HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - Finance Committee - 02/23/2024 -
Finance Administration
215 N. Mason
2nd Floor
PO Box 580
Fort Collins, CO 80522
970.221.6788
970.221.6782 - fax
fcgov.com
Council Finance Committee Hybrid Meeting
CIC Room / Zoom
February 23, 2024
1:00 - 3:00 pm
Council Attendees: Mayor Arndt, Emily Francis, Kelly Ohlson
Staff: Kelly DiMartino, Tyler Marr, Travis Storin, Denzel Maxwell, Claudia Menendez,
Lance Smith, Jason Graham, Phil Ladd, Ryan Malarky, Andrea Smith,
Gunnar Hale, Monica Martinez, Drew Brooks, Brad Buckman, Dana Hornkohl,
Dave Lenz, Trevor Nash, Terri Runyan, Ginny Sawyer, Renee Reeves,
Lawrence Pollack, Jo Cech, Nina Bodenhamer, Victoria Shaw, Zack Mozer,
Carolyn Koontz
Others: Keivn Jones, Chamber
Meeting called to order at 1:00 pm
Approval of minutes from December 14, 2023, Council Finance Committee Meeting.
Emily Francis moved for approval of the minutes as presented. Mayor Arndt seconded the motion.
The minutes were approved unanimously via roll call by; Mayor Arndt, Emly Francis, Kelly Ohlson.
A. Scheduling & Chair for 2024 – 2025 Council Term – Travis Storin
Mayor Arndt was nominated to be Chairperson of the Council Finance Committee by Emily Francis. Mayor Arndt
was elected as Chairperson unanimously approved by roll call; Kelly Ohlson, Mayor Arndt and Emily Francis.
Upon confirmation from MPT Emily Francis, 2024 Council Finance Committee Meetings will take place as hybrid
meetings on the first Thursday of the month starting in April – 4-6 pm. The next meeting will be held
Wednesday, March 20th 4:30- 7 pm.
B. Utility Rate / Debt Forecast
Lance Smith, Sr. Director, Utilities Strategic Finance
SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION – Utilities 2023 Capital Improvement Plans and Strategic Financial Plan Updates for
the Water, Wastewater and Stormwater Utilities
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this agenda item is to provide the Council Finance Committee with an overview of the planning
processes underway within Fort Collins Utilities. This agenda item will focus on the Water, Wastewater and
Stormwater Enterprise Funds. The Light & Power Enterprise Fund was presented for discussion last December.
The 2023 Capital Improvement Plans (CIPs) and the 2024 Strategic Financial Plans for each utility are outlined and
attached. The resulting investment projections set the basis for beginning the 2025-26 Budgeting For Outcomes
(BFO) cycle. The overall 10-year rate projections for each utility is also presented here along with the forecasted
debt issuance needs.
Recognizing that these utilities share customers, a more comprehensive view is also taken here of how the
combined plans will impact what our community pays for utility services over the coming decade and the levels
of service to be expected for such. The capital improvement plans are intended to maintain the current levels of
service for each utility through sustainable asset renewal plans and targeted new infrastructure. This can be
achieved through the higher than previously anticipated rate increases being planned, and timely debt issuances
shown here.
For the 2025-26 Budgeting For Outcomes process the table below summarizes the impact of the proposed rate
increases for the average residential customer.
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
1. Does the Council Finance Committee support the Utilities Strategic Financial Plan assumptions ahead of
the 2025-26 BFO cycle? In particular, the projected rate increases necessary to meet anticipated revenue
requirements.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION
This is a continuation of the discussion that began in December with the presentation of the Electric utility
financial plan and associated rate and debt forecasts. With this presentation of the Water, Wastewater and
Stormwater utility’s financial picture, any feedback will be utilized in developing the initial 2025-26 budget
offers. After discussing each of these utility services, the comprehensive picture is presented and the forecasted
impacts on customer utility costs can be seen. The feasibility of the financial paths presented is then discussed.
