Smith: Mark Jackson is lead for that project and he said he'd be glad to give a presentation to
the Board. This is the non -route based approach.
• York: It is possible that we could go to the Council Meeting and listen to the discussion.
• Smith: If, in fact, it would be the first item on the Work Session agenda, it would start at 6:00
and could last between 30 and 60 minutes.
• Levine: As far as that goes, I don't see anything listed concerning that study at any regular
Council meeting. Is Council giving direction?
• Smith: I don't think they will be asking for Council action with this Work Session, but I'm not
sure.
• Levine: I'm trying to figure out where the AQAB fits in.
• York: Could we watch it on TV?
• Levine: It's cable.
• Smith: I don't think there's an outlet in here.
• Storm: They video stream the Work Sessions and Council Meetings.
• Smith: Maybe we could hook up a computer monitor.
• Levine: How about wireless?
• Smith: Let's talk about all the items you saw on the Six Month Planning Calendar.
• York: In March, they're doing the Transit Master Plan, the Airport Master Plan and
Transportation Demand Management.
• Levine: Highway 392 — We've been hearing a lot about that and the Environmental Overview
Study. I'm wondering if besides the land issues of the environment, if air quality is ever a part
of Environmental Impact Studies.
• Smith: I think it's important to think about which things you want to focus on, and to do that
you'll need more information about what's coming up. I'm sorry I can't tell you the end product
of the Truck Mobility Study.
• Levine: This is one item where the timeframe doesn't work for us to be able to weigh in before
Council, but there's a possibility with the other issues.
• Carrico: So, Nancy, are you suggesting that we talk about the Transit Master Plan and
Highway 392 at the February meeting?
• York: Well, it would be really good if we could, and they probably have materials available.
• Smith: Yes, CDOT came to the Transportation Board to talk about that last Wednesday. And I
think specifically, Highway 392 was one of the items on the agenda. So, you're right — they
could probably come in February and talk about that, and perhaps the Transit Master Plan
Update. Those are generally related to your Work Plan items.
Air Quality Advisory Board
January 24, 2006
Page 3
• York: I'm also very curious about the Airport Master Plan.
• Smith: That's another big, long ongoing project. There have been some questions raised not
just about air quality, but other environmental issues — wildlife corridors, runoff.
• York: It appears on the Council's regular April 18t' meeting.
• Smith: Are there any others?
• Levine: TDM — Transportation Demand Management.
• Smith: Maybe what I should do is find out from the people involved in bringing these items
what are the intended outcomes at these meetings, then talk with Eric about which issues to
put on the February agenda. It can't be all of them; maybe just one or two key issues.
• York: It would be important to just get the materials so we can look at them and have a
discussion. We may want to weigh in on some of them.
• Levine: Absolutely.
• Smith: I'll work with Eric. The Work Sessions are now video-taped presentations because
they're trying to cut back on paper material that Council reads, so it's not as easy to share the
materials. Patty do you even know if we can get a hold of those video tapes.
• Storm: I've gotten tapes for Greg before —just bits and pieces of the meetings that he wants to
hear.
• Smith: DVDs?
• Storm: Yes.
• Smith: That would be one option. To get some copies and send those to you. The
presentations are 15-20 minute staff presentations. Are you interested in that?
• Dietrich: Sure.
• Carrico: Sure.
• Smith: They normally tape one or two Wednesdays prior to the Work Session, so tapes won't
be available on issues scheduled later in the year on the Six Month Planning Calendar. I could
still find out the gist of the item.
• Levine: Are they going to DVDs specifically as opposed to PowerPoint presentations?
• Smith: The DVD is of the PowerPoint presentation.
• Levine: OK. That means though there would have to be an actual PowerPoint presentation, so
we could get that material in addition to the DVD.
• Smith: I didn't really see anything else. It's all coming up the end of April or towards the end of
May.
• York: The Transportation Maintenance Fee is another one.
• Smith: I think that one is best addressed by the Transportation Board. There is a relationship
to air quality, but it's less direct than all the others.
• York: I know it is, but I would expect to weigh in on transit rather than asphalt.
• Smith: I see what you're saying. The other thing that's interesting is from my experience,
typically in the past, staff working on these types of projects would often request to come to the
Air Quality Board — they kind of made a circuit. That's not happening much right now, and
may be the result of reduced resources. I will find out and let you know. I'll work with Eric on
that.
• Levine: That is one of my interests, and one of the trends that I've noticed. In the past, we've
had lots of presentations by staff — many presentations about the various City Plans, lots of
presentations on Transportation Plans, various growth plans of the City because it all is tied to
air quality. My experience is that it served a duel purpose. It got staff aware of air quality
issues. They would make their presentations, then have a host of questions, most of which
were concerned with air quality. They couldn't answer all of them, but they would get back to
Air Quality Advisory Board
January 24, 2006
Page 4
us. It was a good learning experience both ways. I think it tends to make staff more cognizant
of various City issues, and some of the larger issues that they're dealing with their projects. It
does serve a useful purpose. We had a good presentation last month — but that was the
exception rather than the rule.
Smith: That presentation was requested by you — the Board. But, they were not preparing to
bring anything to Council so it was understandable that the Board would make that request. It's
also true that some of the major plans go through 5-year planning cycles like City Plan and the
Transportation Master Plan. Like Eric said, there are some neighborhood scale plans that are
being developed — like the North College Corridor Plan — that maybe the Board might be
interested in weighing in on that as well. So, I think this gives us a list of some good things. I'll
find out more.
So, I guess we can assume that there's going to be one or two Council -related items in
February. And there could be in March as well when you look at the timing of these other
things.
Levine: Do you want to continue to go down the list?
Smith: It's not going to be possible to do all those things in February with the Track -to -Win
Summary, provide input on marketing plans, ozone plans and hear about two other items.
March might be a good opportunity, depending on what else is coming up, to provide an update
on the CMAQ Hi -Emitter project because the project plan will have been flushed out by then.
