Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - COMPLETE AGENDA - 09/16/2025City of Fort Collins Page 1 of 8 City Council Summary Agenda City Council Regular Meeting Agenda September 16, 2025 at 6:00 PM Jeni Arndt, Mayor Emily Francis, District 6, Mayor Pro Tem Susan Gutowsky, District 1 Julie Pignataro, District 2 Tricia Canonico, District 3 Melanie Potyondy, District 4 Kelly Ohlson, District 5 City Council Chambers 300 Laporte Avenue, Fort Collins & via Zoom at https://zoom.us/j/98241416497 Cablecast on FCTV Channel 14 on Connexion Channel 14 and 881 on Xfinity Carrie Daggett Kelly DiMartino Delynn Coldiron City Attorney City Manager City Clerk PROCLAMATIONS & PRESENTATIONS 5:00 PM A) PROCLAMATIONS AND PRESENTATIONS PP 1. Declaring the Day of October 9, 2025, as The Hand That Feeds Day. PP 2. Declaring the Week of September 17-23, 2025, as Constitution Week. PP 3. Declaring September 15 - October 15, 2025, as Hispanic/Latiné Heritage Month. PP 4. Declaring the Month of September 2025 as Suicide Prevention and Awareness Month. REGULAR MEETING 6:00 PM B) CALL MEETING TO ORDER C) PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE D) ROLL CALL E) CITY MANAGER'S AGENDA REVIEW • City Manager Review of Agenda • Consent Calendar Review, including removal of items from Consent Calendar for individual discussion. F) COMMUNITY REPORTS G) PUBLIC COMMENT ON ANY TOPICS OR ITEMS OR COMMUNITY EVENTS (Including requests for removal of items from Consent Calendar for individual discussion.) Page 1 City of Fort Collins Page 2 of 8 Individuals may comment regarding any topics of concern, whether or not included on this agenda. Comments regarding land use projects for which a development application has been filed should be submitted in the development review process** and not to Council. • Those who wish to speak are required to sign up using the online sign-up system available at www.fcgov.com/council-meeting-participation-signup/ • Each speaker will be allowed to speak one time during public comment. If a speaker comments on a particular agenda item during general public comment, that speaker will not also be entitled to speak during discussion on the same agenda item. • All speakers will be called to speak by the presiding officer from the list of those signed up. After everyone signed up is called on, the presiding officer may ask others wishing to speak to identify themselves by raising their hand (in person or using the Raise Hand option on Zoom), and if in person then will be asked to move to one of the two lines of speakers (or to a seat nearby, for those who are not able to stand while waiting). • The presiding officer will determine and announce the length of time allowed for each speaker. • Each speaker will be asked to state their name and general address for the record, and, if their comments relate to a particular agenda item, to identify the agenda item number. Any written comments or materials intended for the Council should be provided to the City Clerk. • A timer will beep one time and turn yellow to indicate that 30 seconds of speaking time remain and will beep again and turn red when a speaker’s time has ended. [**For questions about the development review process or the status of any particular development, consult the City's Development Review Center page at https://www.fcgov.com/developmentreview, or contact the Development Review Center at 970.221.6760.] H) PUBLIC COMMENT FOLLOW-UP I) COUNCILMEMBER REMOVAL OF ITEMS FROM CONSENT CALENDAR FOR DISCUSSION CONSENT CALENDAR The Consent Calendar is intended to allow Council to spend its time and energy on the important items on a lengthy agenda. Staff recommends approval of the Consent Calendar. Agenda items pulled from the Consent Calendar by either Council or the City Manager will be considered separately under their own Section, titled “Consideration of Items Removed from Consent Calendar for Individual Discussion.” Items remaining on the Consent Calendar will be approved by Council with one vote. The Consent Calendar consists of: • Ordinances on First Reading that are routine; • Ordinances on Second Reading that are routine; • Those of no perceived controversy; • Routine administrative actions. 1. Consideration and Approval of the Minutes of the September 2, 2025, Regular meeting. The purpose of this item is to approve the minutes of the September 2, 2025, Regular meeting. Page 2 City of Fort Collins Page 3 of 8 2. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 142, 2025, Appropriating Philanthropic Revenue Received through City Give for The Gardens on Spring Creek as Designated by the Donor. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on September 2, 2025, appropriates $326,351 in philanthropic revenue received through City Give to benefit the Gardens on Spring Creek (the “Gardens”). These estate gifts to the Gardens align with both t he City’s strategic priorities and the respective donors’ designation. In 2019, City Give, a formalized enterprise-wide initiative was launched to create a transparent, non-partisan governance structure for the acceptance and appropriation of charitable gifts. 3. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 143, 2025, Vacating a Portion of the Right-of-Way of Giddings Road. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on September 2, 2025, vacates a portion of the public right-of-way (ROW) at Giddings Road between Mountain Vista Drive and Richards Lake Road. The outside 8-ft of ROW on either side of the existing road can be vacated, and the road will still meet the minimum Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards for a 2-lane arterial street. 4. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 144, 2025, Annexing the Property Known as the Moor Annexation to the City of Fort Collins, Colorado. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on September 2, 2025, annexes a 3.368- acre property located northeast of the intersection of North Taft Hill Road and Laporte Avenue. The Initiating Resolution was adopted July 15, 2025. A related item to zone the annexed property is presented on this Agenda. This annexation request is in conformance with the State of Colorado Revised Statutes as they relate to annexations, the City of Fort Collins City Plan, and the Larimer County and City of Fort Collins Intergovernmental Agreement Regarding Growth Management. 5. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 145, 2025, Amending the Zoning Map of the City of Fort Collins and Classifying for Zoning Purposes the Property Included in the Moor Annexation to the City of Fort Collins, Colorado, and Approving Corresponding Changes to the Residential Neighborhood Sign District Map and Lighting Context Area Map. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on September 2, 2025, zones the property included in the Moor Annexation into the Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood District (LMN) and place the property into the Residential Sign District and the LC1 Lighting Context Area. 6. First Reading of Ordinance No. 146, 2025, Appropriating Unanticipated Philanthropic Revenue Received Through City Give for Various Programs and Services as Designated by the Donors. The purpose of this item is to request an appropriation of $152,669.11 in philanthropic revenue received through City Give. These miscellaneous gifts to various City departments support a variety of programs and services and are aligned with both the City’s strategic priorities and the respective donors’ designation. In 2019, City Give, a formalized enterprise-wide initiative was launched to create a transparent, non-partisan governance structure for the acceptance and appropriations of charitable gifts. Page 3 City of Fort Collins Page 4 of 8 7. First Reading of Ordinance No. 147, 2025, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves and Authorizing Transfers of Appropriations for the William Neal and Ziegler Intersection Improvements Project and Related Art in Public Places. The purpose of this item is to appropriate and transfer additional funds for the William Neal and Ziegler Intersection Improvements project (Project). The funds will be used for construction services. If approved, this item will: 1) appropriate $388,773 in Transportation Capital Expansion Fee (TCEF) funds to the Project; 2) appropriate $77 in Transportation Services funds to the Project; 3) transfer $85,000 in Conservation Trust funds to the Project; 4) transfer $45,000 in Community Capital Improvement Program (CCIP) Pedestrian Sidewalk funds to the Project; a nd transfer $3,850 of Project funds to the Art in Public Places (APP) program. 8. First Reading of Ordinance No. 148, 2025, Making Supplemental Appropriation of Colorado Office of Economic Development and International Trade for the Colorado CHIPS Community Support Program Marketing Grant Funds in the General Fund. The purpose of this item is to appropriate $25,000 of unanticipated revenue from the Colorado Office of Economic Development and International Trade for the Colorado Creating Helpful Incentives to Produce Semiconductors (CHIPS) Community Support Program Marketing grant. This grant provides funding to the Economic Health Office for marketing and promotional activities targeted at semiconductor ecosystem companies and advanced industries. 9. Items Related to Appropriating Additional Funds for 2025. A. First Reading of Ordinance No. 149, 2025, Making Supplemental Appropriations in Various City Funds. B. First Reading of Ordinance No. 150, 2025, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves and Authorizing Transfers of Appropriations in Various City Funds. The purpose of these items is to combine dedicated and unanticipated revenues or reserves that need to be appropriated before the end of the year to cover the related expenses that were not anticipated and therefore not included in the 2025 annual budget appropriation. The unanticipated revenue is primarily from fees, charges, rents, contributions and grants that have been paid to City departments to offset specific expenses. 10. First Reading of Ordinance No. 151, 2025, Amending Sections 26-148 and 26-149 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins Regarding Water Supply Requirement Credits for Water Services. The purpose of this item is to ensure that City Code (Code) more comprehensively addresses how Fort Collins Utilities (Utilities) credits existing water services when they are changed, typically during redevelopment. Code currently addresses how Utilities credits nonresidential services when they are redeveloped and replaced with a new nonresidential service. However, Code does not currently address how Utilities should credit residential services that are redeveloped into nonresidential services, or when nonresidential services are redeveloped into residential services. This item would fill those gaps. 11. First Reading of Ordinance No. 152, 2025, Amending Chapter 24 Article IV of the Code of the City of Fort Collins Relating to Portable Signs. The purpose of this item is to update the City Code (Code) pertaining to portable signs. This ordinance updates the areas where portable signs are allowed to more accurately reflect the Page 4 City of Fort Collins Page 5 of 8 designated downtown areas as well as the timeframe of when a portable sign permit is valid and the requirements to obtain a permit. 12. First Reading of Ordinance No. 153, 2025, Creating a New Article VI in Chapter 24 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins Relating to Electric Vehicle Charging by Temporary Cord Draping. The purpose of this item is to secure and promote the public health, safety, and general welfare of persons using City sidewalks by regulating the placement, covering over, use, and removal of electric vehicle charging cords located upon certain public sidewalks within the City. To expand charging opportunities for electric vehicles for persons without dedicated off-street parking at their residence, this proposed new City Code (Code) regulates the safe draping of an electric vehicle charging cord across a sidewalk or other public right-of-way at the person’s residence for the purpose of providing a charge to a curbside vehicle at the person’s residence. 13. First Reading of Ordinance No. 154, 2025, Expanding the Boundaries of the Fort Collins, Colorado Downtown Development Authority and Amending the Plan of Development of the Authority. The purpose of this item is to expand the boundaries of the Fort Collins Downtown Development Authority (the “DDA”) and amend the Plan of Development of the Authority to include a property at 313 North Meldrum Street and adjacent street right-of-way on North Meldrum Street. The property is a commercially zoned lot in the Old Town District and is the location of the historic Emma Malaby Grocery building. The right-of-way is being added as a housekeeping step to more efficiently describe the overall DDA boundary. There is no impact to the City from the inclusion of this right-of-way. 14. Items Relating to Platte River Power Authority Organic Contract and Power Supply Contract. A. First Reading of Ordinance No. 155, 2025, Authorizing an Amended and Restated Organic Contract for Platte River Power Authority. B. First Reading of Ordinance No. 156, 2025, Authorizing an Amended and Restated Contract with Platte River Power Authority for the Supply of Electric Power and Energy. The purpose of this item is to extend and amend the Organic Contract between Estes Park, Longmont and Loveland (the member cities) that is the basis for Platte River Power Authority’s (“Platte River”) existence and purpose and to extend and make modifications to the Power Supply Agreement (“PSA”) with Platte River 15. Resolution 2025-083 Authorizing the City Manager to Execute an Agreement with the Colorado Water Conservation Board for Protected Mitigation Releases from the Halligan Water Supply Project. This purpose of this item is to seek authorization for the City Manager to execute an agreement with the Colorado Water Conservation Board. Pursuant to the Halligan Water Supply Project: Fish and Wildlife Mitigation and Enhancement Plan, the City will seek a Water Court decree to protect the City’s reservoir releases from diversion by others. These are called “protected mitigation releases” under the applicable statute. Once completed and operational, this will create legally protected stream flows in the approximately 22 miles of the North Fork of the Cache la Poudre River between Halligan Dam and Milton Seaman Reservoir. An agreement with the Colorado Water Conservation Board is required to begin this effort. Page 5 City of Fort Collins Page 6 of 8 16. Resolution 2025-084 Approving an Exception to the Competitive Purchasing Process for the Purchase of Animal Control Services from NOCO County Humane for 2025. The purpose of this item is to request an exception to the competitive bid process for the purchase of services for a one-year term beginning January 1, 2026, from NOCO Humane for the operation and management of the animal shelter. Approval of this exception may be used as authorized in City Code Section 8-161(d)(4) as the basis for the City Manager and the Purchasing Agent to negotiate and agree to the additional purchase of animal control services from NOCO Humane through December 2030 without further Council approval. Exception to Competitive Bidding Rationale: Code Section 8-161(d)(1)(a). There exists only one (1) responsible source. 17. Resolution 2025-085 Approving Participation in the Settlement with Additional Opioid Defendants, Alvogen, Apotex, Amneal, Hikma, Indivior, Viatris, Sun, and Zydus, and a Related Waiver of Claims. The purpose of this item is to consider a resolution to allow the City to participate in the Colorado Opioids Settlement with Alvogen, Apotex, Amneal, Hikma, Indivior, Viatris, Sun, and Zydus by granting approval to sign an additional participation agreement and waiver of claims for opioid - related damages. This is in follow-up to prior approvals of settlements with multiple other opioid defendants, negotiated through national settlement efforts coordinated through the State of Colorado. END OF CONSENT CALENDAR J) ADOPTION OF CONSENT CALENDAR K) CONSENT CALENDAR FOLLOW-UP (This is an opportunity for Councilmembers to comment on items adopted or approved on the Consent Calendar.) L) STAFF REPORTS M) COUNCILMEMBER REPORTS N) CONSIDERATION OF ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR FOR INDIVIDUAL DISCUSSION O) CONSIDERATION OF ITEMS PLANNED FOR DISCUSSION The method of debate for discussion items is as follows: • Mayor introduced the item number and subject; asks if formal presentation will be made by staff • Staff presentation (optional) • Mayor requests public comment on the item (three minute limit for each person) • Council questions of staff on the item • Council motion on the item • Council discussion • Final Council comments • Council vote on the item Note: Time limits for individual agenda items may be revised, at the discretion of the Mayor, to ensure all have an opportunity to speak. The timer will buzz when there are 30 seconds left and the light will turn yellow. It will buzz again at the end of the speaker’s time. Page 6 City of Fort Collins Page 7 of 8 18. First Reading of Ordinance No. 157, 2025, Amending Chapter 2, Article VII, Division 2 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins Relating to the Gift Acceptance Restrictions and the Definitions Section of the City’s Ethics Rules. The purpose of this item is to consider amendments to the City’s ethics rules related to gift acceptance restrictions recommended by the Ethics Review Board. Corresponding changes to the definitions section of the ethics rules will also be considered. 19. First Reading of Ordinance No. 158, 2025, Amending Chapter 2, Article VIII, Division 2 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins Relating to Financial Disclosure Requirements. The purpose of this item is to consider amendments to the City’s ethics rules related to financial disclosure requirements recommended by the Ethics Review Board. 