Strategic Financial Planning Process
The strategic financial planning process is intended to provide a long-term plan for the efficient and effective
financial management of each utility in a manner that is consistent with the City’s values and mission and
aligned with the City’s biennial Budget Process and Strategic Planning Process. Much of the long-term strategic
direction for each utility requires significant capital investment spanning more than one budget cycle making a
long-term capital improvement plan necessary to support the strategic plan.
Whereas strategic planning sets the operational direction of where the utilities are going in the future, strategic
financial planning provides a financial context for this movement. The strategic financial plans ensure the long-
2023 2024 2025 2026
Residential Utility Cost Baseline % Change Bill % Change Bill % Change Bill
Electric $84.20 5.0%$88.41 6.0%$93.71 5.0%$98.40
Water $51.00 4.0%$53.04 7.0%$56.75 9.0%$61.86
Wastewater $35.61 4.0%$37.03 6.0%$39.26 8.0%$42.40
Stormwater $22.42 3.0%$23.09 6.0%$24.48 6.0%$25.95
Total $193.23 4.3%$201.58 6.3%$214.20 6.7%$228.60
term operational and fiscal objectives and level of service targets for each of the utilities are met in a financially
sustainable and resilient manner. The three main financial metrics from a long-term financial planning
perspective are:
1. Operating Margin > 3.0%
2. Debt Coverage Ratio > 2.0
3. Annual Rate Adjustments < 5.0%
The confidence in the long-term financial modeling that is the basis of these forecasts depends on the
assumptions used in the modeling. Some of those assumptions are macro-economic assumptions around long-
term inflation, how inflation affects the cost of debt service through the associated interest rates and how well
the economy is doing in general. The recent pandemic has stressed the economy with supply chain constraints,
yet it has also highlighted the necessity for utility services as is reflected in the relatively stable revenues for
such. Other assumptions are more micro-economic and, as such, depend on internal efforts to effectively
manage operating costs along with capital and resource planning. The financial resiliency of each of these utility
enterprise funds relies on active management of ongoing operating and maintenance expenses, as well as
planning for large capital expenditures and strong leadership over the coming decade.
The capital investment required to maintain the current levels of service provided by each of the four utility
services to the community requires a long planning horizon and consistent reevaluation and prioritization.
Ahead of the biennial budget process beginning both the 10-year Strategic Financial Plan and the associated 10-
year Capital Improvement Plan are updated and presented to the Council Finance Committee for discussion to
ensure that adequate operating revenues are expected to support the City Manager’s Recommended Budget.
Water Enterprise Fund
The 10-year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) for the Water Fund consists of projects needed to provide an
adequate water supply such as Halligan Reservoir, a modern water quality laboratory, some improvements
needed at the water treatment plant and asset renewal both at the plant and the water distribution
infrastructure. It is anticipated in the CIP that it will take a few years to reach the targeted asset renewal rate of
1.0% per year.
The 2023 CIP for Water has $458M of capital investments through 2033. This is a 60% increase over the 2021
plan. The 2023 CIP includes significant additional funding needed for the Halligan Reservoir - $308M compared
to $120M in 2021.
Water Operations
The financial modeling involved in updating the strategic financial plan analyzes operating revenues and
expenses to determine the amount of operating income that can fund capital investment before issuing any new
debt.
Operating revenues have grown modestly over the past decade through rate increases while total water sales
have remained almost flat. Based on the projected revenue requirements for O&M and capital investment
revenues are projected to grow at a rate significantly higher than the past decade at 7.9% compared to 1.9%
since 2013.
The colored area represents the 80% confidence band around the expected operating revenue.
Water O&M expenses have increased at an inflationary rate over the past decade. This has been achieved
through active management. The rate and debt issuance forecasts in the plan assume that O&M will increase at
a rate close to the rate of inflation of 3.5% annually through 2033.
The colored area represents the 80% confidence band around the expected operating expense.
By limiting O&M to a more modest rate of growth than in the past 2 years it is expected that the Water Fund will
generate sufficient operating income consistently to fund asset renewal investments at a level of 50-75% of the
targeted levels. This will limit the amount of debt issuance that is necessary over the coming decade.