Probably in April, possibly as late as May, we'll begin recruiting cars. That's lower priority and
could be done by memo if necessary. Kathy Collier really wants to give an update on the
Climate Wise Program. Brian said he could come to the Board and give an update on the
radon project any time starting in March. That's when data will begin coming in. It actually may
take longer than expected to complete the whole project. I'm thinking that's a big enough
project that you would want an interim presentation. Where the data are going and how the
project is progressing.
Dietrich: How long is the project?
Smith: It's supposed to be completed by summer, but the consultant they hired has less
capacity to do a lot of testing. It's not really clear how long it's going to take to test 75 - 100
homes, so it may extend into the summer, which is longer than we originally thought.
Levine: The Radon Ordinance that specifies we have passive radon for all new single and
condo -type residential structures in Fort Collins. We don't have any requirements to inform the
buyer necessarily of how efficient the system is after it's built. This study is the way by which
we hopefully know if the builder's are doing it right, what the levels are and how effective the
systems are. We can turn passive into active systems. So, that would be an informed -buyers
decision. I would say sooner. If we have data that's meaningful, because, if it's not being done
right or isn't the remedy we think it is for some reason, or there's some problem with it, we
should jump on it and get to Council as soon as possible and try to correct it. These things are
really important. We've had presentations of the various energy efficiency building codes,
building inspections and we've had great presentations by Doug Swartz, where we saw
pictures of homes with no insulation in the attic. We all agreed at that time when we have a
new program, or a new ordinance or new way of doing something, it's good to use all your
resources at the beginning of the process and get things squared away to get as much
information as possible.
York: When does that study start?
Levine: Just about now.
Air Quality Advisory Board
January 24, 2006
Page 5
• Smith: It has started in that the consulting team has been hired, and they're in the process of
trying to get volunteer households to participate. They haven't actually done any sampling yet,
but they might in two weeks.
• York: I'd like to release that slot in April. I bet they won't actively start testing until mid -
February.
• Levine: We've been working on this forever. I was on two radon action task forces — the first
one was very involved and had a lot of builders who put that into their product — like Aspen
Construction. We have some builders who have done this forever and have done a great job.
They know all of the pitfalls, and all now all of a sudden we have some new builders that
ostensibly haven't been doing this. I would think there could be a tremendous variation
between the two. I have a lot of confidence in the people who have been doing this for a long
time.
• Smith: This is Code prescribing how it should be done, but there is also Code related to new
home construction.
• Levine: The results could be very reassuring for all of us.
• Dietrich: I would doubt the consultants would have any results by March.
• York: April.
• Levine: If we don't have enough data to show anything meaningful, then I would say let's do
something else.
• Smith: I think the protocol is cap on — test for 24 hours — put cap on, let it equalize for 48
hours, then do another 24 hour test. It's something like that. Some percentage of houses will
likely receive a more in-depth real-time test — not a net measurement over 24 hours. That was
an addition the contactor put -in his proposal. That's more related to dosage and exposure.
That will be interesting information and I'm not sure how they will select 10 percent of the
houses, or when they're going to do that, but it will be interesting.
May is the likely target date for a joint meeting with the Transportation Board to hear about the
results from the VMT Best Practices Study. It is on the schedule on their Work Plan for April,
but Brian thinks it's probably going to slip a month, but not too much more. So, I think May is a
good time and Brian is beginning to talk with the T-Board Chair about scheduling that joint
meeting.
• Levine: When do they meet?
• Smith: On the third Wednesday. I don't know how the two boards want to work that out, and
we don't have to address that now, but it is something that's coming up. Is the third
Wednesday potentially workable for everyone in May?
• York: I have another meeting, but can skip it.
• Levine: There's plenty of time to put that together.
• Smith: Maybe radon follow-up in June is too soon. I think we're just going to have to see how
the project goes, and schedule another presentation once we have the results, unless there's
something that's been uncovered by the first set of results.
• Levine: As soon as there's something meaningful, I'd like the Board to see it. Too early in the
curve is not a good use of our time.
• Smith: Would there be value to a wood smoke program summary after the wood smoke
season is over? That could easily be done by memo, but it could also be a function of the
discussion we're going to have later this evening. July — Chronic Wasting Disease — I'm not
aware of any timeframe on that, so I just used it as a place marker. To get the presenters to
Air Quality Advisory Board
January 24, 2006
Page 6
come and talk about it helps to have a predetermined date. Let's see — West Nile Virus review.
Eric, should we move that up? The Board recommended that West Nile Virus Task Force be
reconvened.
• Levine: Or a task force.
• Smith: It was to look at the status of the West Nile season in 2006 and possibly make
recommendations as it relates to what the City will do with West Nile in 2007. 1 was trying to
find a time when the season will nearly be over, but still be able to provide some input for the
budget — if there are any budget adjustments. What's why I was thinking of September.
• Dietrich: That seems like a good target.
• Levine: Would we have time to make a budget recommendation?
• Smith: I honestly don't know what's going to happen with a mid -course correction on the
budget, but I think September would be a reasonable time frame. Patty, with working with
Greg, does this seem reasonable?
• Storm: I honestly don't know. With Budgeting for Outcomes, we just don't have a grasp on the
budget process yet. We're not really sure how it's going to work yet.
• Smith: Let's tentatively leave it for September, and as it becomes more clear, we can move it if
needed.
• Levine: I think it would be more important for the Board to have a timeframe where they could
weigh in and not have to wait until the next West Nile season. I suspect there won't be a West
Nile season — like there hasn't been for the last two years. It's more a thing of the past than the
future.
• Smith: Then do you want to have it in July or August?
• Levine: It would be good to have another discussion before we make a recommendation, but
only if there is no problem for us to weigh in. If you could get a sense of that we could do either
of those.
• Smith: I'll try.
• York: Don't you think the budget will be about the same time as this year's budget?
• Smith: No, I don't. Only because it was such a huge update process last year. The input was
provided as early as summer, even though Council didn't vote on the budget until November.
But technically, the 2007 budget is set — it's just a matter of adjustments. I do think that
happens at a later time frame. It has in the past. I'll check and see if I can find out anything
more. Maybe Finance will have an idea on that.
October — the Hi -Emitter Project Summary. That could be an important project for the Board.