20. First Reading of Ordinance No. 159, 2025, Amending Chapter 2, Article VIII, Division 3 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins Relating to Gift Reporting Requirements of the City’s Financial Disclosure Rules. The purpose of this item is to consider amendments to the City’s ethics rules related to gift reporting requirements recommended by the Ethics Review Board. P) RESUMED PUBLIC COMMENT (if applicable) Q) OTHER BUSINESS OB 1. Possible consideration of the initiation of new ordinances and/or resolutions by Councilmembers. (Three or more individual Councilmembers may direct the City Manager and City Attorney to initiate and move forward with development and preparation of resolutions and ordinances not originating from the Council's Policy Agenda or initiated by staff.) OB 2. Consideration of a motion to adjourn this meeting until after the completion of the Electric Utility Enterprise Board business: "I move that Council adjourn this meeting until after the completion of the Electric Utility Enterprise Board business." R) ADJOURNMENT Every regular Council meeting will end no later than midnight, except that: (1) any item of business commenced before midnight may be concluded before the meeting is adjourned and (2) the Council may, at any time prior to adjournment, by majority vote, extend a meeting beyond midnight for the purpose of considering additional items of business. Any matter that has been commenced and is still pending at the conclusion of the Council meeting, and all matters for consideration at the meeting that have not yet been considered by the Council, will be deemed continued to the next regular Council meeting, unless Council determines otherwise. Upon request, the City of Fort Collins will provide language access services for individuals who have limited English proficiency, or auxiliary aids and services for individuals with disabilities, to access City services, programs and activities. Contact 970.221.6515 (V/TDD: Dial 711 for Relay Colorado) for assistance. Page 7 City of Fort Collins Page 8 of 8 Please provide advance notice. Requests for interpretation at a meeting should be made by noon the day before. A solicitud, la Ciudad de Fort Collins proporcionará servicios de acceso a idiomas para personas que no dominan el idioma inglés, o ayudas y servicios auxiliares para personas con discapacidad, para que puedan acceder a los servicios, programas y actividades de la Ciudad. Para asistencia, llame al 970.221.6515 (V/TDD: Marque 711 para Relay Colorado). Por favor proporcione aviso previo cuando sea posible. Las solicitudes de interpretación en una reunión deben realizarse antes del mediodía del día anterior. Page 8 File Attachments for Item: PP 1. Declaring the Day of October 9, 2025, as The Hand That Feeds Day. Page 9 PROCLAMATION WHEREAS, the sugar beet industry played a significant role in the agricultural history of Colorado, particularly in the twentieth century, when it became the most important agricultural activity in the state and by 1909, the largest sugar-producing state in the United States; and WHEREAS, area farmers relied on sugar beets as a vital cash crop, requiring intense labor of thousands of nonunionized fieldworkers, leading farmers and sugar companies to recruit Mexican and Chicano workers who toiled from sunup to sundown to meet the demands of each harvest and became an integral part of the agricultural workforce in Colorado; and WHEREAS, by the late 1920s, the sugar beet industry had become the largest employer of Hispanics in Colorado, with these individuals performing essential, yet often overlooked, labor that contributed significantly to the prosperity of the industry; and WHEREAS, the short-handled hoe, a common tool in sugar beet cultivation, symbolized the exploitative working conditions endured by agricultural laborers, resulting in long-term physical consequences for many, this plight prompting organizations such as the United Farm Workers who brought attention to these injustices culminating in the outlawing of the short- handled hoe in 1975; and WHEREAS, it is essential to honor and recognize the contributions of all those who labored in the sugar beet fields, acknowledging their vital role in shaping Colorado’s agricultural landscape and history. NOW, THEREFORE, I, Jeni Arndt, Mayor of the City of Fort Collins, do hereby proclaim October 9th, 2025, as THE HAND THAT FEEDS DAY in recognition of the invaluable contributions of agricultural laborers in the sugar beet fields and to honor their legacy of hard work, resilience, and determination. I encourage all residents of Fort Collins to reflect on this history of agricultural labor in our community and to celebrate the contributions of those who have worked tirelessly to feed our state and our nation. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and the seal of the City of Fort Collins this 16th day of September 2025. ______________________________ Mayor ATTEST: ______________________________ City Clerk Page 10 Item PP 1. File Attachments for Item: PP 2. Declaring the Week of September 17-23, 2025, as Constitution Week. Page 11 PROCLAMATION WHEREAS, it is the privilege and duty of the American people to commemorate the two hundred and thirty-sixth anniversary of the drafting of the Constitution of the United States of America with appropriate ceremonies and activities; and WHEREAS, Public Law 915 guarantees the issuing of a proclamation each year by the President of the United States of America designating September 17 through 23 as Constitution Week. NOW, THEREFORE, I, Jeni Arndt, Mayor of the City of Fort Collins, do hereby proclaim the week of September 17-23, 2025, as CONSTITUTION WEEK IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and the seal of the City of Fort Collins this 16th day of September 2025. ___________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: ____________________________________ City Clerk Page 12 Item PP 2. File Attachments for Item: PP 3. Declaring September 15 - October 15, 2025, as Hispanic/Latiné Heritage Month. Page 13 PROCLAMATION WHEREAS, Hispanic/Latiné Heritage Month observed annually from September 15 to October 15, celebrates the histories, cultures, and contributions of people with ties to Spain, Latin America, and the Caribbean. The dates were chosen to include key independence days, such as those of Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, and Nicaragua on September 15, and Mexico's on September 16; and WHEREAS, as the largest ethnic, linguistic and cultural group in Fort Collins at nearly 20 percent of the population, the Hispanic/Latiné community reflects true diversity and represents all genders, races, socioeconomic statuses, nationalities, ages, sexual orientations, religions and abilities; and WHEREAS, Fort Collins is proud to be home to many people of Hispanic/Latiné descent who play an important role in our strength and prosperity by making the community vibrant, strong, and productive , and whose tenacity, energy and leadership are woven into the culture of Fort Collins; and WHEREAS, it is the role of City leaders, City institutions, and community members to commit to the removal of cultural and systemic barriers, combat discrimination, promote tolerance and social justice, and advance the cause of equity and inclusion for all in our community, including community members of Hispanic/Latiné descent; and WHEREAS, the City celebrates Hispanic/Latiné community leaders, organizations, and businesses and the invaluable contributions to Fort Collins; offers thanks and gratitude to Hispanic/Latiné leaders and contributors in education, the arts, sciences, medical fields, military, government, business, management, non-profits, social justice organizations, and more. As a City, we will continue to support such organizations, businesses, and individuals and recognize their important contributions to our community and city; and WHEREAS, the Fort Collins City Council and staff commit to making Fort Collins a welcoming community for all people living here; to expanding opportunities in business, education, the arts, sciences, government and leadership; to removing barriers to equity, addressing hate and bias, and promoting equity and justice for Hispanic/Latiné community members. We recognize there is more work ahead of us and commitment to the fundamental community values of equity and inclusion in Fort Collins, ensuring that all residents feel respected, valued, and affirmed. NOW, THEREFORE, I, Jeni Arndt, Mayor of the City of Fort Collins, do hereby proclaim September 15-October 15, 2025, as HISPANIC/LATINÉ HERITAGE MONTH in Fort Collins and encourage residents to participate and to celebrate the cultural riches that our Hispanic/Latiné community has to offer. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and the seal of the City of Fort Collins this 16th day of September 2025. ____________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: ___________________________________ City Clerk Page 14 Item PP 3. File Attachments for Item: PP 4. Declaring the Month of September 2025 as Suicide Prevention and Awareness Month. Page 15 PROCLAMATION WHEREAS, every life is precious, and when we lose someone to suicide, our whole community feels the weight of that loss; and WHEREAS, suicide is preventable when we listen with compassion, reduce stigma, and create spaces where people feel they belong and can find hope; and WHEREAS, Fort Collins is a city that believes in flourishing together — building a culture of care where all residents are supported, connected, and empowered to thrive; and WHEREAS, the Alliance for Suicide Prevention of Larimer County, along with countless partners and volunteers, continues to remind us that prevention is not only about responding to crisis, but about nurturing community, courage, and connection; and WHEREAS, during the month of September 2025, we unite to honor those we have lost, uplift survivors, and recommit ourselves to building a city where it is safe to seek help, safe to share our stories, and safe to imagine a hopeful future. NOW, THEREFORE, I, Jeni Arndt, Mayor of the City of Fort Collins, do hereby proclaim September, 2025 as SUICIDE PREVENTION AND AWARENESS MONTH in the City of Fort Collins, and call upon all residents to extend compassion, break the silence, and join together in creating a resilient and thriving community where every person feels valued and supported. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and the seal of the City of Fort Collins this 16th day of September 2025. ______________________________ Mayor ATTEST: ______________________________ City Clerk Page 16 Item PP 4. File Attachments for Item: 1. Consideration and Approval of the Minutes of the September 2, 2025, Regular meeting. The purpose of this item is to approve the minutes of the September 2, 2025, Regular meeting. Page 17 City Council Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 1 of 1 September 16, 2025 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Council STAFF Delynn Coldiron, City Clerk SUBJECT Consideration and Approval of the Minutes of the September 2, 2025, Regular meeting. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to approve the minutes of the September 2, 2025, Regular meeting. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the minutes. ATTACHMENTS 1. Draft Minutes, September 2, 2025 Page 18 Item 1. City of Fort Collins City Council Proceedings Page 337 September 2, 2025 COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO Council-Manager Form of Government Regular Meeting – 6:00 PM PROCLAMATIONS AND PRESENTATIONS 5:00 PM A) PROCLAMATIONS AND PRESENTATIONS PP 1. Declaring the Month of September 2025 as National Preparedness Month. PP 2. Declaring the Month of September 2025 as Hunger Action Month. Mayor Jeni Arndt presented the above proclamation at 5:00 p.m. REGULAR MEETING 6:00 PM B) CALL MEETING TO ORDER Mayor Jeni Arndt called the regular meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers at 300 Laporte Avenue, Fort Collins, Colorado, with hybrid participation available via the City’s Zoom platform. C) PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Jeni Arndt led the Pledge of Allegiance to the American Flag. D) ROLL CALL PRESENT Mayor Jeni Arndt Mayor Pro Tem Emily Francis Councilmember Susan Gutowsky Councilmember Julie Pignataro Councilmember Tricia Canonico Councilmember Melanie Potyondy Councilmember Kelly Ohlson STAFF PRESENT City Manager Kelly DiMartino City Attorney Carrie Daggett City Clerk Delynn Coldiron Page 19 Item 1. September 2, 2025 City of Fort Collins City Council Proceedings Page 338 E) CITY MANAGER'S AGENDA REVIEW City Manager Kelly DiMartino provided an overview of the agenda, including:  Six protests were received prior to the deadline regarding Item No. 21, Resolution 2025-082 Referring Ordinance No. 141, 2025, Expressing Support for the Recommendations of the Civic Assembly and Adopting a Conceptual Framework for the Use and Management of the Hughes Stadium Site to a Vote of the Registered Electors of the City at the Next Regular General Election on November 4, 2025, and the agenda has been updated accordingly.  Items 1-19 on the Consent Calendar are recommended for adoption.  Two discussion items related to the Civic Assembly recommendations. F) COMMUNITY REPORTS – None. G) PUBLIC COMMENT ON ANY TOPICS OR ITEMS OR COMMUNITY EVENTS (Including requests for removal of items from Consent Calendar for individual discussion.) Kathryn Dubiel commented on Charter language that requires all ballot initiatives to include the words yes and no and expressed concern that the citizen-initiated initiative that will be put before voters does not include that language. She requested Council make the necessary correction. Cory Carroll commented on advocating for his patients related to the environment in which they live, which included his participation in the Poudre Canyon Group of the Colorado Sierra Club. He stated the Group disbanded due to the intentional manipulation of its election last year by the Fort Collins YIMBY group, which was done ostensibly to seek political endorsement for one of the leaders of YIMBY who is currently a candidate for Council District 1. He stated it was unfortunate that the 30- year activism of the Poudre Canyon Group has now ended and added he would send additional information to Council via email. Quinn Necker spoke about his passion for flags and suggested the Fort Collins flag should be redesigned to remove text and add symbolism. He showed a rendering of a flag he designed. Michelle Haefele stated the City frequently uses surveys that utilize a question format called a L ikert scale. She commented on the importance of symmetrical response options and stated there have been two recent City surveys that included non-symmetrical response options making the outcomes biased, one related to the Civic Assembly, and one related to Sound in the City. She requested the City use professional resources to design surveys or stop using them altogether. Kirk Fieseler opposed the LMN zoning recommendation for the Moor annexation and suggested it should be zoned Urban Estate or Low-Density Residential to bring it in line with the character of the area. He noted conceptual review plans show a 78,000 square foot four-story building on the property, which is in direct opposition to the Northwest Subarea Plan. Additionally, he stated the site is in the floodplain and the area is already highly susceptible to flooding without additional impervious space. He also opposed a proposed Laporte Avenue access for the property and stated the project would decrease his quality of life with increased traffic, lights, noise, and trespassers. He suggested looking at the two-story apartment buildings to the east of his property for an example of how to properly build apartments in the area. Brian Tracey commented on his history as a bike mechanic at CSU and other locations. He stated he likes the idea of kids learning and having fun on bikes and expressed support for raptor rescue. However, he stated the original intent of the 2021 Hughes Stadium ballot language was to protect the land from development and have it be open land with low-impact use. He opposed the Civic Assembly recommendation ballot item stating it lacks specificity. Page 20 Item 1. September 2, 2025 City of Fort Collins City Council Proceedings Page 339 Andrew Fricina discussed the Monte Carlo and McMurray Avenue intersection and related safety issues. He stated there are issues with speeding and people not stopping at 4-way stop signs and noted there are five schools within a one-mile radius of the intersection which means there are hundreds of children walking and biking in the area. He urged Council to station a police office in the area to watch for violations. Judy Castro expressed appreciation to Council for its work. She expressed concern about mosquito spraying and impacts on her property. She suggested additional research occur on the topic and urged Council to be open to that. Carin Avila, Rocky Mountain Raptor Program Director, expressed her support for the Hughes for Everyone issue committee and Civic Assembly recommendations regarding the Hughes property. She urged Council to adopt Resolution 2025-082 and stated the property can be restored to help create habitat and provide education, create space for expanded recreation, and create space for wildlife rehabilitation. She stated the land can be a place to connect, conserve, and recreate, which are all community values. Dianna Murphy requested clarification related to the ordinance for the large-scale development of the Hughes Stadium site and the ballot language as it relates to non-disclosed taxpayer obligations and the CCIP tax renewal. She commented on the overlap between ballot items and questioned whether the funding for the bike park is coming exclusively from CCIP funding and asked if bike park funding would go toward another location if both the item preserving Hughes as a Natural Area and the CCIP renewal are approved. Valerie Vogeler opposed the Moor annexation and zoning and provided context about the semi-rural nature of the neighborhood. She discussed the Northwest Subarea Plan and a recent ruling that it is regulatory in nature. She stated she does not believe a 78,000 square foot four-story building with surface parking is in compliance with the Subarea Plan and expressed concern about pedestrian safety and the floodplain. Rich Stave commented on witnessing a local business assisting an individual until medical assistance arrived. He opposed Item No. 9, Second Reading of Ordinance No. 134, 2025, Authorizing the City of Fort Collins to Lease Real Property Adjacent to the Overland Electric Substation to Platte River Power Authority for a Battery Storage Project, and questioned why the City should fund something that benefits CSU. Additionally, he stated it appears to be a research project which should be on CSU property