Water Rate and Debt Forecasts
Rate increases are anticipated to be significantly over inflationary pressures in the coming decade due to
significant changes in the necessary capital investments which require higher adjustments to ensure adequate
operating revenue is generated to support the system renewal investments. Some debt is anticipated to be
needed for capital investments over the next decade, as well.
It should be recognized that actual revenues realized from a rate increase are not typically the full amount of the
rate increase. There is some elasticity to rate adjustments. Additionally, most utility services are weather
dependent, so it is possible to occasionally realize more or less revenue than anticipated in rate design for a
given year although this weather variability is expected to balance out over an extended period.
Wastewater Enterprise Fund
Year 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033
Rate Increase 4.0%4.0%7.0%9.0%7-10%7-10%7-10%7-10%7-10%7-10%7-10%
Debt Issued ($M)$154.0 $43.0
2023 2022 2021 2020 2019
Water Adopted Rate Increase 4.0%0.0%2.0%0.0%0.0%
Realized Revenue Increase -8.8%1.7%1.7%4.2%-6.1%
Wastewater CIP
The Capital Improvement Plan for the Wastewater Fund includes improvements necessary at both water
reclamation facilities, a modern pollution control laboratory and a ramping up of investment in asset renewal
programs for the collection system. Prioritization of the capital projects will need to be considered before the
2025-26 budget process to ensure investments are made where needed the most.
The amount of anticipated capital investment is greater than what has been made over the previous decade by a
factor of over three, consistent with what has been seen in the other wet utilities in 2023. This will require
significant operational planning and project management to ensure that the bond revenue is utilized efficiently.
Wastewater Operations
Operating revenues have grown very modestly over the past decade at 1.9% annually after going through some
larger rate adjustments through 2012. Moderate rate adjustments will be necessary going forward to increase
revenues in this fund as wastewater services are not metered but rather depend on the amount of water being
consumed by a customer. Conservation efforts on water usage can negatively impact revenues for the
wastewater utility. Almost no revenue growth in residential services over the past decade combined with
reduced commercial wastewater demands has put rate pressure on the wastewater utility.
The colored area represents the 80% confidence band around the expected operating revenue.
Wastewater O&M has increased modestly over the past decade as well and is expected to continue to grow
modestly at around the historical inflationary level of 3-5%.
The colored area represents the 80% confidence band around the expected operating expense.
By limiting O&M to a more modest rate of growth in all departments it is expected that the Wastewater Fund
will generate sufficient operating income consistently to fund asset renewal investments at 50-75% of the
targeted levels. This will limit the amount of debt issuance that is necessary over the coming decade.
The growing difference between the operating revenue and operating expense allows for more asset renewal to
be funded with less debt issuances than would be necessary without such operating income. Moderate rate
adjustments will allow for pledged revenues to be sufficient for any anticipated debt issuances over the next few
decades.
Wastewater Rate and Debt Forecasts
As the table below shows, there will be the need to issue debt for several capital investments over the next
decade. The first such issuance should be done in 2025 as part of the 2025-26 BFO cycle. Moderate rate
adjustments will be necessary to increase the net pledged revenues available for debt service as the debt is
issued.
Again, actual revenues realized from a rate increase are not typically the full amount of the rate increase. It is
typical to realize more or less revenue than anticipated in rate design for a given year due to customer response
to rate signals.