Whenever the project is ultimately finished and there are some recommendations, then the
Board can look at the information and decide whether you think based on it, there should be a
recommendation to Council about having a local program or not. That's one of the objectives
of the Hi -Emitter Pilot. I think October is the right timeframe because the fiscal year for the
federal government ends then, and technically, the project ends then.
The rest are just suggestions. I'm going to see about gaining support for developing revised
strategic plans about meeting the City's greenhouse goals because the most recent status
report is not on track to meet the 2010 goal. I think that if the City is committed to meeting that
goal, we need to come up with some more measures. I can work on that, and the end of the
year would be a good time for the Board to weigh in.
There's something on your Work Plan about an update on the landfill methane emissions and
perhaps to install a methane emissions system. We could have Steve Harem come speak to
Air Quality Advisory Board
January 24, 2006
Page 7
us about it or it could be done by memo. Antidotally, what I'm hearing now is it's out in the
future. At least until 2015 or later because of the new sampling methodology that has caused
sample emissions of non -methane organic compounds to drop way below the threshold.
Previously, the landfill was really close to the threshold for needing a collections system.
• Levine: Do you know anything more about it — that is, the new methodology?
• Smith: We could have someone from Larimer County come in and talk about it.
• Levine: Sure, if we have time — it's not really high priority for me.
• Dietrich: Are there expansion plans for the landfill?
• Smith: I should know this and I don't really. We could either have Susie or someone from
Larimer County talk to us about the future of the landfill. That may have actually caused the
change in sampling methodology
There are also some items on your Work Plan that are not on the list and some are fairly hefty
items. The first one is to investigate the feasibility of calculating the real cost of the different
modes of transportation with the goal of disseminating this information to the Council and to the
public. This is not on the staff work plan and has the potential for subcommittee work.
• York: I was thinking that I might make a motion when we get to alternative fuels that we
investigate the air quality issues of alternative fuel use and production. The importance of it is
because of the CDOT 1-25 Corridor Study, the Loveland Airport, and the pending RTA. Last
week Tracy said he could get us the air quality differences for natural gas versus diesel. He
talked about percentages from engine maintenance.
• Smith: I think Eric also had that flagged as an information request. I need to follow up with
Tracy.
• Levine: Yeah, there were a few requests for information that came out of that meeting.
• Smith: Maybe when we go over the minutes, we could summarize those to make sure I have
them all down.
• York: If we were to investigate those issues about alternative fuels that would be a good place
to start.
• Levine: That's our next agenda item.
• York: And to also evaluate health impacts.
• Smith: So, you're pointing out that there's a relationship between those three.
• Levine: That would be a great fit for our former Vice Chair, as an economist. Maybe I'll drop
her a note.
• Smith: I'm not as clear on the relationship between alternative fuels and alternative modes.
They both have an air quality benefit. If I heard you right Nancy, I think you were saying that on
the next agenda item you might make a recommendation to investigate the air quality benefits
of alternative fuels.
• York: To evaluate the air quality issues — I said.
• Smith: OK. Do you think it also relates to this issue of calculating the real costs of modes of
transportation?
• York: It just touches on it. It might be a good place to start to ascertain the real cost of modes
of transportation.
• Smith: We tried to do that through the Auto Subsidy Study using a procedure that ICLEI laid
out in 2001. We hired a CSU grad student to do that study and it petered out because there
wasn't agreement within the City about how the costs were allocated. Like the cost of roads,
where should they be allocated? Are they a public good that should be there anyway? Many
Air Quality Advisory Board
January 24, 2006
Page 8
modes do use a paved surface, so that's where the project ran into trouble. Trying to make
actual calculations and agreement about the premise behind it.
• York: You know, I think somebody has already done that.
• Levine: That's what I was going to suggest. Let's not reinvent the wheel.
• York: On Saturday morning David Roy had a community meeting on forming a grid system for
transit. Some woman in the back stood up and said it was $450 for cars. I didn't catch the gist
of it, but I think it's been done.
• Smith: For Fort Collins?
• York: Not for Fort Collins.
• Levine: A real cost has a lot of value judgments. It makes it impossible.
• Dietrich: The difficult part is relating transportation costs to hospitals, police, fire. The accident
rate, the timing of the accident rate.
• Levine: It's more realistic to look at partial costs.
• Dietrich: The mode calculation is there. What's biodiesel versus gasoline?
• Levine: An then there are also the costs not to us an as entity or even the State of Colorado,
because we're paying for it at the national level. Those are the real costs.
• Dietrich: There's a relationship between the number of automobiles on the road and police and
fire. You can make some approximations.
• Smith: It might be good to start thinking about the ultimate goal you have in mind, which I
assume is to raise public awareness and to encourage the use of alternative modes.
• Levine: Absolutely.
• Smith: I'm just trying to think abut what would be the most effective use of your time to get to
that goal.
• Levine: The study may show that all single occupancy in the gigantic pick-up trucks are the
most harmful.
• Smith: How does the Board want to address this item, or do you want to wait and see and
revisit it later in the year? See how your work plan is looking and how many Council -related
things will be taking up your time. That's one possibility. Another possibility would be to use
some of that national or generic information and put a Soapbox in the Coloradoan.
• York: I think evaluating a few is a really good place to start because they have cost impacts
and health impacts.
• Smith: That information is readily available. There may be come controversy over it. The cost
of fuel per gallon per average trip length and associated health impacts — positive or negative.
• Dietrich: Define several achievable goals. Perhaps have this as an agenda item in the next
couple of months.
• Levine: Sounds like the real cost of different modes of transportation is just too big in itself to
get your arms around. So, if we're going to do a partial, then why don't we focus on that and
we can have a couple of options to see which ones would be the best fit for our group to work
on. It would be a good piece that we could define and get reputable numbers on.
• Smith: Yes, you could look at what information you need and then decide which ones you want
to do.
• Levine: Why don't we put that on for next month?