rather than being the responsibility of Fort Collins ratepayers. Joe Rowan commented on a letter sent to Council urging the use of excess tax collections from the 2015 CCIP for affordable housing. He stated a response letter was sent from Community Services regarding the low original estimate of the cost of the Southeast Community Center. He urged Council to use the funds for housing, the number one issue in Fort Collins, versus another recreation center, to better address community priorities. Kimberly Connor provided information about the genocide that is occurring in Gaza and urged Council to adopt a ceasefire resolution. She stated silence supports what is occurring. Adam Hirschhorn noted he is running for Mayor and wanted to acknowledge the help he received to get him on the ballot. He mentioned several groups who had been involved. He stated one of the best moments of his campaign was when he was on campus and someone asked him where he stood on Palestine. He also acknowledged Jacob Castillo for recognizing the sustainability campus he proposed. Blaine (no last name provided) noted he was a volunteer recognized as part of the National Preparedness Month proclamation. He expressed support for a ceasefire resolution and provided a Page 21 Item 1. September 2, 2025 City of Fort Collins City Council Proceedings Page 340 story about a young girl who was murdered along with her family and the two first responders who were trying to find them. He stated the genocide that was happening a year ago continues today and commented on the staggering number of people who have been murdered and intentionally targeted by Israeli soldiers. He stated we can help by boycotting products that fund genocide and divest from companies in the community whose products have been found in bomb fragments in destroyed communities. Claire (no last name provided) commented on the Hughes Stadium site and reminded Council that one of the most prominent recommendations from the flawed Civic Assembly survey was to include Indigenous voices in every aspect of the project and to set aside sacred and ceremonial space. She expressed concern those voices are being diminished as the process moves forward. She noted she was one of the women who glued her hand to the wall in Chambers in protest of the lack of Council action on a ceasefire resolution and to honor her ancestors who have been erased from history. She stated it has been acknowledged that Fort Collins land was stolen and stated much healing is needed. She urged Council to ensure Indigenous oppressed voices are heard. Tammy VerCauteren, Bird Conservancy of the Rockies Executive Director, spoke in support of the recommendations of the Civic Assembly process for multiple uses of the Hughes property. She stated the recommendations offer opportunities for people of all ages and abilities to be able to engage with nature. She noted they envision restoration, developing habitat and providing education and conservation efforts. She also supported activities related to bike trails, a bike park, sledding and frisbee golf and stated they want to honor Indigenous voices by including a place to honor and celebrate them as part of the process. Eric Sutherland spoke about addressing affordability in the city stating affordable housing is the most important issue impacting the community. He stated the largest contribution Fort Collins taxpayers make to housing is to subsidize Timnath housing by backfilling funds that would otherwise be lost to tax increment financing, in the amount of $8 million this year. He noted Timnath is not building affordable housing and stated the problem could be easily solved by directing the money appropriately. Miranda Spindel spoke in opposition to the Moor annexation and expressed concern that any project allowed with the proposed LMN zoning would not fit with the character of the existing area. She also discussed a recent ruling that the Northwest Subarea Plan is regulatory in nature. She commented on a conceptual review for a project on the site stating it is completely out of compliance with the Subarea Plan. Bill Bertschy commented on the Spring Creek flood and resulting floodway and floodplain work. He stated the proposed LMN zoning for the Moor property is inconsistent with the recent conceptual review for the site. He discussed flooding issues in the area and noted mitigation for any project would need to occur to ensure floodway requirements are met. Public comment concluded at 7:04 p.m. H) PUBLIC COMMENT FOLLOW-UP Councilmember Ohlson agreed that the way the City conducts surveys is a concern and suggested Council may need to intervene to ensure symmetrical options are provided. He also concurred with the comments related to the lack of validity of online opinion polls which he stated provide worthless information. Councilmember Pignataro requested follow-up on the intersection of Monte Carlo and McMurray that was discussed. Dana Hornkohl, Engineering Department, replied the FC Moves Department is currently doing safety audits for Kruse Elementary, which would include that intersection, and the Page 22 Item 1. September 2, 2025 City of Fort Collins City Council Proceedings Page 341 concerns mentioned by Mr. Fricina will be addressed as part of that process. He stated he would be able to provide additional details shortly. Councilmember Pignataro asked Assistant City Attorney Rupa Venkatesh to forward a previous memo to Claire regarding the Indigenous engagement related to the Civic Assembly process. Mayor Arndt thanked Quinn for his recommendations related to the City flag and thanked Mr. Fricina for his comments regarding the Monte Carlo and McMurray intersection. Councilmember Potyondy asked about the Moor annexation and what subsequent opportunities would be available for people to provide input as development occurs. Arlo Schumann, City Planner, stated the applicants have submitted a conceptual plan, though it is not official. He clarified that when any development proposal comes forward, it will go through multiple rounds of review by City staff as part of the development review process, and depending on the project, there are various potential hearings or decision letters that are provided. Councilmember Ohlson asked about the recommended zoning for the Moor property. Mr. Schumann replied the LMN zoning is in alignment with the City’s Structure Plan and the Northwest Subarea Plan. Councilmember Potyondy asked about the types of structures that are allowable in the LMN zone. Mr. Schumann replied it is a primarily single-family detached zone, though it does allow for townhomes and apartment buildings of a certain size with bonuses allowed if they are affordable housing projects. Councilmember Gutowsky asked about the ballot language question related to yes and no wording. City Attorney Daggett replied in reviewing the language to provide it to the County Clerk, it was identified that yes and no needed to be included; therefore, the language on the ballot question as it is being submitted does follow the Charter requirements. COUNCILMEMBER REMOVAL OF ITEMS FROM CONSENT CALENDAR FOR DISCUSSION None. J) CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Consideration and Approval of the Minutes of the August 12, 2025, Special Meeting and August 19, 2025, Regular meeting. The purpose of this item is to approve the minutes of the August 12, 2025, Special Meeting and the August 19, 2025, Regular meeting. Approved. 2. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 127, 2025, Appropriating Unanticipated Philanthropic Revenue Received Through City Give for Various Programs and Services as Designated by the Donors. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on August 19, 2025, recommends an appropriation of $22,050 in philanthropic revenue received through City Give. These miscellaneous gifts to various City departments support a variety of programs and services and are aligned with both the City’s strategic priorities and the respective donors’ designation. In 2019, City Give, a formalized enterprise-wide initiative was launched to create a transparent, non-partisan governance structure for the acceptance and appropriations of charitable gifts. Page 23 Item 1. September 2, 2025 City of Fort Collins City Council Proceedings Page 342 Adopted on Second Reading. 3. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 128, 2025, Making Supplemental Appropriations and Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the Water Utility Fund for the Lemay Water Line Replacement Project and to Supplement the 2025 Water Main Operating Budget and Related Art in Public Places. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on August 19, 2025, requests a supplemental appropriation of $3,400,000 in the Water Utility Fund to fund the Lemay Water Line Replacement Project, and to supplement the 2025 water main operating budget, in addition to an appropriation of $32,000 for Art in Public Places. The Lemay Water Line Replacement Project is the result of unanticipated and continuous water leaks occurring since spring 2025. Based on the number and frequency of leaks, approximately $200,000 has been spent to date on responding to leaks. Considering the condition of the water line and risk to City staff and the public, the water line needs to be replaced. The $3,432,000 supplemental appropriation serves to: 1) supplement the 2025 water main repairs operating budget by $200,000 for unanticipated costs incurred to respond to numerous leaks; 2) fund $3,200,000 for design and construction of a new water line, as well as removal of the existing water line; and 3) contribute $32,000 for Art in Public Places per Code. Adopted on Second Reading. 4. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 129, 2025, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the Wastewater Utility Fund for the Blower Replacement Project and Related Art in Public Places. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on August 19, 2025, requests additional appropriation of $1,700,000 in the Wastewater Utility Fund to fund the Blower Replacement Project, in addition to appropriation of $17,000 for Art in Public Places. The Blower Replacement Project at the Drake Water Reclamation Facility (DWRF) has undergone design, up to sixty percent, for replacing two blowers. An additional $1,700,000 from Wastewater Utility Fund reserves is needed to supplement the existing appropriated budget for preliminary design. The requested $1,700,000 additional appropriation will fund final design and installation of both blowers, having a minor contingency to fund unanticipated costs for the blowers to be placed into service. Adopted on Second Reading. 5. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 130, 2025, Making a Supplemental Appropriation of an Additional Award from the Colorado Auto Theft Prevention Authority Grant for the Fort Collins Police Services Property Crimes Unit. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on August 19, 2025, supports the Fort Collins Police Services’ Property Crimes Unit by appropriating $54,200 of unanticipated grant revenue awarded by the Colorado State Patrol Department of Public Safety. In July 2025, the Colorado State Patrol awarded Fort Collins Police Services $54,200 as a partner agency of the Beat Auto Theft Through Law Enforcement (BATTLE) Task Force. The $54,200 award is under the BATTLE program’s FY26 cycle. These state funds will be used for Police Services personnel overtime pay to support multiagency and multijurisdictional BATTLE operations to identify, interdict, investigate, enforce, and prosecute motor vehicle theft-related crimes. Page 24 Item 1. September 2, 2025 City of Fort Collins City Council Proceedings Page 343 Adopted on Second Reading. 6. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 131, 2025, Making Supplemental Appropriations of Grant Funds From Colorado Parks and Wildlife for the Soapstone Prairie Headwaters Restoration Project. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on August 19, 2025, supports the Natural Areas Department (“NAD”) in stream and wetland protection and restoration work at Soapstone Prairie Natural Area. The Soapstone Prairie Headwaters Stream Restoration Project aims to improve ecological function and habitat in a one-mile reach of stream and wetland complex at Soapstone Prairie Natural Area. Specifically, the project will: - Improve hydrological function and biodiversity for a one-mile reach of stream/wetland complex. - Create seven pools using beaver dam analog wood structures to support amphibian habitat. - Incorporate a rest cycle from livestock grazing through wildlife-friendly fencing. - Include Native and Indigenous community members in restoration planting activities. NAD was awarded $25,500 through the Colorado Parks and Wildlife (“CPW”) Wetlands for Wildlife grant (Attachment 1). This grant funds the final phase of the project – adaptive management and monitoring activities – and follows completion of prior work including design, construction, and community engagement. This ordinance will enable the Natural Areas Department to complete the Soapstone Prairie Headwaters Restoration Project and fulfill final monitoring and reporting obligations under the CPW grant. Adopted on Second Reading. 7. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 132, 2025, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves and Authorizing Transfers of Appropriations for the Power Trail and Harmony Grade Separated Crossing Project and Related Art in Public Places. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on August 19, 2025, appropriates Transportation Capital Expansion Fee (TCEF) funds to the Power Trail and Harmony Grade Separated Crossing project (Project). The funds will be used for construction services. If approved, this item will: 1) appropriate $1,500,000 in TCEF funds to the Project; and 2) appropriate $15,000 (1%) of the TCEF funds to the Art in Public Places (APP) program. Adopted on Second Reading. 8. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 133, 2025, Making Supplemental Appropriations and Appropriating Prior Year Reserves for the Epic Pool Ice Center Chiller Replacement and Rink Renovation Project and Related Art in Public Places. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on August 19, 2025, appropriates $2,000,000 from 2050 Parks & Recreation tax reserves and $1,000,000 from the Recreation Fund reserves to replace the EPIC Ice Chiller system and modernize key rink infr astructure, including dasher boards, tempered safety glass, protective netting, painting and rink flooring. Adopted on Second Reading. Page 25 Item 1. September 2, 2025 City of Fort Collins City Council Proceedings Page 344 9. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 134, 2025, Authorizing the City of Fort Collins to Lease Real Property Adjacent to the Overland Electric Substation to Platte River Power Authority for a Battery Storage Project. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on August 19, 2025, approves a lease agreement between the City and Platte River Power Authority (PRPA) to lease 27,351 square feet of real property at 401 South Overland Trail within the existing site parcel. The agreement, which will require only a nominal annual rental payment by Platte River, allows the parties to evaluate the feasibility of the project and, pending successful analysis, proceed with the installation and operation of a 5MW/20MWh utility-side system connected to Light & Power’s distribution system. Platte River and Light & Power are collaborating on this project as part of their commitment to a non-carbon future and a reliable electric grid, with energy storage playing a crucial role in achieving those goals. Adopted on Second Reading. 10. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 135, 2025, Authorizing the Acquisition by Eminent Domain Proceedings of Certain Lands Necessary to Construct Cordova Road – North of Duff Drive. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on August 19, 2025, authorizes the use of eminent domain to acquire right-of-way needed for constructing the Cordova Road – North of Duff Drive project (Project). Adopted on Second Reading. 11. Items Relating to Amendments and Updates to Tax Provisions in City Code. A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 136, 2025, Amending Article III of Chapter 3 of the Code of Fort Collins Relating to Liquor Occupation Tax. B. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 137, 2025, Amending Articles II and III of Chapter 25 of the Code of Fort Collins Relating to Sales and Use Tax C. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 138, 2025, Amending Article IV of Chapter 25 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins to Increase the Threshold to Require a Written Settlement Agreement for Lodging Tax. These Ordinances, unanimously adopted on First Reading on August 19, 2025, recommend amendments to the Liquor Occupation Tax, the Sales and Use Tax, and Lodging Tax as part of the regular housekeeping and necessary updates to promote the health, safety and welfare of the community by providing for the accurate and efficient imposition, collection, and enforcement of the City’s taxes. The changes to the second reading of Ordinance No. 137, 2025 (found at the top of page 14 of the ordinance) remove an outdated statutory reference in Code Sec. 25-216 (Review of decisions of Financial Officer) by deleting the citation in that Section to Colorado Revised Statutes (C.R.S.) § 29-2-106., which was updated and relocated to C.R.S. § 29-2- 203 in the omnibus 2024 housekeeping legislation, Senate Bill 24-025 (SB24-025). SB24- 025 revised, modernized, and harmonized separate state statutes pertaining to sales and use tax administration. All Ordinances Adopted on Second Reading. Page 26 Item 1. September 2, 2025 City of Fort Collins City Council Proceedings Page 345 12. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 139, 2025, Amending Section 15-383 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins Regarding the Licensing of Outdoor Vendors. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on August 19, 2025, recommends amending the Outdoor Vendors Code to adopt an annual expiration date of the license issued by the City to align with the cadence of regulation by other local governments and for purposes of efficient regulation of vendors by the City. Adopted on Second Reading. 13. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 140, 2025, Amending Article IV of Chapter 15 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins to Update the Door-to-Door Solicitation Permitting Processes. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on August 19, 2025, recommends amendments and updates to the City’s regulation of door-to-door solicitors. Adopted on Second Reading. 14. First Reading of Ordinance No. 142, 2025, Appropriating Philanthropic Revenue Received through City Give for The Gardens on Spring Creek as Designated by the Donor. The purpose of this item is to appropriate $326,351 in philanthropic revenue received through City Give to benefit the Gardens on Spring Creek (the “Gardens”). These estate gifts to the Gardens align with both the City’s strategic priorities and the respective donors’ designation. In 2019, City Give, a formalized enterprise-wide initiative was launched to create a transparent, non-partisan governance structure for the acceptance and appropriation of charitable gifts. Adopted on First Reading. 15. First Reading of Ordinance No. 143, 2025, Vacating a Portion of the Right-of-Way of Giddings Road. The purpose of this item is to vacate a portion of the public right-of-way (ROW) at Giddings Road between Mountain Vista Drive and Richards Lake Road. The outside 8-ft of ROW on either side of the existing road can be vacated, and the road will still meet the minimum Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards for a 2-lane arterial street. Adopted on First Reading. 16. Items relating to the Moor Annexation. A. Resolution 2025-079 Setting Forth Findings of Fact and Determinations Regarding the Moor Annexation. B. Public Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 144, 2025, Annexing the Property Known as the Moor Annexation to the City of Fort Collins, Colorado. The purpose of these items is to annex a 3.368-acre property located northeast of the intersection of North Taft Hill Road and Laporte Avenue. The Initiating Resolution was adopted July 15, 2025. A related item to zone the annexed property is presented on this Agenda. This annexation request is in conformance with the State of Colorado Revised Statutes as they relate to annexations, the City of Fort Collins City Plan, and the Larimer County and City of Fort Collins Intergovernmental Agreement Regarding Growth Management. Page 27 Item 1. September 2, 2025 City of Fort Collins City Council Proceedings Page 346 Resolution Adopted and Ordinance Adopted on First Reading. 17. Public Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance No. 145, 2025, Amending the Zoning Map of the City of Fort Collins and Classifying for Zoning Purposes the Property Included in the Moor Annexation to the City of Fort Collins, Colorado, and Approving Corresponding Changes to the Residential Neighborhood Sign District Map and Lighting Context Area Map. The purpose of this item is to zone the property included in the Moor Annexation into the Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood District (LMN) and place the property into the Residential Sign District and the LC1 Lighting Context Area. This item is a quasi-judicial matter and if it is considered on the discussion agenda it will be considered in accordance with the procedures described in Section 1(d) of the Council’s Rules of Meeting Procedures adopted in Resolution 2024-148. Adopted on First Reading. 18. Resolution 2025-080 Adopting the 2025 Fort Collins Utilities Water Efficiency Plan. The purpose of this item is to adopt the 2025 Fort Collins Utilities Water Efficiency Plan. The 2025 Fort Collins Utilities Water Efficiency Plan (WEP) sets water efficiency goals and identifies strategies (such as voluntary incentives, policy, infrastructure tools, and education) to meet the goals, with a focus on treated water use within the Fort Collins Utilities (Utilities) water service area. The WEP update followed State guidelines and involved extensive public and staff engagement, quantitative analyses, and an equity evaluation. The State of Colorado requires that retail water providers have a State-approved water efficiency plan that is updated periodically. Following Council adoption, staff will submit the 2025 WEP to the Colorado Water Conservation Board for final approval. Adopted. 19. Resolution 2025-081 Approving Participation in the Settlement with An Additional Opioid Defendant, Purdue, and a Related Waiver of Claims. The purpose of this item is to consider a resolution to allow the City to participate in the Colorado Opioids Settlement with Purdue by granting approval to sign an additional participation agreement and waiver of claims for opioid-related damages. This is in follow-up to prior approvals of settlements with multiple other opioid defendants, negotiated through national settlement efforts coordinated through the State of Colorado. Adopted. END OF CONSENT CALENDAR Mayor Pro Tem Emily Francis moved, seconded by Councilmember Pignataro, to approve the recommended actions on items 1-19 on the Consent Calendar. The motion carried 7-0. Page 28 Item 1. September 2, 2025 City of Fort Collins City Council Proceedings Page 347 K) CONSENT CALENDAR FOLLOW-UP (This is an opportunity for Councilmembers to comment on items adopted or approved on the Consent Calendar.) Councilmember Potyondy celebrated the generous gift made to the Gardens on Spring Creek through the City Give program. Mayor Arndt stated the battery storage project is part of the move toward a clean energy future. L) STAFF REPORTS – Access Fort Collins Demonstration Amanda King, Chief Communication and Engagement Officer, provided an update on the City’s new and improved Access Fort Collins, which is the quickest and easiest way for community members to submit questions, service requests, or comments that are then routed directly to the City staff person who can best respond. She noted the platform can be accessed from the City’s website in several locations and there are also Apple and Android phone applications available. She provided a tutorial of how to submit a request on the new site and discussed how requests are handled internally. M) COUNCILMEMBER REPORTS None. Clerk’s Note: Mayor Arndt called for a break at 7:20 p.m., noting the meeting would resume at 7:30 p.m. N) CONSIDERATION OF ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR FOR INDIVIDUAL DISCUSSION None. O) CONSIDERATION OF ITEMS PLANNED FOR DISCUSSION 20. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 141, 2025, Expressing Support for the Recommendations of the Civic Assembly and Adopting a Conceptual Framework for the Use and Management of the Hughes Stadium Site. This Ordinance, adopted on First Reading on August 19th, 2025, by a vote of 6-1 (Nay: Gutowsky), supports the Civic Assembly’s recommendations presented to Council on May 27, 2025, and adds additional specification to those recommendations. Mayor Arndt noted this item is on Discussion as the vote was not unanimous on First Reading. PUBLIC COMMENT Rich Stave noted he wasn’t clear about whether Items #20 and #21 were in the correct order and questioned why another taxpayer funded bike park is needed when there is another one a mile away. He commented on E-bikes and stated very few Fort Collins residents will benefit from a bike park. He suggested funds should instead go toward repair and improvement of existing parks. COUNCIL QUESTIONS/COMMENTS Councilmember Ohlson requested clarification regarding references to the life cycles of features. Ginny Sawyer, Senior Policy and Project Manager, replied that language was included given the stewardship of the site will be ongoing in perpetuity. She stated it will be important to manage features respective of their life cycles as the community may desire changes in the future. Page 29 Item 1. September 2, 2025 City of Fort Collins City Council Proceedings Page 348 Councilmember Potyondy asked about a possible mismatch between the ordinance and ballot initiative in the language around involvement and engagement with the Indigenous community. She suggested changing the language in the ordinance to properly communicate the commitment to requiring that involvement and consultation. Councilmember Ohlson concurred with the change and suggested ‘including Indigenous/Native American consultation,’ but stated he would also support ‘require.’ Councilmember Potyondy supported the symmetry of having the language in the ordinance and ballot align. She suggested a friendly amendment to use the language from the ballot initiative in the ordinance. City Manager DiMartino suggested a wording change to replace ‘endeavor to engage in ongoing consultations’ with ‘consult.’ Mayor Pro Tem Francis moved, seconded by Councilmember Pignataro, to adopt Ordinance No. 121, 2025, Expressing Support for the Recommendations of the Civic Assembly and Adopting a Conceptual Framework for the Use and Management of the Hughes Stadium Site, on Second Reading, with language edits outlined by the City Manager in Section F, 2. Councilmember Gutowsky noted she opposed the ordinance on First Reading because she felt there was a discrepancy in the super majority vote and felt that the decision of the Civic Assembly was diminished by not honoring the vote. The motion carried 6-1. Ayes: Councilmembers Potyondy, Canonico, Pignataro, Arndt, Francis, and Ohlson. Nays: Councilmember Gutowsky. Councilmember Gutowsky stated she wanted to remind the community that the original initiative that passed in 2021 was approved by 69% of the voters and she believes the Civic Assembly recommendation moves away from that original intent. She commented on constituents’ concerns regarding the bike park feasibility study which has not been shared in a transparent fashion. She stated she would like to see the details of the site evaluation criteria and cost estimates for each location. She stated it is important to see how the Hughes site compares with others and stated she was going to propose that a regional bike park be considered for the northeast part of the city. 21. Resolution 2025-082 Referring Ordinance No. 141, 2025, Expressing Support for the Recommendations of the Civic Assembly and Adopting a Conceptual Framework for the Use and Management of the Hughes Stadium Site to a Vote of the Registered Electors of the City at the Next Regular General Election on November 4, 2025. This item has been amended to include 6 protests received on September 1, 2025, before the noon deadline The purpose of this item is to refer Ordinance No. 141, 2025, relating to the recommendations of the Civic Assembly for the use and management of the Hughes Stadium Site, to the November 2025 ballot. Pursuant to Section 7-156 of the City Code, any registered elector desiring to protest the proposed ballot title or submission clause for this item, must file such protest with the City Clerk no later than noon on Monday, September 1, 2025. The form and additional information on how to file a protest is located at this link: fcgov.com/elections/ballot-title-protest. Page 30 Item 1. September 2, 2025 City of Fort Collins City Council Proceedings Page 349 Because this date falls on a holiday: By Email: Protests may be emailed to cityclerk@fcgov.com by the noon deadline on September 1. In Person: Protests intended for in-person delivery may be submitted by 5:00 p.m. on Friday, August 29 or an appointment may be scheduled for the September 1 holiday by contacting 970- 221-6515 before 5:00 p.m. on August 29. If a protest is filed, a hearing on the protest will be added to the agenda item and will take pl ace before City Council adopts the Resolution setting the ballot title and submission clause. The Mayor noted six protests were received and explained the process that would be used. STAFF PRESENTATION Assistant City Manager Rupa Venkatesh provided the question that was to be answered as part of the Civic Assembly process and provided the language of the adopted 2021 ballot measure to rezone the Hughes site as Public Open Lands, which is defined as parks, recreation, open lands, natural areas, and wildlife rescue and restoration. She also provided the language of the proposed 2025 ballot initiative. PROTEST PRESENTATIONS The Mayor allotted 5 minutes for each protest presentation. Patricia Babbit commented on the suggested acreage for various uses of the site and noted a great deal of unaccounted for land remains. She expressed concern that the parcel measurements were not exact and expressed her opposition to the recommendation citing ambiguity. Tom Farnsworth protested the sufficiency of the ballot language specifically citing a June 2024 work session during which Council went to great lengths to clearly define recreation, wildlife rescue and restoration, natural areas, and parks on the 2021 ballot item as a way to show precise intent. He then noted Council discussed Civic Assembly super majority items and the recommendation that a bike park be included on the list of ballot items despite not having super majority status. He stated the clear and concise recommendations of the Civic Assembly are being skirted and stated the ballot language should include the exact terminology of the super majority items. Paul Patterson noted his protest was related to the permanent easement given for a detention pond and stated this use should be included in the submission clause. He provided suggestions for how to do this and pointed out the location and size of the easement. He noted the disc golf course easement exists within this area and provided additional details related to this. Kathryn Dubiel stated the Indigenous community has again been marginalized by the local government, administrators, and staff. She stated the resolution language marginalizes the involvement of the Indigenous community despite the Civic Assembly recommendations highly regarding Indigenous involvement. She also commented on the difference between the enacting clause of the ordinance and the ballot submission clause. Melissa Rosas stated the proposed ballot language and underlying ordinance leave voters with the impression that Council is only accepting the recommendations of the Civic Assembly; however, in comparing the Civic Assembly’s final report to the Council’s underlying ordinance, it is clear that impression is false and misleading. She stated the Civic Assembly did not Page 31 Item 1. September 2, 2025 City of Fort Collins City Council Proceedings Page 350 recommend a bike park or stand-alone wildlife conservation rescue and rehabilitation space and the ballot language around the dedicated space and facilities is exceedingly vague and could allow massive built infrastructure. Additionally, she stated there are no site plans or planning documents and only vague concepts with no guarantees on size or use. She stated she would like to see Council stand by the recommendations as provided in the Civic Assembly’s final report. Kathryn Dubiel stated this protest deals with the fact that there are elements of the presentation of the information that voters will see which is not clear and is misleading. She commented on a confusing comparison between the Council-referred ordinance and the citizen-initiated ordinance and stated the submission clause is required to be a clear statement of the enacting clause of the ordinance. She also commented on the order of the new amenities in the ballot language which she stated does not give the voter a vision of what will be significant changes and urged Council to change the list order. COUNCIL QUESTIONS/COMMENTS Councilmember Potyondy requested clarification regarding the permanent easement question that was raised. Ginny Sawyer, Senior Project and Policy Manger, replied the easement came with the property when it was purchased and noted the detention pond is necessary on the property. She stated she was unsure about the disc golf course easement; however, the City has stated its commitment to retaining and maintaining a disc golf course. Councilmember Pignataro asked if the City needs to have an easement on land it owns. City Attorney Daggett replied the City acquired a substantial easement from CSU several years ago, and when the City became the owner of the property, easements that were for the benefit of the City essentially merged with the title. Councilmember Ohlson stated he cannot yet support this item without some additional clarification. He noted the detention pond could be moved on the site or resized. He asked how staff would address the idea of being specific about parcel sizes for the bike park , conservation campus, and space that remains undesignated. Sawyer replied a connected trail system is anticipated throughout the site and noted this parcel will be unique and different from anything else in the city. She noted consultation work with the Indigenous community has not yet occurred and there may be some buffering between uses for which the undesignated space could be used. City Attorney Daggett noted the ordinance calls out the remainder of the site as park, aside from the specified uses. Councilmember Ohlson stated he would have liked the resolution to state something other than ‘expressing support for the recommendations of the Civic Assembly,’ stating he never supported that process. He stated he would have preferred language related to expressing support for multiple uses of the Hughes Stadium site. He requested clarification as to why staff did not list the uses from largest to smallest. He also commented on some ballot language that is confusing regarding the citizen-initiated ordinance. Mayor Pro Tem Francis supported updating the language and updating the language to match the updates that were made as part of the previous item. She suggested the cleanest way to do that would be to deny all protests and then make the changes under the resolution item. Councilmember Gutowsky expressed her appreciation for the time the protestors took to engage in what they thought was flawed about the resolution and ballot language. She expressed concern that so many community members were worried about the Civic Assembly process being flawed and about the ballot language being misleading. She recommended consideration of the specific Page 32 Item 1. September 2, 2025 City of Fort Collins City Council Proceedings Page 351 suggestions to clean up the language. She also though more specificity should be provided around the acreages. Mayor Pro Tem Francis moved, seconded by Councilmember Canonico, that Council deny each of the six protests based on consideration of the ballot title and submission clause and the information presented in the protest hearing, finding the ballot