Year 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033
Rate Increase 4.0%4.0%6.0%8.0%6-8%6-8%6-8%6-8%6-8%6-8%6-8%
Debt Issued ($M)$59.0 $52.0 $59.0
2023 2022 2021 2020 2019
Wastewater Adopted Rate Increase 4.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Realized Revenue Increase 2.7%1.1%7.3%-1.9%-2.0%
Stormwater Enterprise Fund
Stormwater CIP
The Capital Improvement Plan for the Stormwater Fund includes new cost estimates for all anticipated initial
buildout projects. Updating the cost estimates, along with some preliminary design refinements to some of the
project requirements, increased the anticipated 10-year capital investment needed to build out the stormwater
infrastructure from $171M in the 2021 CIP to $239M in the 2023 CIP. Cost adjustments for stream restoration
projects are also included in the plan which now shows $35M in stream restoration projects in addition to the
water quality and flood protection projects. The CIP will require investing almost 4 times as much each year in
capital infrastructure than the previous decade’s level of investment. This will require significant operational
planning and project management to ensure that the bond revenue is utilized efficiently.
The CIP with the current projection of flood protection and stream rehabilitation work is shown below.
The trend in the anticipated capital investments seen in all 4 utility’s CIPs is cautionary. With each review and
update of the capital improvement plans there is an escalation of the estimated total investment required. This
is being driven primarily by higher cost estimates for known capital projects but also from new projects being
identified.
Stormwater Operations
Operating revenues have grown modestly over the past decade at an annual rate of 2.7% primarily through
annexations and infill development along with some modest rate adjustments.
The colored area represents the 95% confidence band around the expected operating revenue.
Stormwater O&M has increased at a higher rate of 6.0% annually over the past decade as more infrastructure is
built requiring more O&M. The financial forecast recognizes this but assumes that the growth can be managed
to increase at the rate of inflation.
The colored area represents the 95% confidence band around the expected operating expense.
By managing O&M growth to a more modest rate of growth than in the past 2 years while increasing charges for
stormwater services it is expected that the Stormwater Fund will generate sufficient operating income
consistently to fund asset renewal investments at a level of 75-90% of the targeted levels. This will limit the
amount of debt issuance that is necessary over the coming decade.
The growing divergence between the operating revenue and operating expense is necessary to increase the net
pledged revenues necessary to cover the increased outstanding debt over the next few decades.
Stormwater Rate and Debt Forecasts
With the strong operating income being generated every year in this utility only providing a fourth of the
anticipated capital investment required to fully build out the infrastructure for the community, it will be
necessary to issue significant debt to complete the remaining flood mitigation infrastructure. The table below
shows the amount of debt that is anticipated to be issued over the next decade. There will be the need to issue
debt for several capital investments over the next decade. The first such issuance was done in 2023 as part of
the 2023-24 BFO cycle. The next issuance is expected in 2026 as part of the 2025-26 BFO cycle. Moderate rate
adjustments will be necessary to increase the net pledged revenues available for debt service as the debt is
issued.
As with the other utilities, actual revenues realized from a rate increase are not typically the full amount of the
rate increase. Because customer growth has driven revenue increases in the recent past, this utility has seen a
consistently higher growth in revenues than the associated rate increases.
Conclusions and Next Steps
Over the past two meetings ten-year rate and debt forecasts have been discussed which indicate that the
significant capital investments expected over the coming decade can be achieved for each utility independently.
However, it is also necessary to look more holistically at the impact of these plans on our community. Because of
significant increases on the CIPs, larger rate increases will be needed in the next budget cycle to fund capital
investments. The longer-term rate projections shown above are subject to change as active measures are
developed and taken to manage O&M expenses to more modest rates of growth than in the most recent few
years. The table here shows a combined rate impact to our ratepayers that is larger than we have seen since
2012.
Year 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033
Rate Increase 3.0%3.0%6.0%6.0%5-7%3-5%4-6%4-6%6-8%6-8%6-8%
Debt Issued ($M)$45.0 $58.0 $76.0
2023 2022 2021 2020 2019
Stormwater Adopted Rate Increase 3.0%0.0%0.0%2.0%2.0%
Realized Revenue Increase 4.6%0.0%0.7%2.7%2.6%
2023 2024 2025 2026
Residential Utility Cost Baseline % Change Bill % Change Bill % Change Bill
Electric $84.20 5.0%$88.41 6.0%$93.71 5.0%$98.40
Water $51.00 4.0%$53.04 7.0%$56.75 9.0%$61.86
Wastewater $35.61 4.0%$37.03 6.0%$39.26 8.0%$42.40
Stormwater $22.42 3.0%$23.09 6.0%$24.48 6.0%$25.95
Total $193.23 4.3%$201.58 6.3%$214.20 6.7%$228.60
Discussion / Next Steps;
Water
Kelly Ohlson; (regarding slide #7 - see above) in 2021, we had $107M for Halligan and then in 2023 we had
$240M. What is the difference in the numbers?