• York: When I think about it — CDOT is doing an Environmental Impact Study on the 1-25
Corridor — I went to the meeting last night. That's something that we, as a Board, should be
aware of. They're in Phase 3 where they reduced the options to two packages. One of the
packages has a rail going down the west side of 287 and a rapid bus transit coming down out
of Greeley. So there's a convergence. A lot of bus routes in between crossing various
Air Quality Advisory Board
January24, 2006
Page 9
corridors. This makes me think about evaluating rapid bus transit because it's proposed in our
Transfort Plan for the Mason Street Corridor Study to find out its efficiency.
• Levine: Can I ask a question? In other words, a local commuter rail service down 287?
• York: Down the existing tracks on Mason. Going down past Longmont and over to Boulder.
It's a 97 minute trip.
• Levine: To where?
• York: Union Station
• Levine: That's a 97 minute trip — going all around like that?
• York: There's talk about trying to eliminate going over to Boulder.
• Levine: My vision would be high speed commuter rail going right down 1-25, so every driver on
1-25 could see how much better they could be doing. When 1-25 is a parking lot, all those
people on the train would be transit envy — that would be the biggest incentive.
• York: Their other proposal is to have a rapid bus transit down 1-25 and having bus feeders into
bus rapid transit with its own lane. They're trying to determine how to make decisions on the
efficiencies of the fuel, the kinds of fuels being used, and our buses that run more and more on
natural gas for air quality benefits and costs.
• Levine: One unscheduled item that I think a lot of board members will be interested in is diesel.
We're kind of transitioning into the next item. We don't have to do it all at once. We have
some questions for the staff as far as vehicles. I think it was John Deere who has the better
engines that the City was more interested in and they got rave reviews. The John Deere folks
have emissions studies.
• Carrico: For a lot of the parameters, the diesel emissions will drop. I think the mandatory
program starts next year. There's probably a study that gives a better view.
• Levine: We're looking at air toxins as well as its particulants.
• Smith: I see how this relates to the next item.
• Levine: We'll put that on our Work Plan somewhere.
• York: Does the Board feel like it would be beneficial to evaluate different fuels for the different
modes of transportation, so we could provide that information to City Council?
• Levine: I'm a little confused. Different fuels for different modes of transportation? Obviously,
busses can use compressed natural gas, gasoline and hydrogen (which will be in the future).
There's also diesel and biodiesel.
• York: I was thinking about rapid bus transit and commuter rail. That's what I'm interested in.
Those are the things that are being considered for our region.
• Levine: We have a bus system right now. We have different choices as far as how we run the
bus system and what fuels we use.
• Smith: I think it might be more productive to focus on buses in Fort Collins. It's an interesting
question about the 1-25 Corridor Study, but City Council doesn't know if or how they might
weigh in on that Study. I think providing input to City Council about Transfort busses fueling
capability is really relevant.
• Levine: Denver and the region has done a lot with light rail. Some of that awareness has
filtered down. The ridership is more than the naysayers predicted.
• York: That's been consistent. Because FoxTrot, the bus that runs between Fort Collins and
Loveland, had far greater ridership than anticipated. At the meeting last night, during the
conversation about the CDOT Study, I really got the impression that people are interested in
some form of transit rather than lanes. Although many references were made to the condition
of 1-25 between here and Denver. But something that's interesting is that they indicated in this
area, and they're looking at the 2030 Plan, is that congestion is still going to occur. The
Air Quality Advisory Board
January 24, 2006
Page 10
congestion is between Fort Collins and just south of Loveland down to Denver. I find that quite
interesting. There are land use issues and there are ways to mitigate besides widening the
road. They're thinking 8 lanes in those congested areas.
• Levine: It worked for L.A., so why couldn't it work for us?
• Levine: Should we move on to Alternative Fuels?
• Smith: I think we're finished talking about the schedule.
• Levine: Do any Board Members have any suggestions for the 2006 Work Plan?
• Dietrich: I think it's here — about the CSU transit issues. There are new paradigms to work
with CSU to fund transit systems.
• Smith: I think at the same time there was a suggestion that the discussion happen with the
Transportation Board. The Transportation Board isn't aware of it yet. Are you all interested in
pursuing a joint conversation with the Transportation Board about funding transit?
• Levine: CSU's relatively unexpected actions hurt TransFort a lot this year.
• York: People say our bus system is for CSU.
• Levine: Not only is it for CSU, but TransFort folks have asked for our advice and shown us
their strategy of what they wanted to do. They wanted to build on strengths and concentrate on
the core, which meant CSU. They had built the ridership up. There were roots that were gone
for primarily non-CSU residents of Fort Collins that were nixed in order to concentrate on CSU.
• Dietrich: Another thing that we didn't talk about was building that gigantic hospital at Centerra.
Centerra built no new roads. Its ability to connect Fort Collins to that facility is no where in any
plan. Is there any bus service? Can the hospital participate? They have a monopoly in this
area to provide health care, and might be enticed to provide some type of public service to
transport their employees — their customers?
• York: They have a shuttle from the hospital on Lemay to the hospital on Harmony.
• Dietrich: It would be good if we could get them to fund a bus between those three facilities.
• Smith: Smart Trips was trying to work with the hospital complex and businesses on Harmony
to have a business -funded transit corridor. They were making good progress, but didn't quite
get there.
• Dietrich: The City shouldn't have to carry the burden.
• Levine: This gets into the whole land use/transportation aspect — LUTRAQ.
• Dietrich: Exactly. We have no control over the land use. Centerra is there — it's done. There's
no new roads into Centerra — I don't know how that was possible. How are people going to get
to and from — use 1-25 or back dirt roads. The best influence we can have on the 1-25 Corridor
is to take local action rather than just making 1-25 wider.
• Levine — You know what I said the advertising of the commuter rail on 1-25 — is obviously what
Centerra is all about. Advertising the shopping — All of those millions of motorists that use 1-25
Corridor. It's one gigantic free advertising spot.
• Dietrich: They are not participating at all in any solution.
• York: My understanding is that they also are trying to get CDOT to pay for the interchange
upgrades even though they have $70 million earmarked in the tax package.
• Levine: They call them upgrades. It almost an euphemism — If there are shortfalls, it's caused
primarily by them.
• Smith: Does the whole Board want to talk about that broader issue? It seems to me that would
be a good question to talk about with the Transportation Board.
• Dietrich: That's another question - Is that something that the Transportation Board is already
working on?