title and submission clause to meet the applicable standards. The motion carried 6-1. Ayes: Councilmembers Potyondy, Canonico, Pignataro, Arndt, Francis, and Ohlson. Nays: Councilmember Gutowsky. PUBLIC COMMENTED ON RESOLUTION 2025-082 Kathryn Dubiel stated Councilmember Pignataro noted the City is not required to provide an easement for itself; however, she noted there is a canal importation basin with components that were designed and sized to prevent flooding, which is a responsibility of the City. She stated she would like to know the cost impacts of moving the detention pond and questioned whether that would be a good use of taxpayer dollars. Tom Farnsworth stated this ballot is the product of Council and stated it is important to realize all members have used the words credibility, trustworthy, and transparency. He stated this ballot issue should not be included on the ballot and suggested the citizen-initiated item should be allowed to fail or pass. Melissa Rosas stated Council and staff have excluded Indigenous perspectives around preserving and protecting the Hughes site as a natural area for all. Elena Lopez concurred with Melissa Rosas’ statements and stated icing out the Indigenous and Bipoc people who want to protect the land for everyone is particularly disturbing. She stated they will fight to protect the land as long as they can and thanked the allies in the community. Lucy Lee stated she served as a delegate on the Civic Assembly and thanked Council for the opportunity to serve the City and collaborate with fellow residents on recommendations. She stated it is disheartening that there has been misinformation related to the recommendations and commended Council for turning the issue over to the delegates. She expressed support for the placement of the item on the ballot. COUNCIL QUESTIONS/COMMENTS Councilmember Gutowsky noted Council had a long discussion about how much they appreciated the work of the Civic Assembly and she stated she had nothing but praise for the work. She stated that Council’s job should be to pass a resolution accepting the recommendations of the Civic Assembly. She then commented on the petitioners who have taken countless hours to collect signatures and got their item on the ballot. She stated the citizen-initiated item should stand alone without placing the Civic Assembly item on the ballot. She stated placing both items on the ballot will cause confusion. Councilmember Ohlson requested clarification regarding language indicating that certain uses such as disc golf and sledding ‘may’ continue in the ordinance and differing wording in the ballot language. Assistant City Manager Venkatesh replied Council’s direction was that the language in the ordinance should be closely matched to the Civic Assembly recommendations, which clearly included uses such as a bike park, natural area, and park amenities, but were neutral on the disc golf course and sledding hill, which is why those are separate from the required uses. Page 33 Item 1. September 2, 2025 City of Fort Collins City Council Proceedings Page 352 Councilmember Ohlson reiterated the language difference regarding ‘may continue’ and ‘will continue’ existing uses and suggested the resolution should include ‘may.’ Assistant City Manager Venkatesh replied that change could be made. Councilmember Ohlson expressed concern about the reference to the citizen initiative in the ballot language. City Manager DiMartino suggested ‘allowing continuing uses.’ Council did not support that change. Councilmember Potyondy expressed support for striking the language related to the reference to the citizen initiative. Mayor Arndt also expressed support for striking the language and stated she would be supporting the resolution. She expressed support for the Civic Assembly process and related recommendations and stated it was done in a supportive and inclusive manner. She stated she was excited the recommendations would be placed before the voters. Clerk’s Note: Mayor Arndt called for a break at 8:56 p.m., noting the meeting would resume at 9:56 p.m. Mayor Pro Tem Francis moved, seconded by Councilmember Potyondy, to adopt Resolution 2025-082 Referring Ordinance No. 141, 2025, Expressing Support for the Recommendations of the Civic Assembly and Adopting a Conceptual Framework for the Use and Management of the Hughes Stadium Site to a Vote of the Registered Electors of the City at the Next Regular General Election on November 4, 2025, with the following amendments: page 3, section F number 2 should read ‘The City will consult with’ and striking out ‘endeavor to,’ page 4, the number 11 should be removed and number 12 should become 11, under Council referred ordinance, the language ‘differs from the citizens’ initiative ordinance on the November 2025 ballot which would require 100% of the Hughes site to be designated as a City natural area’ should be stricken and replaced with ‘provides for the following City action:,’ and the fourth bullet should read ‘may include existing uses such as disc golf and winter sledding.’ The motion carried 6-1. Ayes: Councilmembers Potyondy, Canonico, Pignataro, Arndt, Francis, and Ohlson. Nays: Councilmember Gutowsky. P) RESUMED PUBLIC COMMENT Q) OTHER BUSINESS Mayor Arndt offered birthday wishes to Councilmember Ohlson tomorrow. OB 1. Possible consideration of the initiation of new ordinances and/or resolutions by Councilmembers. (Three or more individual Councilmembers may direct the City Manager and City Attorney to initiate and move forward with development and preparation of resolutions and ordinances not originating from the Council's Policy Agenda or initiated by staff.) R) ADJOURNMENT There being no further business before the Council, the meeting was adjourned at 9:04 p.m. Page 34 Item 1. September 2, 2025 City of Fort Collins City Council Proceedings Page 353 ______________________________ Mayor ATTEST: ______________________________ City Clerk Page 35 Item 1. File Attachments for Item: 2. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 142, 2025, Appropriating Philanthropic Revenue Received through City Give for The Gardens on Spring Creek as Designated by the Donor. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on September 2, 2025, appropriates $326,351 in philanthropic revenue received through City Give to benefit the Gardens on Spring Creek (the “Gardens”). These estate gifts to the Gardens align with both the City’s strategic priorities and the respective donors’ designation. In 2019, City Give, a formalized enterprise-wide initiative was launched to create a transparent, non-partisan governance structure for the acceptance and appropriation of charitable gifts. Page 36 City Council Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 1 of 2 September 16, 2025 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Council STAFF Emily Land, Director of Philanthropy & Strategic Partnerships SUBJECT Second Reading of Ordinance No. 142, 2025, Appropriating Philanthropic Revenue Received through City Give for The Gardens on Spring Creek as Designated by the Donor. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on September 2, 2025, appropriates $326,351 in philanthropic revenue received through City Give to benefit the Gardens on Spring Creek (the “Gardens”). These estate gifts to the Gardens align with both the City’s strategic priorities and the respective donors’ designation. In 2019, City Give, a formalized enterprise-wide initiative was launched to create a transparent, non- partisan governance structure for the acceptance and appropriation of charitable gifts. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on Second Reading. FIRST READING BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION The City has long been the beneficiary of local generosity and has a valuable role in our community’s philanthropic landscape. Generosity is demonstrated in both large and modest gifts; each appreciated for its investment in the mission and the range of services the City strives to deliver. As acknowledged by Section 2.5 of the City's Fiscal Management Policy 2-revenue, approved by City Council, the City Manager has adopted the Philanthropic Governance Policy to provide for the responsible and efficient management of charitable donations to the City. This item appropriates $326,351 from the estate of John Ardary received through City Give. The donor’s estate bequest directed the City to use this generous donation for the benefit of the Gardens. CITY FINANCIAL IMPACTS This Ordinance will appropriate $326,351 in unanticipated philanthropic revenue received through City Give for the Gardens. Page 37 Item 2. City Council Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 2 of 2 The donations shall be expended from the designated fund solely for the donor’s directed intent. The funds have been received and accepted per City Give Administrative and Financial Policy. The City Manager has also determined that these appropriations are available and previously unappropriated from their designated City Fund and will not cause the total amount appropriated in those Funds to exceed the current estimate of actual and anticipated revenues. BOARD / COMMISSION / COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION None. PUBLIC OUTREACH None. ATTACHMENTS First Reading attachments available in September 2, 2025, agenda materials at the following link: https://fortcollins-co.municodemeetings.com/. 1. Ordinance No. 142, 2025 Page 38 Item 2. ORDINANCE NO. 142, 2025 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS APPROPRIATING PHILANTHROPIC REVENUE RECEIVED THROUGH CITY GIVE FOR THE GARDENS ON SPRING CREEK AS DESIGNATED BY THE DONOR A. The City of Fort Collins has long been the beneficiary of local philanthropy. Generosity is demonstrated in both large and modest gifts, each appreciated for its investment in the mission and the range of services the City strives to deliver. B. The City has received a philanthropic gift of $326,351 that requires appropriation by City Council. This gift came from the estate of John Ardary with the designation that it benefit The Gardens on Spring Creek. C. This appropriation benefits the public health, safety, and welfare of the residents of Fort Collins and serves the public purpose of supporting a municipal botanical garden. D. Article V, Section 9 of the City Charter permits the City Council, upon recommendation of the City Manager, to make a supplemental appropriation by ordinance at any time during the fiscal year, provided that the total amount of such supplemental appropriation, in combination with all previous appropriations for that fiscal year, do not exceed the current estimate of actual and anticipated revenues and all other funds to be received during the fiscal year. E. The City Manager has recommended the appropriation described herein and determined that the funds to be appropriated are available and previously unappropriated from the Cultural Services and Facilities Fund and that this appropriation will not cause the total amount appropriated in the Cultural Services and Facilities Fund to exceed the current estimate of actual and anticipated revenues and all other funds to be received in this Fund during this fiscal year. F. Article V, Section 11 of the City Charter authorizes the City Council to designate in the ordinance when appropriating funds for a federal, state or private grant or donation, that such appropriation shall not lapse at t he end of the fiscal year in which the appropriation is made, but continue until the earlier of the expiration of the federal, state or private grant or donation or the City’s expenditure of all funds received from such grant or donation. G. The City Council wishes to designate the appropriation herein for the Estate of John Ardary City Give Donation as an appropriation that shall not lapse until the earlier of the expiration of the grant (or donation) or the City’s expenditure of all funds received from such grant (or donation). Page 39 Item 2. In light of the foregoing recitals, which the Council hereby makes and adopts as determinations and findings, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. There is hereby appropriated from new revenue or other funds in the Cultural Services and Facilities Fund the sum of THREE HUNDRED TWENTY-SIX THOUSAND THREE HUNDRED FIFTY-ONE DOLLARS ($326,351) to be expended in the Cultural Services and Facilities Fund for The Gardens on Spring Creek. Section 2. The appropriation herein for the Estate of John Ardary City Give Donation is hereby designated, as authorized in Article V, Section 11 of the City Charter, as an appropriation that shall not lapse at the end of this fiscal year but continue until the earlier of the expiration of the grant (or donation) or the City’s expenditure of all funds received from such grant (or donation). Introduced, considered favorably on first reading on September 2, 2025, and approved on second reading for final passage on September 16, 2025. ______________________________ Mayor ATTEST: ______________________________ Sr. Deputy City Clerk Effective Date: September 26, 2025 Approving Attorney: Ted Hewitt Exhibit: None Page 40 Item 2. File Attachments for Item: 3. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 143, 2025, Vacating a Portion of the Right-of-Way of Giddings Road. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on September 2, 2025, vacates a portion of the public right-of-way (ROW) at Giddings Road between Mountain Vista Drive and Richards Lake Road. The outside 8-ft of ROW on either side of the existing road can be vacated, and the road will still meet the minimum Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards for a 2-lane arterial street. Page 41 City Council Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 1 of 2 September 16, 2025 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Council STAFF Tim Dinger, Civil Engineer III, Engineering Development Review SUBJECT Second Reading of Ordinance No. 143, 2025, Vacating a Portion of the Right-of-Way of Giddings Road. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on September 2, 2025, vacates a portion of the public right-of-way (ROW) at Giddings Road between Mountain Vista Drive and Richards Lake Road. The outside 8-ft of ROW on either side of the existing road can be vacated, and the road will still meet the minimum Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards for a 2-lane arterial street. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on Second Reading. FIRST READING BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION The developer is seeking to vacate a portion of the ROW for Giddings Road, related to their adjacent development of Montava Phase D. Giddings Road is classified as a 2-lane arterial street between Mountain Vista Drive and Richards Lake Road, per the City’s Master Street Plan. The current ROW width for this portion of Giddings Road is 100-feet, which exceeds the 84-foot minimum that is the required ROW width for the street classification, according to the Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards (LCUASS). The developer is proposing to vacate the outer 8-feet of ROW from both sides of Giddings Road, which would bring the proposed ROW width to meet the exact minimum requirement (84-feet). The final plat for Montava Phase D – Infrastructure will dedicate 15-foot width utility easements adjacent to the ROW. The City Engineer and the Planning, Development, and Transportation Director recommend approval of this right-of-way vacation. CITY FINANCIAL IMPACTS None. BOARD / COMMISSION / COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION None. Page 42 Item 3. City Council Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 2 of 2 PUBLIC OUTREACH Potentially affected utility agencies and City staff have been notified of the request for right-of-way vacation. The Montava Metro District will be the sole property owner for both sides of this portion of Giddings Road at the time the right-of-way vacation is recorded. ATTACHMENTS First Reading attachments available in September 2, 2025, agenda materials at the following link: https://fortcollins-co.municodemeetings.com/. 