Lance Smith; we have been going through the permitting process for quite some time. As we got near to the
end of the federal permitting process, we really started sharpening our pencils and got a new cost estimate,
which we know is significantly higher, but we feel it is much more realistic than what we had.
Kelly 0hlson; it is a big change in 2-3 years.
Lance Smith; it is – we hired some consultants and did some design work around that.
Emily Francis; in the packet it says $308M.
Jason Graham; $308M is the total cost, $240M is the construction.
Mayor Arndt; does this include estimated litigation?
Jason Graham; I am not sure.
Mayor Arndt; I think we need to add that to this estimate.
Travis Storin; one other area in that same vein, but on the other side of the ledger – I don’t think this
presumes any grant funding at this point, but we have taken steps to allow this contract to be federalized,
should we identify a grant opportunity. We do think that with the federal legislation in the last 2 ½ years,
this could be a really good candidate. Legal reserve notwithstanding, at this point, fairly conservative on the
funding side.
Kelly Ohlson; Halligan history – a historical perspective would be helpful just so Council and others can learn
in the future, I would like to see a slide of the history of Halligan estimates going back 20-25 years for the
next time we discuss this. You can break it out into permitting, construction or however you want.
Mayor Arndt; let’s include what we have already paid out as part of the decision set.
Jason Graham; we can do that –
ACTION ITEM; create a historical slide going back to 2002 showing estimate revisions / cost changes / what
we have already paid out.
Travis Storin; Lance is signaling the biggest mover of our rate increase here is the capital plan and the
biggest mover to the capital plan is Halligan.
Wastewater
2021 - 2024 – significant changes – declining operating margin – costs increasing – debt coverage ratio – to
meet debt service
Emily Francis; can you speak more about the development fees declining?
Lance Smith; even though development is happening on the east side of town that is not impacting
wastewater.
Tyler Marr; it tracks overall that we saw a decline in development activity last year as interest rates went up.
Mayor Arndt; Less and less of a revenue source.
Stormwater
Fund has $19M in operating revenue
Mayor Arndt; what is the spike in 2025? Downtown?
Lance Smith; in 2025 we have the Oak Street Project as part of the Downtown Stormwater Improvement
Program and in 2030 we have the next phase of that. Also, the Magnolia / Maple Outfall – higher cost
estimates. We have seen O&M growth at 6% annually over the last decade – when we look at what we had
forecasted 2021 versus 2024. We issued $40M instead of $80M in debt in 2024 to pay for the Oak Street
portion. Going forward we will need to issue more debt but will also need to manage O&M costs.
Mayor Arndt; O&M is higher because of the intensity of the storms we are seeing –is there any impact on
that from climate change issues? Why is O&M going up higher than others?
Jason Graham; we don’t know exactly why it is going up other than we do have increased monitoring, some
aging infrastructure, staff. We can’t say it is due to storms or the magnitude.
Lance Smith; mowing is a bit part of it.
Lance Smith; (see slide 15 above) rate increases have been less than 3% but going forward, I would not say they
are gradual or modest. Part of what is driving that is O&M is starting to increase as inflation becomes an issue.
We are going to need to Issue more debt to fund the CIP and will have significantly more outstanding debt than
we currently have. Primary drivers behind rate pressures.
What does this mean to a residential customer? This is not in range of gradual and modest. – recommending
that we go with this level of rate increase;
6.3% in 2025
6.7% in 2026
We are going to work on limiting O&M growth to the extent that we can.
Some of the capital projects may get delayed.