Air Quality Advisory Board
January 24, 2006
Page 11
• Smith: Their Work Plan is so comprehensive, I don't know how they could possibly address it
all. But if they knew there was interest, I could talk to Mark Jackson about the Transportation
Board's interest in the specific issue of CSU funding as an organization for transit, and the
broader question of all service entities contributing to TransFort costs. I'll let you know if
they're interested.
• York: There's also Poudre R-1 School District. They have their own busses. But if we had a
transportation system that served all of Fort Collins, maybe Dial -a -Ride could reduce services
and there would be money savings with Poudre R-1.
• Levine: Dave you brought that up a couple of meetings ago. There's no bus route servicing
the new high school. We have an inadequate infrastructure policy in Fort Collins. How can we
have anything that would be nailed down to call it a policy when you get a new high school and
you don't get basic services.
• Dietrich: The Charter School on East Prospect — No neighborhood services.
• Levine: I'd love to bring staff in to address this issue. We need to listen to what their problems
are, but they also need to listen to our perspective.
• Smith: Would that be Transit Planning Staff?
• Levine: I don't know, but how do we get into the situation where there are schools and no
services?
• Dietrich: The City may have no control over this.
• Smith: Yeah, probably not as much control as other things.
• York: I wonder if the schools are required to meet the adequate public facilities policy?
• Dietrich: They don't.
• Smith: That's probably the factor.
• York: The other thing included in adequate public facilities could be transit, but I have a notion
that that's not in the mix of adequate public facilities.
• Dietrich: It would be interesting to know, in general, how these policies apply. Do they apply to
the hospital?
• Levine: All we've been talking about is the land use/transportation issues.
• Dietrich: Is that something that someone else is already dealing with?
• Levine: Well, you know they're not dealing with it.
• Smith: Actually, we could look at the Transportation Board's Work Plan, but I think a better way
would be to talk with their staff liaison. Their Work Plan has so much on it, I don't really think
they will get to all of it. That still leaves the questions you raised about generally what is
covered in adequate public facilities, and what construction is required to meet them. I think
school properties are exempt from certain requirements.
• Dietich: I wonder is that state law? I know CSU is.
• Smith: I think it is. Because there are some other things that govern school impact fees at the
state level.
• Dietrich: I wouldn't mind a presentation on how these laws apply.
• York: What keeps running in my mind is that we are an Air Quality Board.
• Dietrich: This really bugs me. There's a charter school, Liberty Commons on East Prospect in
Reynolds Business Park. There is no public transportation, and no close neighborhoods.
Every child that attends that school has to be driven. The vehicle miles traveled to that school
is phenomenal. Every day .... Twice a day. Generally one or two kids per car. Besides that,
they tie up all the other traffic because the transportation corridors are not properly designed
out there. So, it's causing a lot of pollution, and it's educating each one of those kids at that
school that they need to be driven everywhere.
Air Quality Advisory Board
January 24, 2006
Page 12
• Levine: That's the kind of thing that we talked about with the City Plan updates and the drive-
thru strategies. It seemed to me that when a kid watches mom go to the bank - drive thru -
then get lunch - drive thru. There's no reason to ever not leave your car.
• Dietrich: That's where we have a lot of air quality issues. That's VMT big time. How would
you like to get 30% of the traffic off the roads? It could be done immediately in Fort Collins. All
we'd have to do is not have kids driving to school, and provide school busses to make that
happen. Unfortunately, there's no money.
• Levine: I usually don't find stuff as good as that in my Sierra Club magazine. I liked the article
- it was very short and exactly what we were looking at. I was surprised at how fast that came
to be. Basically they said they didn't have the money for grandiose projects at all. This is not a
big public subsidy. They had the will and I'm assuming they had all the entities working
together.
• Dietrich: Look at the City of Curitiba, Brazil with 10.7 million people — You have to have public
transportation.
• Levine: I'm sure density made some of that possible.
• York: This flyer that I just passed out is from a group that advocates public transportation and it
sounds like there's some interest in a citizen initiative.
• Levine: If we're going to cover Alternative Fuels — Well, basically all the information is in the
minutes from the last meeting. The first thing I mentioned is the performance of the natural gas
engines and diesel standards now and in 2007. One of my main concerns is - Well, it's
actually in the minutes on page 5. Tracy said the official City policy is compressed natural gas
for future bus purchases. And they said "yes", but there's no written policy, and it seems to me
if there is no written policy, then there are no parameters defining when we purchase new
vehicles or what the different prices are. I would think a policy would have to have some
contingencies that fit within about 10%. If there is nothing in writing anywhere, then there really
is no policy.
• Smith: By the way, I did confirm that, because I wasn't really clear either. Specifically,
regarding the purchase of CNG fueled busses for TransFort. As far as I know, it's not written
down, but Tracy reiterated that he really believes the City is committed to it because they've
invested in the fueling structure and they're about to receive a CNG buss. I know that doesn't
address any future purchases, but he feels things are on track. But Eric is right, there is no
written policy.
• Levine: In the past, we've had some great, long time City staff members championing issues. I
had a lot of confidence in them, and I knew the City was moving forward. Then all of a sudden,
they aren't working for the City any longer. The private sector had gobbled them up. It was
maybe good for them, but not necessarily the best for the City, and lacking a real policy
framework. I'm always concerned when we rely on individuals rather than actual public policy.
• Dietrich: Could that be a City Plan urban -type policy?
• Smith: That's really a good question. I think that's too specific to be a City Plan -type of policy.
There is an Administrative Policies book that's somewhat general. I looked through it and
couldn't find anything that addressed alternative fuels.
• York: Or, clean fuels? It seems to me that there's something about their commitment to using
the cleanest fuels.
• Levine: That's what the plan was for the old Mason Street Corridor.
• Smith: That was documented in the Mason Street Corridor Plan. The written policies or
guidelines I could find related to this issue is there's one in the Action Plan for Sustainability
and it states (not Council adopted — it's approved by the Executive Lead Team) but it states the
Air Quality Advisory Board
January 24, 2006
Page 13
goal is to purchase the highest fuel efficient and/or lowest emission vehicles for the requested
application.