1. Ordinance No. 143, 2025 Page 43 Item 3. -1- ORDINANCE NO. 143, 2025 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS VACATING A PORTION OF THE RIGHT-OF-WAY OF GIDDINGS ROAD A. The Montava Construction & Development, Inc. (the “Developer”) is under contract with the Anheuser-Busch Foundation to purchase the properties surrounding a portion of Giddings Road between Mountain Vista Drive and Richards Lake Road including Parcel numbers 8833000002, 8833000001, 8832000001, 8832000002 with the intention of constructing a housing development. B. In order to develop these properties and maximize the developable area, the Developer is requesting that the City vacate a portion of the Giddings Road right-of- way dedicated via Road Book R, Page 152 & Book 2289, more particularly described in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. C. Specifically, the Developer is requesting to vacate the outer 8-feet of right- of-way from both sides of Giddings Road. The existing right-of-way is 100-feet, which exceeds the 84-ft standard minimum width for street classification as described by Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards (“LCASS”) for a 2-lane arterial street. The proposed vacation would bring the right-of-way within the exact minimum requirement of 84-ft as set forth in the LCASS for a 2-lane arterial street. D. This proposed right-of-way vacation relates to the phase of the Montava Phase D development related to infrastructure (“Montava Subdivision Phase D Infrastructure”) This phase is currently proceeding through the City’s site plan review processes. The Final Plat for Montava Subdivision Phase D Infrastructu re is described in Exhibit B, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. The Montava Subdivision Phase D Infrastructure plan proposes to improve the right -of-way and frontage of Giddings Road and construct a roundabout to serve the development. E. City Code Section 23-115 provides that the City Council may vacate a City right-of-way upon finding “that the right-of-way being considered for vacation is no longer needed for right-of-way purposes,” and that the vacation is in the public’s interest. F. Colorado Revised Statutes (“C.R.S.”) Section 43 -2-303(1)(a) provides that the City Council may by ordinance “vacate any roadway or part thereof located within the corporate limits” of the city. C.R.S. Section 43-2-303(3) further provides that upon vacation, “rights-of-way may be reserved for the continued use of existing sewer, gas, water, or similar pipelines and appurtenances, for ditches or canals and appurtenances, and for electric, telephone, and similar lines and appurtenances.” G. In accordance with City Code Section 23-115(d), pertinent City staff, potentially affected utility companies, emergency service providers, and affected property owners in the vicinity of the right-of-way have been contacted, no objection has been reported to the proposed vacation, and the City Engineer recommends approval of the Page 44 Item 3. -2- right-of-way vacation. The City will continue to reserve the existing right-of-way for utility purposes. H. As required under City Code Section 23-115(e), the Planning Development and Transportation Director recommends approval that a portion of the Giddings Road right-of-way be vacated. I. Vacating a portion of the Giddings Road right-of-way will not prejudice or injure the rights of the residents of Fort Collins. In light of the foregoing recitals, which the Council hereby makes and adopts as determinations and findings, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. The City Council hereby finds and determines that a portion of the Giddings Road right-of-way dedicated via Road Book R, Page 152 & Book 2289 , more particularly described in Exhibit A, is no longer needed for right-of-way purposes, and that it is in the public interest to vacate the same. Section 2. The portion of Giddings Road right-of-way dedicated via Road Book R, Page 152 & Book 2289, as described by Exhibit A, is hereby vacated, abated, and abolished. Section 3. In accordance with City Code Section 23-115(f), title to the Giddings Road right-of-way vacated by this Ordinance shall vest in accordance with C.R.S. Section 43-2-302. Section 4. This Ordinance shall not be effective until the final plat for Montava Phase D – Infrastructure, more particularly described in Exhibit B, is submitted by the Developer for recordation. Section 5. Upon the fulfillment of the condition stated in Section 4 of this Ordinance, the City shall record this Ordinance with the Larimer County Clerk and Recorder, at which point the vacation shall become effective. Section 6. Maintenance of the Vacation Area shall be the responsibility of those in whom title vests and shall be undertaken as provided in City Code Section 20-42, Section 24-42, and any other applicable requirements. Page 45 Item 3. -3- Introduced, considered favorably on first reading on September 2, 2025, and approved on second reading for final passage on September 16, 2025. ______________________________ Mayor ATTEST: ______________________________ Sr. Deputy City Clerk Effective Date: September 26, 2025 Approving Attorney: Stefanie Boster Exhibit: Exhibit A – Legal Description Exhibit B – Montana Subdivision Phase D Infrastructure Page 46 Item 3. EXHIBIT A TO ORDINANCE NO. 143, 2025 Page 47 Item 3. A parcel of land, situate in the Southeast Quarter of Section 32, Township 8 North, Range 68 West of the 6th Principal Meridian, City of Fort Collins, County of Larimer, State of Colorado; and being more particularly described as follows: COMMENCING at the Southeast corner of said Section 32 and assuming the East line of said Southeast Quarter as bearing North 00°33'45" West a distance of 2642.14 feet, monumented by a 2-1 2 " aluminum cap stamped LS 17497 in a Monument Box at the Southeast corner and a 3-1 4" brass cap stamped LS 15278 in a Monument Box at the East Quarter corner and with all other bearing contained herein relative thereto; THENCE North 00°33'45" West, along said East line, a distance of 50.00 feet; THENCE North 89°57'58" West a distance of 42.00 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE North 89°57'58" West a distance of 8.00 feet, to the North Right-of-Way (ROW) line of Mountain Vista Drive and West ROW line of North Giddings Road, as described in the Special Warranty Deed recorded September 14, 1984 as Reception No. 587201 of the Larimer County Clerk & Recorder; THENCE North 00°33'45" West, along said West line, a distance of 1207.02 feet to a point on the South line of Goodheart Drive Right-of-Way, as described in the Plat recorded , as Reception No. of the Larimer County Clerk & Recorder; THENCE South 89°59'26" East a distance of 8.00 feet to a line that is Parallel with the aforementioned West ROW line; THENCE South 00°33'45" East a distance of 1207.02 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING; Said described parcel of land contains 9,656 Square Feet or 0.222 Acres, more or less (±). I, Steven Parks, a Colorado Licensed Professional Land Surveyor do hereby state this Parcel Description was prepared from under my personal supervision and checking, and that it is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. Steven Parks - on behalf of Majestic Surveying, LLC Colorado Licensed Professional Land Surveyor #38348 EXHIBIT A TO ORDINANCE NO. 143, 2025 Page 48 Item 3. EXHIBIT A TO ORDINANCE NO. 143, 2025 Page 49 Item 3. A parcel of land, situate in the East Half of Section 32, Township 8 North, Range 68 West of the 6th Principal Meridian, City of Fort Collins, County of Larimer, State of Colorado; and being more particularly described as follows: COMMENCING at the Southeast corner of said Section 32 and assuming the East line of said Southeast Quarter as bearing North 00°33'45" West a distance of 2642.14 feet, monumented by a 2-1 2 " aluminum cap stamped LS 17497 in a Monument Box at the Southeast corner and a 3-1 4" brass cap stamped LS 15278 in a Monument Box at the East Quarter corner and with all other bearing contained herein relative thereto; THENCE North 00°33'45" West, along said East line, a distance of 1337.05 feet; THENCE North 89°59'26" West a distance of 42.00 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE North 89°59'26" West a distance of 8.00 feet to a point on the West Right-of-Way (ROW) line of that parcel as described in the Special Warranty Deed recorded September 14, 1984 as Reception No. 587201 of the Larimer County Clerk & Recorder and the North ROW line of Goodheart Drive, as described in the Plat recorded , as Reception No. of the Larimer County Clerk & Recorder; THENCE along said West ROW line for the following two (2) courses: THENCE North 00°33'45" West a distance of 1304.60 feet; THENCE North 00°35'37" West a distance of 378.64 feet to a point on the South ROW line of Longwood Drive, as described in the Plat recorded , as Reception No. ; THENCE North 89°25'19" East a distance of 8.00 feet to a line that is Parallel with the aforementioned West ROW line; THENCE South 00°35'37" East a distance of 378.65 feet; THENCE South 00°33'45" East a distance of 1304.66 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING; Said described parcel of land contains 13,466 Square Feet or 0.309 Acres, more or less (±). I, Steven Parks, a Colorado Licensed Professional Land Surveyor do hereby state this Parcel Description was prepared from under my personal supervision and checking, and that it is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. Steven Parks - on behalf of Majestic Surveying, LLC Colorado Licensed Professional Land Surveyor #38348 EXHIBIT A TO ORDINANCE NO. 143, 2025 Page 50 Item 3. EXHIBIT A TO ORDINANCE NO. 143, 2025 Page 51 Item 3. A parcel of land, situate in the Northeast Quarter of Section 32, Township 8 North, Range 68 West of the 6th Principal Meridian, City of Fort Collins, County of Larimer, State of Colorado; and being more particularly described as follows: COMMENCING at the Northeast corner of said Section 32 and assuming the East line of said Northeast Quarter as bearing South 00°35'37" East a distance of 2633.48 feet, monumented by a 3-1 4" brass cap stamped LS 15278 in a Range Box at the Northeast Quarter corner and a 3-1 4" brass cap stamped LS 15278 in a Monument Box at the East Quarter corner and with all other bearing contained herein relative thereto; THENCE South 00°35'37" East, along said East line, a distance of 49.98 feet; THENCE North 89°39'06" East a distance of 42.01 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE South 00°35'37" East a distance of 2145.50 feet; THENCE South 89°25'19" West a distance of 8.00 feet to a point on the West Right-of-Way (ROW) line of that parcel as described in the Special Warranty Deed recorded September 14, 1984 as Reception No. 587201 of the Larimer County Clerk & Recorder and the North line of Longwood Drive ROW, as described in the Plat recorded , as Reception No. of the Larimer County Clerk & Recorder; THENCE North 00°35'37" West, along said West line, a distance of 2145.63 feet to a point on the South ROW line of Richards Lake Road, as described in the Special Warranty Deed recorded September 14, 1984 as Reception No. 587201 of the Larimer County Clerk & Recorder; THENCE South 89°39'06" East a distance of 8.00 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING; Said described parcel of land contains 17,165 Square Feet or 0.394 Acres, more or less (±). I, Steven Parks, a Colorado Licensed Professional Land Surveyor do hereby state this Parcel Description was prepared from under my personal supervision and checking, and that it is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. Steven Parks - on behalf of Majestic Surveying, LLC Colorado Licensed Professional Land Surveyor #38348 EXHIBIT A TO ORDINANCE NO. 143, 2025 Page 52 Item 3. EXHIBIT A TO ORDINANCE NO. 143, 2025 Page 53 Item 3. A parcel of land, situate in the Southwest Quarter of Section 33, Township 8 North, Range 68 West of the 6th Principal Meridian, City of Fort Collins, County of Larimer, State of Colorado; and being more particularly described as follows: COMMENCING at the Southwest corner of said Section 33 and assuming the West line of said Southwest Quarter as bearing North 00°33'45" West a distance of 2642.14 feet, monumented by a 2-1 2 " aluminum cap stamped LS 17497 in a Monument Box at the Southwest corner and a 3-1 4" brass cap stamped LS 15278 in a Monument Box at the West Quarter corner and with all other bearing contained herein relative thereto; THENCE North 00°33'45" West, along said West line, a distance of 50.00 feet; THENCE North 89°58'54" East a distance of 42.00 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE North 00°33'45" West a distance of 2592.55 feet; THENCE North 00°35'37" West a distance of 1551.54 feet to the North line of that parcel as described in the Special Warranty Deed recorded September 14, 1984 as Reception No. 587201 of the Larimer County Clerk & Recorder; THENCE along said parcel for the following (3) courses THENCE North 89°24'18" East a distance of 8.00 feet ; THENCE South 00°35'37" East a distance of 1551.53 feet; THENCE South 00°33'45" East a distance of 2592.64 feet; THENCE South 89°58'54" West a distance of 8.00 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING; Said described parcel of land contains 33,153 Square Feet or 0.761 Acres, more or less (±). I, Steven Parks, a Colorado Licensed Professional Land Surveyor do hereby state this Parcel Description was prepared from under my personal supervision and checking, and that it is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. Steven Parks - on behalf of Majestic Surveying, LLC Colorado Licensed Professional Land Surveyor #38348 EXHIBIT A TO ORDINANCE NO. 143, 2025 Page 54 Item 3. EXHIBIT A TO ORDINANCE NO. 143, 2025 Page 55 Item 3. A parcel of land, situate in the Northwest Quarter of Section 33, Township 8 North, Range 68 West of the 6th Principal Meridian, City of Fort Collins, County of Larimer, State of Colorado; and being more particularly described as follows: COMMENCING at the Northwest corner of said Section 33 and assuming the West line of said Northwest Quarter as bearing South 00°35'37" East a distance of 2633.48 feet, monumented by a 3-1 4" brass cap stamped LS 15278 in a Range Box at the Northwest corner and a 3-1 4" brass cap stamped LS 15278 in a Monument Box at the West Quarter corner and with all other bearing contained herein relative thereto; THENCE South 00°35'37" East, along said West line, a distance of 49.98 feet; THENCE South 89°57'45" East a distance of 42.00 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE South 89°57'45" East a distance of 8.00 feet to the East Right-of-Way (ROW) line of North Giddings Road and the South ROW line of Richards Lake Road, as described in the Special Warranty Deed recorded September 14, 1984 as Reception No. 587201 of the Larimer County Clerk & Recorder; THENCE South 00°35'37" East, along said East line a distance of 801.85 feet to the North line of that parcel as described in the Special Warranty Deed recorded May 31, 2016 as Reception No. 20160033867 of the Larimer County Clerk & Recorder; THENCE North 35°00'49" West, along said North line, a distance of 14.15 feet to a line that is Parallel to the aforementioned East ROW line; THENCE North 00°35'37" West a distance of 790.26 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING; Said described parcel of land contains 6,368 Square Feet or 0.146 Acres, more or less (±). I, Steven Parks, a Colorado Licensed Professional Land Surveyor do hereby state this Parcel Description was prepared from under my personal supervision and checking, and that it is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. Steven Parks - on behalf of Majestic Surveying, LLC Colorado Licensed Professional Land Surveyor #38348 EXHIBIT A TO ORDINANCE NO. 143, 2025 Page 56 Item 3. EXHIBIT A TO ORDINANCE NO. 143, 2025 Page 57 Item 3. ” ”” ” ” ” ”” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ”” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” EXHIBIT B TO ORDINANCE NO. 143, 2025 Page 58 Item 3. “”“” EXHIBIT B TO ORDINANCE NO. 143, 2025 Page 59 Item 3. EXHIBIT B TO ORDINANCE NO. 143, 2025 Page 60 Item 3. EXHIBIT B TO ORDINANCE NO. 143, 2025 Page 61 Item 3. EXHIBIT B TO ORDINANCE NO. 143, 2025 Page 62 Item 3. EXHIBIT B TO ORDINANCE NO. 143, 2025 Page 63 Item 3. File Attachments for Item: 4. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 144, 2025, Annexing the Property Known as the Moor Annexation to the City of Fort Collins, Colorado . This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on September 2, 2025, annexes a 3.368-acre property located northeast of the intersection of North Taft Hill Road and Laporte Avenue. The Initiating Resolution was adopted July 15, 2025. A related item to zone the annexed property is presented on this Agenda. This annexation request is in conformance with the State of Colorado Revised Statutes as they relate to annexations, the City of Fort Collins City Plan, and the Larimer County and City of Fort Collins Intergovernmental Agreement Regarding Growth Management. Page 64 City Council Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 1 of 2 September 16, 2025 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Council STAFF Arlo Schumann, City Planner SUBJECT Second Reading of Ordinance No. 144, 2025, Annexing the Property Known as the Moor Annexation to the City of Fort Collins, Colorado. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on September 2, 2025, annexes a 3.368-acre property located northeast of the intersection of North Taft Hill Road and Laporte Avenue. The Initiating Resolution was adopted July 15, 2025. A related item to zone the annexed property is presented on this Agenda. This annexation request is in conformance with the State of Colorado Revised Statutes as they relate to annexations, the City of Fort Collins City Plan, and the Larimer County and City of Fort Collins Intergovernmental Agreement Regarding Growth Management. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on Second Reading. FIRST READING BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION Introduction This is a voluntary annexation of 3.368 acres located northeast of the intersection of North Taft Hill Road and Laporte Avenue. The site remains undeveloped. The site is bound by a place of worship to the north, a large lot single family home to the east, commercial retail stores and Laporte Avenue to the south, and N Taft Hill Road to the west. Larimer County and City of Fort Collins Intergovernmental Agreement The property is located within the Fort Collins Growth Management Area (GMA) and according to policies and agreements between the City of Fort Collins and Larimer County contained in the Intergovernmental Agreement for the Fort Collins Growth Management Area, the City agrees to consider annexation of property in the GMA when the property is eligible for annexation according to State law. Contiguity Requirements Page 65 Item 4. City Council Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 2 of 2 The Moor Annexation gains contiguity with city limits along its western edge fronting N Taft Hill Road with the Sanctuary On The Green Annexation (126-2018) and along its southern edge fronting Laporte Avenue with the Kennedy's West Laporte Annexation (70-1972). The annexation site has a total perimeter of 1,868.88 feet and a contiguous perimeter with city limits of 835.30 feet. The contiguous perimeter is 45% of the overall perimeter, exceeding the one-sixth (16%) required by state statute. CITY FINANCIAL IMPACTS The annexation and zoning will not result in any initial direct significant financial/economic impacts. Annexation will trigger the transition of law enforcement from the Larimer County Sherriff’s Office to Fort Collins Police Services, however, the site is currently undeveloped. When additional development of the site occurs, water services will be provided by the City. COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION The Planning and Zoning Commission will hear and provide a recommendation for the Moor Annexation and Zoning to Council at the Commission’s August 21, 2025, hearing. The minutes from this meeting were not available on First Reading and are included on Second Reading of this item. PUBLIC OUTREACH A joint neighborhood meeting for the annexation and proposed Overall Development Plan for the site was held on February 12, 2025. A majority of questions and concerns discussed at the meeting related to future development issues rather than the annexation. ATTACHMENTS First Reading attachments available in September 2, 2025, agenda materials at the following link: https://fortcollins-co.municodemeetings.com/. 1. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes, August 21, 2025 (draft) 2. Ordinance No. 144, 2025 Page 66 Item 4. 