Litigation and permitting – internally we will look to see if we can push things out.
Mayor Arndt; it is hard to know the ins and outs – I trust you.
Residential drinking water is a right and we should keep that base level with the least amount of rate
increase – instead of saying the base rate goes up by 4% - folks getting hit hard with cost-of-living increases;
food, shelter, etc. I prefer to graduate this up gradually.
Emily Francis; I would agree with shifting more. I am curious in reading and looking at this, at what point do we
say this isn’t a great plan for our future. We need to look at alternatives to leveling out rate increases,
and if that means changing or altering. I am not comfortable with where we are at. We need to adjust our
plans, so we have a more even approach and what are those trade- offs?
Tyler Marr; we have begun to have those conversations already, as we tend to agree. As Lance said,
we are not here today to say these are modest and gradual increases. I think and Jason can speak to this in
more detail, but depending on the fund some of those tradeoffs are clearer than others. For example, the cost
of not issuing the debt in Stormwater is that we stay at status quo. We don’t advance some of the downtown
plan – we could just delay an outfall by however many years. That might not be palpable to some folks, and it is
a very clear lever you can pull. In Wastewater, the headworks replacement – some of those are key operational
items. If we don’t find a way to get to some of these asset maintenance goals, we risk system failures in the long
term that could actually be more expensive. There are tradeoffs and we will continue to go through the CCIPs
with a fine-tooth comb and depending on the fund, the cost of doing business is substantially increasing.
Emily Francis; one of the things that is challenging for council members is keeping track of all of the approvals
you make and how that might lead to rate increases like this. What will happen to the update the plan or
prioritization or coming back? Understanding the multiple impacts on top of each can get lost when they are
spread out over 10 years.
Travis Storin; the immediate parliamentary action that is in front of you is proposed rate increases for next year
that would be brought to Council this fall. As a committee member, you could say to staff, I want to see this
again a year from now. I don’t want to wait the normal 2 years for the next budget cycle. A lot of us on staff
leadership across the city including utilities had similar sticker shock. There are some O&M questions but
primarily we are talking about the capital plan. We have our own questions around; ok we have big movers like
Halligan but even the others like Stormwater and Wastewater – this is just a higher level of capital than we have
actually been able to construct. We have our own questions too, like these are the plans that make those asset
management needs whole on paper but what are we actually able to deliver on in the physical world? There is
no real action in front of you until this fall when rates come up. I think the near-term rates are pretty solid and
we can juggle where that impact is felt in our community. It is the longer-term rate increases that have us most
concerned.
Emily Francis; I am in favor of having this comes back in one year – What the tradeoffs are and to look at a
potentially lower level of service.
Kelly Ohlson; one slide was almost $1B of capital – the four columns added up to 900M+. Certain elements have
been in love with Halligan for a long time - others have not. I don’t know what else to eliminate.
Unless there is something with the big projects that are really driving this -
The main thing driving this is the capital – don’t know what we can slow or eliminate?
The other complicating factor is that all of these need to be in the mix. If we don’t get federal dollars. someone
else will. Having them in the mix right now is probably a good thing.
I have wondered about this for years; I think we have errored on the side of keeping the rates low when we
could have gradually built-up reserves over the last decade. The chickens may have come home to roost.
Jason Graham; you are correct in that large capital projects are what is driving the rate increases.
We continually look at our CIPs – how can we put those in the right years so we can properly resource and pay
for them so there is no big hit on rates. Items like headworks are needed for employee safety, wastewater
treatment for pollution, for hauled waste (porta potty) that infrastructure is old and dated. It is a corrosive
environment. We have had that on the CIPs in the past. We have tried different strategies, but it is getting to
the point where we need to act. Same thing with the laboratories (water quality and pollution control
laboratories). Luckily the federal government has given us an influx of money that we can hopefully leverage and
use to help stabilize these rates.