• Levine: I don't like that word in there — what's a goal?
• Smith: And then a target is more specific and it has to do with purchasing three to five of the
highest...... In the most recent Climate Status Report, which is really not approved by anyone,
but it was developed by the Energy Management Team, the recommended feature action is to
ensure life cycle costing for vehicle purchases while considering pollution emissions. The life
cycle costing is an important component. We can look at those printed words, and it's not the
force of law. The Air Quality Plan — this is policy — Policy AQ 16 says — lead by example. The
City will make efforts to reduce and mitigate its own air pollution emissions before asking or
requiring others to reduce and mitigate their emissions. That sets the intent. Then, there's the
BFO offer that obviously pays for biodiesel. Fort Collins was a founding member of the Clean
Cities Coalition. So that carries with it an unstated intent commitment to alternative fuels.
There is a policy to establish hydrogen related projects within the City — excuse me, it's not a
policy but rather a resolution passed in 2002. There's another resolution that was passed back
in 1997. The language in it is really good. My sense is that resolutions that were passed by
prior Councils don't carry much weight. I'll read it for you. 'It provides that the City should
regularly evaluate the latest technologies using alternative fuels for transportation and to the
greatest extent practicable, apply those technologies to the operation of city vehicles in order to
provide energy efficient transportation'.
• Levine: I remember that. I worked on that.
• Smith: So, we could pull this up. It exists as a resolution. This is what I could find that's
written.
• Levine: I don't want to tie the City's arms to something that's not workable but how about a
purchasing policy for specific type of vehicles as in full-sized busses if the cost, without other
mitigating factors, is within 10%, then we purchase the clean fuel automatically, if there are no
other serious mitigating factors — something like that. If it's within a certain amount of cost, the
City is committed.
• Smith: That should be life cycle cost — right?
• Levine: I'm not sure.
• Smith: That would come up. How do you evaluate the cost?
• Levine: It's not only that. Fuel costs can vary. You can have compressed natural gas can go
up or down. That's one of the reasons I asked the staff what are the total operational costs of
TransFort and the fuel costs compared to real costs? I was thinking that infrastructure and
actually hiring people can drive maintenance actually higher so the alternative fuel is not that
important to the City's bottom line. Say 20% of the costs, rather than 80% of the costs. This is
just an example. A large part of the cost is certainly not fuel.
• Dietrich: Back to the resolution. You said that it was passed in 1997?
• Smith: Yes, 1997.
• Dietrich: Once they're passed, they're always there?
• Smith: Well, yes. Theoretically, they are still a resolution of the Council.
• Dietrich: Does Council ever reaffirm a resolution?
• Smith: They could. I mean, I don't see why they couldn't.
• Dietrich: It's not standard procedure?
• Smith: No.
• Dietrich: I'm sure there are resolutions that are totally outdated.
Air Quality Advisory Board
January 24, 2006
Page 14
• Smith: Well, yes. Those are not "taken off the books" as far as I know. What might happen is
a newer resolution addressing the same subject comes forward and sets forth a different intent.
I think this is still in effect. It's just that there isn't generally the urgency to make sure that every
clause in every resolution is adhered to when they're five, ten, fifteen years old.
• Dietrich: To get a resolution like that on Council's mind might be interesting to reaffirm the
resolution.
• Smith: And, there's other good language in this resolution.
• Dietrich: Do you think they would dismiss it saying we already did that?
• Smith: I don't think they would automatically say that. It might make more sense to just
introduce it as a new resolution. It would have the same context, but endorsed by this Council.
• Dietrich: Maybe we could incorporate some changes.
• Smith: This is somewhat related. There's a bill introduced in the State Legislature about
environmentally practical purchasing. It has some language about if the cost is lower or only
reasonably exceeds and if the product quality is the same and can be provided in the same
timeframe and quantities. I am sharing this as an example of purchasing guideline language. I
think the bill said if the cost didn't exceed 5% above the average cost, then entities would be
encouraged to purchase the environmentally preferable product. This is for the State.
• Levine: If the fuel cost is only a fraction of the total cost, say even 10%, then a 10% saving in
fuel cost would equal a several percent saving of total cost. I'd like to know the total TransFort
operating costs, the percent spent on bus purchases, bus maintenance, and fuels costs under
different fuel scenarios. To make any type of decision or recommendation, you need this
information. The cost of compressed natural gas varies so much. We have a fast fuel thing —
after eight vehicles we have to build another one to accommodate more, so there's a big step
increase at eight. It does get complex, but we can't simply it.
• Dietrich: We built that natural gas facility, but there is no written commitment to operate for five
years with x number of busses and evaluate again after a period of time.
• Smith: But they said publicly that the intent is as TransFort busses need to be replaced, they'll
be replaced with CNG busses. That counts for a lot, in my mind. It's just not written down.
• Levine: What if they had a breakthrough in fuel cell busses and they were 1/80t" the cost of
CNG.
• Smith: And what if we were stuck with a CNG Policy?
• Levine: I wouldn't want CNG!
• Smith: It seems like your main concern is just to make sure that the City will continue to seek
out the cleanest fuels as long as it's not exorbitantly costly. From what I've seen generally, the
City is making progress without written policy. I think though, your question was to the
progress. That leads us to the budget, among other things.
• Levine: I guess one of the issues I'm interested in is what will the City look for in alternative
modes in 10 years — 20 years? I guess there's too many factors, but I'm kind of worried about
the automobile -only mode. It will really clog up our transportation corridors.
• York: PTAG (Public Transit Advocacy Group) They are going to work on a citizen initiative.
They feel like we feel about transit. They want a grid system with or without the Mason Street
Corridor. One of the things I'm worried about with the Transportation Maintenance Plan is that
it's an asphalt plan. They've removed $700,000 from the transportation budget. Maybe they
will supplementing with the Transportation Maintenance Plan which will be assessing every
household a certain fee per month. My concern is that transit isn't going to be there. They
always say we build the roads — busses ride on the roads; bikes ride on the roads — It's a multi -
modal avenue. I would like to see if we could get the feasibility of our adequate public facilities
Air Quality Advisory Board
January 24, 2006
Page 15
to include transit. Marty Tharp got past the Council that transit was a primary service. That
has since dropped out. The current budget, for instance, damaged transit. They did some
things to other transportation issues too. There's a great deal of frustration coming from us,
coming from the citizens.