8/21/25– MINUTES Planning & Zoning Commission REGULAR MEETING August 21, 2025 – 6:00 PM Council Chambers, City Hall 300 Laporte Ave Also via Zoom 1. CALL TO ORDER: 6:00 PM 2. ROLL CALL a. Board Members Present – Adam Sass (Chair), Russell Connelly (Vice Chair), York, Shirley Peel, Ted Shepard b. Board Members Absent – Julie Stackhouse and Kent Bruxvoort c. Staff Members Present – Frickey, Kidwell, Myler, Yatabe, Mapes, Schumann, Kleer, Gilchrist d. Guest(s) – 3. AGENDA REVIEW Clay Frickey, Planning Manager, provided a review of the agenda. 4. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION None. 5. CONSENT AGENDA Miranda Spindel requested the Moor Annexation item be pulled for discussion due to concerns regarding the proposed zoning of the property. Laura Larson also requested the Moor Annexation item be pulled for discussion. Kay Lannen requested the Academy of Arts and Knowledge item be pulled for discussion due to concerns about playground noise.  CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF JUNE 25, 2025 Page 67 Item 4. 8/21/25– MINUTES The purpose of this item is to approve the minutes from the June 25, 2025 meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission.  ENCLAVE AT REDWOOD SUBDIVISION – FDP250007 DESCRIPTION: This is a request for a combination Major Amendment/Final Development Plan to replat Enclave at Redwood into fourteen (14) separate lots, and ten (10) tracts. There are no proposed changes to the Site, Landscape, Drainage, or Utility Plans approved with the Enclave at Redwood Final Development Plan. This is located in the Low Density Mixed Use Zone District and is subject to a Type 2, Planning & Zoning Commission review. STAFF: Clark Mapes, City Planner PROPERTY OWNER: Brian Bratcher, DR Horton 9555 Kingston Ct. Englewood, CO 80112 APPLICANT: Tenae Beane Ripley Design, Inc. 236 Linden St. Ste. A Fort Collins, CO 80524 Commissioner York made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Peel, to approve the Consent Agenda as amended. Yeas: Connelly, Shepard, York, Peel, and Sass. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. 6. DISCUSSION AGENDA  MOOR ANNEXATION – ANX250001 DESCRIPTION: This is a request to annex and zone 3.368 acres of land generally located at parcel 9710200008. The annexation is subject to a series of hearings including a (Type 2) Review and public hearing by the Planning & Zoning Commission and recommendation to City Council. A specific project development plan proposal is not included with the annexation application. This project is related to Conceptual Review CDR240025, previously known as 2000 Laporte Avenue Annexation. Page 68 Item 4. 8/21/25– MINUTES STAFF: Arlo Schumann, Planner PROPERTY OWNER: RRT Investments LLC 6316 Jocelyn Hollow Rd. Nashville, TN 372053520 APPLICANT: Cathy Mathis TB Group 444 Mountain Avenue Berthoud, CO 80513 STAFF OVERVIEW Arlo Schumann, City Planner, stated this is a request for a recommendation to City Council for a voluntary annexation and zoning of 3.36 acres located northeast of the intersection of Taft Hill Road and Laporte Avenue. He noted the annexation is contiguous with municipal boundaries and meets the State annexation requirements. He stated the proposal is for the site to be zoned Low-Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (LMN). Schumann showed an aerial image of the site and discussed the surrounding parcels and their zoning. He noted the Structure Plan map identifies the site and its immediate surroundings as the Suburban Neighborhood place type, which has a principal land use of single unit detached homes with a density of two to five principal units per acre. Other uses include recreational facilities, schools, places of worship, and ADU’s. Schumann discussed the Northwest Subarea Plan guidance for the area which calls out LMN and RL zoning and limited commercial areas. He also noted staff is recommending the site be placed in the residential sign district and lighting context area 1 (LC1). He stated staff finds the property meets the State law eligibility requirements to qualify for a voluntary annexation and that the requested LMN zoning is consistent with the City’s Structure Plan and Northwest Subarea Plan. Additionally, the annexation is consistent with the policies and agreements between Larimer County and the City of Fort Collins. He noted City Council accepted the annexation petition on July 15, 2025. COMMISSION QUESTIONS Chair Sass asked about the role of the Commission in terms of providing a recommendation on annexations. Assistant City Attorney Brad Yatabe replied the Land Use Code specifies that annexations are controlled by State statutes which were analyzed in the staff report. Additionally, the associated zoning is also part of the recommendation and is analyzed in the staff report as well. He stated the Commission should principally examine alignment with City Plan. Commissioner York asked how long the site has been an enclave. Schumann replied it is not an enclave as there is unincorporated property to the north. He added that this annexation would create an enclave of the gas station and two properties on the west side of Taft Hill Road. Commissioner Peel asked how the Subarea Plans are supposed to be considered in this Page 69 Item 4. 8/21/25– MINUTES type of situation, given the Sanctuary on the Green ruling. Assistant City Attorney Yatabe replied the District Court order directed that Subarea Plans are considered to be more than advisory and there must be compliance with the Plans. Commissioner Peel requested a summary of why this annexation is in compliance with the Northwest Subarea Plan. Schumann replied the framework map identifies the area as LMN. Chair Sass asked about a comment related to the property having previously been a landfill and noted any work would need to be done per CDPHE standards if applicable. Schumann replied that work would be part of the development plan. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION Kathy Fieseler, 1950 Laporte Avenue, stated her property borders the entire east side of the subject property. She ceded her remaining time to Jennifer Beccard. Jennifer Beccard, Fort Collins resident, stated the Fieselers have lived at their home for 44 years and expressed concern that the project will significantly impact their property. She opposed the LMN zoning and recommended Low-Density Residential (RL) or Urban Estate (UE) zoning stating those zones would better align with the Northwest Subarea Plan and the neighborhood. She stated the project is contemplating a four-story building and noted there are no four-story buildings anywhere in the area. She also stated the site is in a floodplain and frequently floods. Additionally, she expressed concern about traffic and safety in the area. Raygina Kohlmeier, 273 North Sunset Street, expressed concern about the proposed zoning stating it is not appropriate for the surrounding area. She also commented on the insufficient drainage situation along Laporte Avenue that was only recently addressed. She questioned whether the existing infrastructure could support additional development without negative flooding, noise, lighting, and traffic impacts. Val Vogeler, 520 North Taft Hill Road, described the neighborhood as being quite rural and suggested LMN zoning is not appropriate for the subject property. She expressed concern about flooding, safety, and traffic impacts. Pastor Dee Highland of the church just north of the subject property stated a four-story building would not be bothersome given the height of existing trees. He expressed concern about the floodplain and drainage issues. Miranda Spindel, owner of the property just to the north of the proposed annexation. She stated any future development of the property will directly impact the neighborhood. She stated the framework plan provides guidance, is not regulatory, and is intended to be used together with the Northwest Subarea Plan guidelines. She noted the District Court did make a ruling establishing that the Northwest Subarea Plan is regulatory, and when the Land Use Code and the Subarea Plan conflict, the more stringent guidelines take precedence. She stated there was a conceptual review for a 78,000 square foot, four-story building which is completely out of alignment with the Northwest Subarea Plan. She suggested the property would be better designated as UE or RL. Bill Bertschy, 430 Peterson, commented on the Spring Creek flood and resulting work on Page 70 Item 4. 8/21/25– MINUTES changing floodplain designations and correcting flood mitigation deficiencies. He stated much of the natural drainage in the northwest part of the city was taken out by development with the idea that flow would go into irrigation ditches, which has proven to be inadequate. He also expressed concern about the impact of LMN zoning on the neighborhood character. Jiayi Shou, 1948 Laporte Avenue, concurred with the concerns raised by previous speakers regarding flooding, neighborhood character, and traffic, and opposed the proposed LMN zoning. She stated a four-story building will negatively impact the neighborhood and views from Puente Verde Natural Area. Laura Larson, 320 North Impala, echoed the concerns of Ms. Shou and Ms. Spindel. She stated the proposed project does not conform to the Northwest Subarea Plan and is in direct opposition to the majority of the guidelines outlined in the Plan. She stated the property should be zoning either RL or UE and reiterated the Northwest Subarea Plan is regulatory in nature. Sam Coutts, 236 Linden Street, expressed support for the annexation application and stated plans, policies, and studies that have been completed should be relied upon. He stated it is clear that the framework plan and Structure Plan have the area designated as LMN. STAFF RESPONSE Schumann acknowledged the points that were made, but noted many of them are not related directly to the annexation. He stated there was a conceptual review plan; however, that was purely conceptual and there are no development plans being reviewed. In terms of the proposed zoning, Schumann stated the framework map that is in the Northwest Subarea Plan does speak to zoning a property RL if it is five acres in size or less and adjacent to an existing single-family neighborhood. He stated he was unsure that a single unincorporated neighboring property is in the spirit of zoning the site RL. Clay Frickey, Planning Manager, noted the specific stipulation that the City would zone parcels RL is for parcels that are currently zoned Farming in the County, and this property is zoned RR2 Residential and CC for Commercial; therefore, this property would not be eligible for being zoned RL per the guidance of the Northwest Subarea Plan. COMMISSION QUESTIONS Commissioner Shepard requested additional information regarding the references to floodplain. Schumann replied there is a City floodway and a City floodplain, both predominantly on the north half of the property. He noted the applicant and property owner are well aware of those issues and that was part of the discussion during the conceptual review. Commissioner York asked if an outfall project recently completed in the area to help mitigate flooding. Schumann replied there are several recent projects and future planned projects in the area and noted floodplain staff members are in contact with the applicants regarding floodway issues. Frickey noted there was some recent work done to improve the outfall situation in the northwest part of the community; however, it remains under the City’s floodplain and floodway. Commissioner Shepard stated his understanding is that the West Vine Drainage Basin is a Page 71 Item 4. 8/21/25– MINUTES joint capital project between the County and the City which extends from Soldier Canyon Dam to the outfall on the Poudre. He noted the project is a work in progress. He stated many of the comments were accurate that much of the natural drainage swales were farmed over. Frickey noted the flooding issues are not directly tied to the annexation and zoning and stated that upon development, stormwater staff would review any project for compliance with all floodplain regulations. Commissioner Peel asked if the Subarea Plan would be considered as part of the development review process for any proposed project. Schumann replied in the affirmative and reiterated there are no current developments being proposed. Commissioner Peel asked if neighbors would have another opportunity to weigh in on concerns. Schumann replied in the affirmative. Commissioner Shepard asked if a four-story building is permitted in the LMN zone district. Schumann replied in the affirmative. Chair Sass asked how many land use categories are in the Northwest Subarea Plan. Schumann replied there are more than three types; however, there are three that are categorized as residential. Chair Sass noted the Subarea Plan showed the property as being LMN. Assistant City Attorney Yatabe stated the principal review of a zoning focuses on consistency with the City’s Comprehensive Plan and/or whether the zoning is warranted by changed conditions within the neighborhood. He noted the Land Use Code does list additional considerations that may be taken into consideration, though they are not mandatory: whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment is compatible with existing and proposed uses surrounding the subject land, whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment, and whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in a logical and orderly development pattern. Commissioner Shepard asked if a map amendment can be conditioned. Assistant City Attorney Yatabe replied in the affirmative. Commissioner Shepard asked about a reference to the Fieseler property having a 25-foot- wide natural habitat buffer. Schumann replied he did not have much detail at this time; however, he stated the existing trees are considered a riparian forest so there would be applicable buffering in considering that a natural feature, which would be part of the environmental compliance portion of the development review process. Commissioner Shepard asked about the location of the Laporte access and whether it is considered to be too close to Taft Hill. Steve Gilchrist, Traffic Operations, replied that will need to be closely examined as was referenced in the conceptual review. Assistant City Attorney Yatabe noted the zoning is part of a quasi-judicial process; therefore, the Commission is confined to considering the information that is being presented and what is on the record. Page 72 Item 4. 8/21/25– MINUTES Chair Sass asked if the Structure Plan is a controlling document for this area. Frickey replied the Structure Plan is a component of City Plan and provides specific guidance on the suggested zone districts for properties annexed into the City. He noted the proposed LMN zoning is consistent with the Structure Plan map designation in City Plan. Chair Sass asked if the Structure Plan would need to be amended to zone the property UE. Frickey replied the UE zone district would be more appropriate in a different Structure Plan designation and stated LMN is more consistent with the Structure Plan map than UE. Commissioner Shepard noted that the Commission cannot consider many of the concerns raised by the public participants, though he acknowledged there are challenges with the site in terms of access, drainage, and natural feature buffering. He also noted a shadow analysis, among other Code provisions, will be required to be addressed during the development review process. COMMISSION DELIBERATION Commissioner Peel stated she agrees with the staff recommendation from a pure annexation and zoning perspective. Additionally, she stated she hopes the applicant and neighborhood can work together to develop a project that fits within the area. Chair Sass concurred. Commissioner Shepard asked if the Commission would be interested in adding a condition to the zoning to not allow four-story buildings on the property. He specifically cited height, mass, bulk, and scale, as well as shadowing of the greenhouse buildings on the Fieseler property. Chair Sass stated those would all be standards of approval that would need to be modified should a proposal come forward with a four-story building. Frickey stated the LMN zone only permits three-story buildings unless there is an affordable housing component, which allows for a larger building. Commissioner York thanked the public participants for their input, but reiterated this decision is only about the annexation and zoning. He supported recommending Council approve the annexation and proposed LMN zoning. Vice Chair Connelly concurred and stated staff’s recommendation is appropriate. He stated this is only the beginning of the process and noted any project would need to meet all applicable criteria. Commissioner Shepard stated the Northwest Subarea Plan contains contradictory themes and there is some incongruity within the document that speaks to character and the definition of low-density. He added that the framework plan is quite black and white in terms of designating zoning. He suggested the Subarea Plan needs to be made more consistent with additional outreach at some point in the future. Commissioner York concurred the Subarea Plan could be improved. Chair Sass noted this will move through the development review process and many further discussions will occur. He stated the zoning makes sense for the site. Commissioner Shepard encouraged multiple neighborhood meetings on any future project. He commented on it possibly being beneficial to look at a designation between LMN and Page 73 Item 4. 8/21/25– MINUTES UE. Frickey noted LMN zoning allows between four and twelve dwelling units per acre and UE allows two. Commissioner Shepard stated he is persuaded by the framework plan which calls for LMN zoning, but stated a twelve dwelling unit per acre development plan would likely not satisfy the applicable compatibility and buffering requirements. Commissioner Peel made a motion, seconded by Commissioner York, that the Fort Collins Planning and Zoning Commission recommend that City Council approve the Moor Annexation ANX250001, and zone the property Low-Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood district finding the property meets the State law requirements for annexation, and the annexation is consistent with the intergovernmental agreement for the Fort Collins Growth Management Area between Larimer County and the City of Fort Collins. Placement into the Low-Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (LMN) zone district is consistent with City Plan, including the Structure Plan map and the Northwest Subarea Plan, and placement into the residential neighborhood sign district and the LC1 lighting context area is consistent with the City’s sign and lighting standards. This decision is based upon the agenda materials, the information presented during the work session and this hearing, and Commission discussion. This Commission hereby adopts the information, analysis, findings of fact, and conclusions contained in the hearing staff report. Yeas: York, Shepard, Peel, Connelly, and Sass. Nays: none. THE MOTION CARRIED.  