Mayor Arndt; could we partner – outside Fort Collins – synergistic partners– why are we all building multiple
pipes. I want to encourage people to think regionally, very open minded. – synergistically – it makes we crazy –
it feels like we could come together. The labs – can we share? Are we duplicating where we could be
collaborating? There is a balance between paying it forward and pushing it forward to our kids and grandkids –
maybe we don’t have top of the top – don’t saddle our kids and grandkids with crumbling infrastructure. Get as
many grants as we can.
Jason Graham; we do provide services to many of our neighboring communities because they don’t have
service.
Tyler Marr; we do have a contracted firm looking at utility infrastructure – just in utilities – hoping that will yield.
Kelly Ohlson; timing of these things – maybe stretch it out a little bit but if it is irresponsible – which council
members like raising rates – if you guys prove it is what it is - Capital and inflation, construction costs are the
primary driver we are getting a new pollution lab – not free – wastewater – it is a good thing. Do we need
Halligan - it is what it is – the other part of the story – historically the city undercharged for water for where we
live, we undercharge for electrical – a lot has changed in the last decade –it would be good to tell the whole
story – historically our rates have been low in comparison to other communities – don’t’ think we will be the
highest of all –
Lance Smith; in 2024 – we estimate we are among the lowest utility rates. Less than Loveland, Boulder,
Longmont etc. Starting at a point when our rates are relatively low – there are folks in our community who are
struggling to pay their bills.
Kelly Ohlson; it is important to tell the story – nobody wants to raise the rates –tough choices and decisions have
to be made - it helps if you can tell the story that we are competitive – and help those who struggle.
Travis Storin; Summary
The reason this is coming forward now is because of the budget process that kicks off over the summer. The
rate increase assumption is a big input in determining how much money will be on the table for Utilities to get
their work done over the next 2 years. We would build a budget based on the rate increases we have presented
today. The next place this will come up will be a September Work Session
I am sensing that there is interest in pausing at the September Work Session and talking a little bit more about
the near rate increases and any work we have done on the capital plan between now and then.
Review this plan annually with this committee, not every 2 years.
C. Laporte Multimodal Grant Match
Gunnar Hale, P.E. Engineering, Civil Engineer I
Monica Martinez, Manager, FP&A, PDT Finance
SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION
Laporte Multi-Modal Grant Match – Transportation Alternative Program Grant Appropriation
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Laporte Avenue between Fishback Avenue and Sunset Street is a two-lane arterial roadway and most of the
roadway within the Project limits lacks adequate bicycle and pedestrian facilities including sidewalk, bike lanes,
curb, and gutter. The City was awarded a $2,500,000 Transportation Alternative Program grant from the North
Front Range Metropolitan Planning Organization (NFRMPO) to fund construction of the Laporte Avenue Multi-
Modal Improvement Project. The grant award requires a 20% local match of $2,500,000. It is suggested that
CCIP Bike, CCIP Pedestrian, TCEF program funds, Transportation Services Fund Reserves and General Fund, be
used for the local match portion, as well as an additional $50,000 in overmatch funds. The City will be required
to contribute 20% of the local match funds as well as the local overmatch funds. The City’s financial commitment
to fund construction will be $625,750 in local funds and $50,000 in local overmatch funds for a total of $675,750
to complete the $3.175M construction.
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
• Is Council Finance supportive of an out of cycle supplemental appropriation for the Transportation
Alternative Program (TAP) and required local match to fund construction for the Laporte Avenue Multi-
Modal Improvement Project.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION
TAP Background
In June 2023, the NFRMPO awarded the City with a TAP grant for the construction of the Laporte Avenue Multi-
Modal Improvement Project
The approved funding breakdown is as follows:
TAP grant $2,500,000
Local Match (City) $625,750
Local Overmatch (City) $50,000____
Total $3,175,750
The total local match request from the City is $675,750. Suggested local match breakdown is as follows:
Transportation Capital Expansion Fee (TCEF) ($225,000), CCIP Bike ($122,727), CCIP Pedestrian ($102,273),
Transportation Services Fund Reserves ($750) and General Fund ($225,000) be used to support this
supplemental appropriation request.