I was impressed with the Sierra Club article because they use buss rapid transit, which is a
fancier buss, and therefore, better received by a cross section of population.
• Levine: They're more efficient too.
• York: They only thing they need is its own lane — in the article.
• Levine: Yeah, it absolutely does. The article says it needs a couple of things.
• Smith: Like an access point for people to get on and off. The main challenge here is
coordinating that with the existing flow of traffic that doesn't flow with high frequency
movement. If I recall, it would need to move at a different pace than the traffic, and that, seems
like one of the major obstacles, assuming that it would be on the transportation grid that exists.
How do you rearrange it?
• Levine: That's what I'm curious about. The article was almost a tease. I really wanted to know
more. How does this work? What, where, how?
• York: The bus stops — well, I couldn't get the notion of how many blocks that was.
• Dietrich: Remember, we're talking about a city moving gigantic flows of people into a central
area.
• York: It says the bus stops every 500-600 meters which is about a 1/3 of a mile or about 4
blocks.
• Dietrich: Going back to the resolution .... There's two ways we can do this. The first would be
a more general approach similar to the existing resolution or the second approach would be
more specific related to a purchasing policy. Eric — while you were gone we talked whether it
would be beneficial to have Council reaffirm the 1997 resolution so its fresh in their minds. So,
which way do we want to go? Do we want a general policy or something more specific related
to purchasing? I would be interested in having Council make the general statement which
provides guidance to the entire City. Who knows, the Council may want to change it, may not
be interested, or may not believe in it. If that happens, then we go in another direction. But it
would be good to know where they're coming from.
• York: There are some free slots to get this on their schedule. The Transportation Maintenance
Fee might be a place to add this next month or the Transit Master Plan. They will have a Work
Session on the Transportation Maintenance Fee and will have another Work Session next May.
The Transit Mast Plan Update is just a Work Session.
• Smith: One possibility might be if you want to make a recommendation — generally along those
lines to Council in relation to one of these upcoming items. I could see a resolution like that
being on the Consent Agenda assuming there was support throughout the City. This type of
resolution is not necessarily something that you would be making a presentation on. You might
prefer to but typically, this kind of conceptual resolution is often on the Consent Agenda.
• Dietrich: The reason for this is that we want to make sure that City staff has guidance to go in
this direction in support of Council.
• Levine: If individuals within the City administration change, which they do, our policy won't
change because there's no reason for it to change.
• Dietrich: The Purchasing Policy thing — I can see Tracy saying we don't want to be tied by that.
• Smith: Our Purchasing Department does not support the Purchasing bill in the legislature.
There are a few specific reasons — the language is extremely vague and there's a reporting
requirement where whoever participates in this has to report to some legislative interim board
Air Quality Advisory Board
January 24, 2006
Page 16
on the cost impact of implementing this policy after one year. So, there are specific reasons
why. I think conceptually, Purchasing does support it, and it occurs to me that we do have an
environmentally preferable purchasing policy. It's an administrative policy that is approved. I
didn't think of it because it's not fuel based, but generic. It's applicable.
Dietrich: We could use this general approach. If there is a general policy, then staff members
would be supportive of the resolution.
Smith: My opinion is that a more generic policy would be more successful than a long term
commitment to do specifically "x" things. I think that would run into problems. I understand
why you would want that.
I want to make sure I'm clear on what you are looking for. There isn't anything that specifically
relates to work on a policy, because so far the board hasn't taken any action whether you want
to do something like that. Do you want this information first?
• Levine: Yes, I would want that information first. I would want to see the information before
making a recommendation. I'd like to see the basic framework — what percentage of the
transaction is this or that.
• Smith: I'm sure it's in the budget, but extracting it might be the hard part.
• York: We need to get the information from Tracy.
• Smith: And that information is about the differences in air pollution emissions that the engine
manufacturers provide.
• York: Yes. And how much cleaner natural gas is.
• Levine: I would like more of a break down.
Wood Smoke
• Levine: I don't have my notes any longer. It seems like the last meeting was a long time ago.
Are there any more volunteers for the Wood Smoke subcommittee?
• York: Today I saw an article that there's an increase in wood smoke because of higher energy
prices.
• Smith: I thought the article was going to be in tomorrow's paper.
• York: Maybe I saw that an "article was coming soon".
• Smith: The reporter just called me today to ask about the wood smoke response line number,
and she said the article should be in tomorrow's paper.
• York: Is there a greater emphasis on wood smoke?
• Smith: Anecdotally there is more wood burning and that's based on talking to the retailers who
are finding more interest in wood burning devices than they used to. Wood sales have actually
gone up, but calls to the wood smoke response line are less than last year. It's also been
warmer, and that's probably a big factor.
• York: I've been monitoring used wood stove sales in the paper as well as wood. They're
haven't been a lot of stoves for sale.
• Levine: When we had that cold snap, I observed in my neighborhood there was a lot of wood
stove activity. I guess with the weather that we're having now we're lucky that we don't have
wood stove air conditioners! There wouldn't be a tree left.
• York: After much discussion with the Committee, you came down to what you wanted to see
with the wood smoke.
• Levine: We need to meet some more.... There are so many questions. We just kind of went
around, and probably didn't use our time the most efficiently. We had a good go -round on
general issues.
Air Quality Advisory Board
January 24, 2006
Page 17
• York: You definitely had something in mind.
• Levine: Point of sale of the homes requiring stoves, upgraded to certified or removed. In
Colorado, there are two types of certification — EPA and Colorado State certifications. They are
one in the same. Catalytic and duel chamber. The rationale being you're not allowed to
purchase a wood stove that is uncertified. A retail store cannot sell an uncertified stove, but
there are a lot of other ways to purchase one. If you're buying a home and want to have a
wood stove, you need to buy a certified unit. If you're buying a home that already has an
uncertified stove installed in it, you're getting a special dispensation to continue to use that unit
as long as you want.
• York: I think you can order uncertified stoves over the internet.
• Smith: But you still have to get a building permit — unless you do it illegally, it has to be
certified. Shipping a wood stove would be expensive. One of the things I remember the
committee talked about was whether we're getting more calls for Zilch loans for wood stoves
than gas. Last year in 2005, both in December and January, the vast majority of loan requests
were upgrades to natural gas — there were 13 upgrades to natural gas, one wood stove
upgrade, one pellet stove and three radon mitigations. That doesn't show a disturbing trend.
Another interesting thing about Zilch loans is that we spent a lot more on Zilch this year. Our
pool of money was $60,000 — we gave over $40,000 and we had never reached that level
before. Next year our pool of money is only $30,000. That's really regrettable. The Committee
also talked about encouraging energy efficiency upgrades to applicants' homes instead of just
upgrading their wood stove. We try to make the point that will have permanent benefits to the
home. Any energy efficiency project needs to meet a 10 year pay back — it should meet it, but
it means you need to go through an energy score rating system to figure it out. So it's not as
easy as saying — well, don't do the wood stove just apply for a Zilch loan for energy efficiency.
What they want to do may or may not be covered by Zilch. The concept is still good though.
• Levine: What about the City's outreach on wood burning. Could we put together costing
information on the various costs of getting into a stove, getting a cleaner stove, upgrading
energy efficiency. What are the benefits? Things like that.
• Smith: That's a great idea. I don't know how easy it would be to compile those costs. It's a
function of how big the home is, how well it's insulated and all those things.
• Levine: You could just say this information is valid for "this sized" typical house.
• Smith: I agree with you. That could be a good selling point. I'm not sure where it would
actually lead. It depends on what you're looking at — dollar costs? Air pollution impacts? Do
you just want to do one room or the whole house?
• Carrico: You could use the utility bill to advertise federal tax incentives for energy efficiency.
• Levine: I don't think I would throw this out if I got it in my utility bill. I think I would read it.
• York: I think that would be great. We could do something through the newspaper.
• Carrico: They actually have seminars at Home Depot. I attended one. They are still on the
steep side of the learning curve.
• Dietrich: Can Zilch be used for water?
• Smith: Solar hot water — yes.
• Dietrich: Can it be used to replace incandescent lights with fluorescent lights.
• Smith: I think there's a minimum loan amount of $500.
• Levine: Compact fluorescents have really come down in price. I have some of the older ones
and they were pretty expensive, but they all had five -to -seven year warranties. What other tax
incentives would go for solar?
Air Quality Advisory Board
January 24, 2006
Page 18
• Carrico: Well, the federal one is 30% on solar thermal or photo -voltaic systems up to a
maximum of $2,000. So, it's a substantial amount particularly for a solar thermal system.
• Dietrich: Do we get Zilch loan requests for upgrades for high efficiency furnaces?
• Smith: We could. The loan pool has to cover gas -to -gas furnace efficiency upgrades. Those
are on the energy efficiency (Utilities) side because it's gas related, and they can only do
electricity -related things. It's not advertised a lot. There's a Project Table that lists the things
that you can do under energy conservation such as: electric demand controller, insulation,
solar space heating, water heating — any kind of space heating that's electric -to -electric
efficiency upgrades. Whole house evaporative cooler, whole house fans and window and door
upgrades. Those are the kinds of things that Zilch covers.
• Dietrich: But, no refrigerators.
• Smith: The Utilities does have the refrigerator recycling program. That's really to get rid of the
old refrigerators; but it is an incentive to get a more efficient refrigerator.
• York: Are you sponsoring the gasoline lawn mower program again this year?
• Smith: Yes. But we are going to require that the retailer provide some incentive as well in
order to participate. If we don't have any participants, I'm not sure what we're going to do.
• Dietrich: So, the reason for the insert — is it specifically wood related or are you trying to
provide a list of alternatives?
• Levine: Now that you mention it, that would be preferable. Yeah, a list of all the different
programs and alternatives on ways to save.
• Smith: Brian Woodruff forwarded a fairly new article in the Daily Grist — it's about woodstoves.
I can forward that email to all of you.
• Dietrich: Sure.
Elect Vice Chair
• Levine: Are we going to try to elect a Vice Chair? At this meeting we don't absolutely need a
Vice Chair.
• York: Greg's not going to be around for a while.
• Levine: Greg's expressed some interest, but he's gone for three months.
• Smith: This is only temporary until April when we re-elect a Chair and Vice -Chair.
• Levine: So, Greg would be gone the whole time.
• Carrico: I'll probably miss at least April and July — I'm not sure of my schedule yet.
• Levine: We have to make sure we have a quorum.
• Smith: By the way, the Council will be looking at reappointing from the existing pool of
applicants.
Minutes
York: I recommend approval of the minutes.
Levine: Any additions — corrections — omissions?
Levine: I had a few small things, but I'm not going there.
Dietrich: I second the motion.
Levine: The minutes are approved.
2005 Air Quality Advisory Board Annual Report
A draft of the 2005 Air Quality Advisory Board Annual Report was passed out to all members.
Levine: Lucinda, when is this due?
Air Quality Advisory Board
January 24, 2006
Page 19
Smith: January 31, 2006.
Levine: I'll be in Florida, but I have access to email.
Smith: The Annual Report goes to Council and also is posted on the web site.
Dietrich: Is it appropriate to use acronyms?
Smith: They should probably be spelled out.
Dietrich: The second major item. The Board spent significant time throughout the year
discussing and giving input on the following issues:
• The 2006/2007 City Budget
Dietrich: Should we add..... on Air Quality Issues.... Or is it obvious?
Smith: Eric — Will you be sending this to the City Clerk or shall I do it? I just want to be clear on
that.
Levine: Why don't you send it.
Dave Dietrich moved that the meeting be adjourned. Kip Carrico seconded the motion.
The meeting adjourned at 8:00 p.m.
by Patty Storm
Executive A - Assistant, CPES Admin
Approved by the Board on� 2006.
Signed
Executive'Ad,Lnin Assistant, CPES Admin
Extension: 6601
Pate