Laporte Corridor Background
The Laporte Corridor within the project limits of Fishback Avenue and Sunset Street currently lacks adequate
bicycle and pedestrian facilities including sidewalk, bike lanes and curb and gutter.
The roadway experiences heavy bicycle and pedestrian traffic especially with Poudre High School, many
residential neighborhoods, and businesses located adjacent to the project limits.
• Several near misses and at least one serious vehicle-pedestrian accident have occurred.
• The corridor currently experiences a higher-than-expected volume of traffic accidents due to the lack of
adequate infrastructure
Laporte Avenue is master planned to be on the City’s low-stress bicycle network. The Project will address the
safety concerns and lack of multi-modal infrastructure.
Laporte Corridor Project Status
TAP Grant submitted – 2020
$750,000 awarded.
MMOF Grant submitted – 2020
$250,000 awarded.
Revitalizing Main Street Grant awarded – 2021
$1,437,500 awarded.
TAP Grant Submitted – 2023
$2,500,000 awarded.
East Segment 100% Design – Completed Fall 2023
West Segment 90% FOR Design – January 2024
East Segment Construction – March 2024
West Segment Construction – June 2024
Staff is recommending appropriation of the City’s construction local match and overmatch for several reasons.
• In line with guiding themes and principles of the City Strategic Plan:
o Multimodal Transportation
Discussion / Next Steps;
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
Is Council Finance supportive of an out of cycle supplemental appropriation for the Transportation Alternative
Program (TAP) and required local match to fund construction for the Laporte Avenue Multi-Modal Improvement
Project.
Gunnar Hale; we are using the full extent of the right of way we own for this project east bound from Taft Hill.
(see slide #8 above). There are a few houses on the west bound segment (see slide #9 above)– Sunset where we
will need to buy right of way.
Kelly Ohlson; this has been approved in numerous ways before now. You are bringing this to us now (1 month
before construction starts) because of the General Fund amount in the mix.
What do you mean when you say that you are negotiating the construction costs? Did we bid the project out?
Gunar Hale; for CMGC (Construction Manager, General Contractor) projects, we will negotiate the costs of the
projects. Because of the size of this project and the blessing from CDOT, we chose CMGC so we can have a
quicker timeline. We have to compare the costs from the CMGC contractor with an independent estimate as
well to prove the costs are true and accurate.
CMGC is kind of a bridge in between a bid and an RFP in a lot of ways. It is not the straight math problem of low
bid when we use that as a tool for procurement. We brought on the contractor midway through the design. The
benefit of bringing them on early is the collaboration and to anticipate and plan for problems that might arise as
opposed to things happening in the field and causing delays.
Kelly Ohlson; who decides who we negotiate with?
Gunnar Hale; in the beginning when we chose SEMA as the CMGC we put this out to bid and multiple
contractors bid on the contract, then we choose who we think will do the best job.
Kelly Ohlson; this is a good project. Where did the other $3M that was previously allocated go? It can’t all be in
design.
Gunnar Hale; the east segment is covered with that beginning $3M that we have in the project. The west
segment is where we need the funding. The additional $3M we are asking for from the General Fun is the local
match for the west segment of the project.
Monica Martinez; we would usually go to our Transportation Services Fund as that is where we always go first
for any sort of local match for capital projects, but we do not have the needed amount in that fund this year, so
we have to come forward to request General Fund dollars.
Emily Francis; I am supportive of this. I would like to meet with Brad to discuss the design. We have been out
there a few times before. I just want to make sure I understand the on again off again street, paths, and
sidewalks so I can answer questions.
Mayor Arndt; I am thrilled and an absolute yes. This is one of my priorities - safe route to schools (to Poudre
High School). It has been a challenge for the students -this will be a huge improvement- happy to support this –
long time coming. Mulberry improvements as well have made a huge difference. Lots of safety concerns - our
kids deserve better.
Travis Storin; will move this on to the full Council on the consent agenda as soon as possible.
Meeting adjourned at 2:50 pm