ACADEMY OF ARTS & KNOWLEDGE – SPA250003 DESCRIPTION: This is a Site Plan Advisory Review (SPAR) request to expand the existing school at 4800 Wheaton Drive (parcel #8606207901) to include 4,790 sq. ft. of the second floor. The school currently occupies the first floor of the building. Building renovations include the first-floor kitchen, second floor classroom buildout, bathrooms and outdoor play area. The site is located in the Harmony Corridor (HC) zone district and is subject to a Site Plan Advisory Review (SPAR) review and will go to the Planning and Zoning Commission for review. STAFF: Arlo Schumann, Planner PROPERTY OWNER: Aurora Charter School BC 4424 Innovation DR Fort Collins, CO 80523 APPLICANT: Academy of Arts and Knowledge 4800 Wheaton Dr. Fort Collins, CO 80525 Page 74 Item 4. 8/21/25– MINUTES  PROSPECT RIDGE MULTIFAMILY – PDP230015 DESCRIPTION: This is a request for a Project Development Plan to develop 228 multifamily residential units at the NE corner of the Prospect Rd and I-25 interchange. (parcel # 8715306001). The applicant proposes 228 multifamily dwelling units across six 4-story buildings. The plan includes 314 parking stalls and an amenity/clubhouse building at the NE corner of the site. Access would be primarily taken from a new local street and the future Carriage Pkwy to the east of the site. The site is directly east of Interstate 25 and directly north of E Mulberry St. The property is within the General Commercial District (C-G) zone district, and the project would be subject to a Planning & Zoning Commission (Type 2) Review. STAFF: Kai Kleer, Sr Planner PROPERTY OWNER: PNE Prospect Road Holdings LLC 900 Castleton Road Ste 118 Castle Rock, CO 80109 APPLICANT: Andy Reese Kimley-Horn & Associates 3801 Automation Way, Suite 210 Fort Collins, CO 80521 7. OTHER BUSINESS 8. ADJOURNMENT a. 10:34 PM Minutes approved by the Chair and a vote of the Commission on XX/XX/XX Signature: Page 75 Item 4. -1- ORDINANCE NO. 144, 2025 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS ANNEXING THE PROPERTY KNOWN AS THE MOOR ANNEXATION TO THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO A. On July 15, 2025, City Council adopted Resolution 2025-072 finding substantial compliance and initiating annexation proceedings for the Moor Annexation, as defined therein and described below. B. Resolution 2025-079 setting forth findings of fact and determinations regarding the Moor Annexation was adopted concurrently with the first reading of this Ordinance. C. Pursuant to Land Use Code Section 6.10.3, the City Planning and Zoning Commission, at its regular meeting on August 21, 2025, unanimously recommended on a 5-0 vote (Commissioners Stackhouse and Bruxvoort absent) that the City Council approve the Moor Annexation. D. The City Council has determined that it is in the best interests of the City to annex the property to be known as the Moor Annexation as described below (the “Property”) to the City. In light of the foregoing recitals, which the Council hereby makes and adopts as determinations and findings, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. The City Council hereby incorporates the findings of Resolution 2025-072 and Resolution 2025-079 and further finds that it is in the best interests of the City to annex the Property to the City. Section 2. The Property, more particularly described as: A parcel of land, situate in the Northwest Quarter (NW1/4) of Section Ten (10), Township Seven North (T.7N.), Range Sixty-nine West (R.69W.) of the Sixth Principal Meridian (6th P.M.), County of Larimer, State of Colorado and being more particularly described as follows: COMMENCING at the West Quarter corner of said Section 10 and assuming the South line of the Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter (SW1/4NW1/4) of Section 10 as bearing South 89°31'38” East, being a Grid Bearing of the Colorado State Plane Coordinate System, North Zone, North American Datum 1983/2011, a distance of 1324.95 feet, monumented by a #6 rebar with 2.5” aluminum cap stamped LS 29407 at the West Quarter corner and a #6 rebar with a 2.5” aluminum cap stamped LS 31169 at the Center-West 1/16th corner and with all other bearings contained herein relative thereto; Page 76 Item 4. -2- THENCE South 89°31'38” East, along said South line, a distance of 280.00 feet to the Southeast corner of the Kennedy's West LaPorte Avenue Annexation as recorded November 14, 1972 as Reception No. 42752 of the Larimer County Clerk & Recorder (LCCR) and to the POINT OF BEGINNING; Thence along the East and North lines and extensions thereof, said Reception No. 42752, the following four courses: THENCE North 00°35'52” East a distance of 30.00 feet; THENCE North 89°31'38” West a distance of 30.00 feet to an extension of the West line of that parcel as described in the General Warranty Deed as recorded November 30, 2021 as Reception No. 20210108643 of the LCCR; Thence along the W est, South, North and East lines and extensions thereof, the following five courses: THENCE North 00°35'52” East a distance of 150.00 feet; THENCE North 89°31'38” West a distance of 199.92 feet to the Easterly Right of Way line of Taft Hill Road and to the Easterly line of the Sanctuary on the Green Annexation as recorded November 16, 2018 as Reception No. 20180069904 of the LCCR; THENCE North 00°37'24” East, along said Easterly lines a distance of 473.87 feet; THENCE South 89°22'36” East a distance of 280.53 feet; THENCE South 00°32'39” West a distance of 653.13 feet to the North line of the City Park Prospect Park and Grandview Cemetery Annexation; THENCE North 89°31'38” West a distance of 51.43 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Said described parcel of land contains 146,728 Square Feet or 3.368 Acres, more or less (±), is hereby annexed to the City of Fort Collins and made a part of said City, to be known as the Moor Annexation, which annexation shall become effective upon completion of the conditions contained in Colorado Revised Statutes (“C.R.S.”) Section 31-12-113, including, without limitation, all required filings for recording with the Larimer County Clerk and Recorder. Section 3. In annexing the Property to the City, the City does not assume any obligation respecting the construction of water mains, sewer lines, gas mains, electric service lines, streets or any other services or utilities in connection with the Property hereby annexed except as may be provided by ordinances of the City. Section 4. The City hereby consents, pursuant to C.R.S. Section 37-45- 136(3.6), to the inclusion of the Property into the Municipal Subdistrict, Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District. Page 77 Item 4. -3- Introduced, considered favorably on first reading on September 2, 2025, and approved on second reading for final passage on September 16, 2025. ______________________________ Mayor ATTEST: ______________________________ Sr. Deputy City Clerk Effective Date: September 26, 2025 Approving Attorney: Brad Yatabe Exhibit: None Page 78 Item 4. File Attachments for Item: 5. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 145, 2025, Amending the Zoning Map of the City of Fort Collins and Classifying for Zoning Purposes the Property Included in the Moor Annexation to the City of Fort Collins, Colorado, and Approving Corresponding Changes to the Residential Neighborhood Sign District Map and Lighting Context Area Map. This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on September 2, 2025, zones the property included in the Moor Annexation into the Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood District (LMN) and place the property into the Residential Sign District and the LC1 Lighting Context Area. Page 79 City Council Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 1 of 4 September 16, 2025 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Council STAFF Arlo Schumann, City Planner SUBJECT Second Reading of Ordinance No. 145, 2025, Amending the Zoning Map of the City of Fort Collins and Classifying for Zoning Purposes the Property Included in the Moor Annexation to the City of Fort Collins, Colorado, and Approving Corresponding Changes to the Residential Neighborhood Sign District Map and Lighting Context Area Map. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Ordinance, unanimously adopted on First Reading on September 2, 2025, zones the property included in the Moor Annexation into the Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood District (LMN) and place the property into the Residential Sign District and the LC1 Lighting Context Area. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on Second Reading. FIRST READING BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION The requested zoning for this annexation is the Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood District (LMN) zone district, which is in alignment with the City of Fort Collins Structure Plan and the Northwest Subarea Plan. The site is undeveloped land. Residential and Natural Areas uses exist to the north and east while small commercial retail and cemetery uses can be found to the south. Existing and future residential neighborhoods a found to the west. The nearby vicinity features a mix of both City and Larimer County zoning, as noted in the following table: Direction Zone District Existing Land Use N Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (LMN) and Larimer County Rural Residential (RR2) Single Unit Dwellings, Place of Worship, City Natural Areas S Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (LMN), Public Open Lands (POL), Commercial Corridor (CC) Retail Businesses, Cemetery E Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (LMN) and Larimer County Rural Residential (RR2) Single Unit Dwellings, City Natural Areas W Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (LMN) Single Unit Dwellings Page 80 Item 5. City Council Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 2 of 4 City of Fort Collins Structure Plan The Structure Plan Map found in City Plan provides the broadest land use and zoning policy guidance applicable to the site via Place Type designations. Place Types describe the general land-uses, densities, and transportation characteristics for an area to help guide potential zoning when properties are annexed into the City. The Structure Plan Map indicates opportunity for the ‘Suburban Neighborhood’ place type for the annexing site and surrounding properties to the east, west, and north. Structure Plan Map (excerpt) The land use characteristics of the Suburban Neighborhood Place Types include: • Principal Land Use Single-unit detached homes. Density: Between two and five principal dwelling units per acre. • Supporting Land Use Parks and recreational facilities, schools, places of worship, Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) and other uses related to the principal uses. Place Types represent flexible guidance to inform zoning based on the history and surrounding context of a site within general zoning categories. This place type is categorized as one of the Neighborhoods Districts alongside Rural Neighborhoods, and Mixed Neighborhoods Designations. The Structure Plan future land use designations represent general citywide policy guidance. Page 81 Item 5. City Council Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 3 of 4 Alignment with City Plan Principles and Policies: Principle LIV 1: Maintain a compact pattern of growth that is well served by public facilities and encourages the efficient use of land. This property is within the Fort Collins Growth Management Area (GMA). City Plan encourages managing growth by encouraging infill development within the GMA to promote a compact pattern of development. In addition to the guidance provided by the Structure Plan Map, City Plan also encourages the use of more specific guidance found in neighborhood and subarea plans. Northwest Subarea Plan The Northwest Subarea Plan was adopted in 2006. The plan provides land use and policy guidance for the northwest quadrant of the city, including the subject property. The requested LMN zone is seen as consistent with this direction and compatible with other surrounding designations as depicted in the Framework Plan: Sign District Staff recommends that the property be placed within the Residential Neighborhood Sign District. The Sign Districts are established for the purpose of regulating signs f or non-residential uses in areas of the community where the predominant character of the neighborhood is residential. Lighting Context Area On March 26, 2021, the City of Fort Collins adopted new exterior lighting standards and established Lighting Context Areas that correspond to the City’s zone districts. The Lighting Context Area identified by Page 82 Item 5. City Council Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 4 of 4 Table 5.12.1 of the City’s lighting code for the LMN zone district is LC1. As part of this item, staff recommends placement of the property into the LC1 Lighting Context Areas. LC1- Low ambient lighting. The vision of human residents and users is adapted to low light levels. Lighting may be used for safety and convenience, but it is not necessarily uniform or continuous. Typical locations include low and medium density residential areas, commercial or industrial areas with limited nighttime activity, and the developed areas in parks and other natural settings. CITY FINANCIAL IMPACTS None. BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION At its hearing on August 21, 2025, the Planning and Zoning Commission unanimously voted (5-0, Stackhouse and Bruxvoort absent) to recommend that City Council approve zoning the Moor Annexation as the Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood District (LMN) and placing the site in the Residential Sign District and the LC1 Lighting Context Area. The minutes from this meeting were not available on First Reading and are included on Second Reading of this item. PUBLIC OUTREACH A joint neighborhood meeting for the annexation and proposed development plan for the site was held on February 12, 2025. All other notification requirements as required by state and local law have been met. A majority of questions and concerns discussed at the meeting related to future development issues rather than the annexation. ATTACHMENTS First Reading attachments available in September 2, 2025, agenda materials at the following link: https://fortcollins-co.municodemeetings.com/. 1. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes, August 21, 2025 (draft) 2. Ordinance No. 145, 2025 Page 83 Item 5. 8/21/25– MINUTES Planning & Zoning Commission REGULAR MEETING August 21, 2025 – 6:00 PM Council Chambers, City Hall 300 Laporte Ave Also via Zoom 1. CALL TO ORDER: 6:00 PM 2. ROLL CALL a. Board Members Present – Adam Sass (Chair), Russell Connelly (Vice Chair), York, Shirley Peel, Ted Shepard b. Board Members Absent – Julie Stackhouse and Kent Bruxvoort c. Staff Members Present – Frickey, Kidwell, Myler, Yatabe, Mapes, Schumann, Kleer, Gilchrist d. Guest(s) – 3. AGENDA REVIEW Clay Frickey, Planning Manager, provided a review of the agenda. 4. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION None. 5. CONSENT AGENDA Miranda Spindel requested the Moor Annexation item be pulled for discussion due to concerns regarding the proposed zoning of the property. Laura Larson also requested the Moor Annexation item be pulled for discussion. Kay Lannen requested the Academy of Arts and Knowledge item be pulled for discussion due to concerns about playground noise.  CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF JUNE 25, 2025 Page 84 Item 5. 8/21/25– MINUTES The purpose of this item is to approve the minutes from the June 25, 2025 meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission.  ENCLAVE AT REDWOOD SUBDIVISION – FDP250007 DESCRIPTION: This is a request for a combination Major Amendment/Final Development Plan to replat Enclave at Redwood into fourteen (14) separate lots, and ten (10) tracts. There are no proposed changes to the Site, Landscape, Drainage, or Utility Plans approved with the Enclave at Redwood Final Development Plan. This is located in the Low Density Mixed Use Zone District and is subject to a Type 2, Planning & Zoning Commission review. STAFF: Clark Mapes, City Planner PROPERTY OWNER: Brian Bratcher, DR Horton 9555 Kingston Ct. Englewood, CO 80112 APPLICANT: Tenae Beane Ripley Design, Inc. 236 Linden St. Ste. A Fort Collins, CO 80524 Commissioner York made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Peel, to approve the Consent Agenda as amended. Yeas: Connelly, Shepard, York, Peel, and Sass. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. 6. DISCUSSION AGENDA  MOOR ANNEXATION – ANX250001 DESCRIPTION: This is a request to annex and zone 3.368 acres of land generally located at parcel 9710200008. The annexation is subject to a series of hearings including a (Type 2) Review and public hearing by the Planning & Zoning Commission and recommendation to City Council. A specific project development plan proposal is not included with the annexation application. This project is related to Conceptual Review CDR240025, previously known as 2000 Laporte Avenue Annexation. Page 85 Item 5. 8/21/25– MINUTES STAFF: Arlo Schumann, Planner PROPERTY OWNER: RRT Investments LLC 6316 Jocelyn Hollow Rd. Nashville, TN 372053520 APPLICANT: Cathy Mathis TB Group 444 Mountain Avenue Berthoud, CO 80513 STAFF OVERVIEW Arlo Schumann, City Planner, stated this is a request for a recommendation to City Council for a voluntary annexation and zoning of 3.36 acres located northeast of the intersection of Taft Hill Road and Laporte Avenue. He noted the annexation is contiguous with municipal boundaries and meets the State annexation requirements. He stated the proposal is for the site to be zoned Low-Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (LMN). Schumann showed an aerial image of the site and discussed the surrounding parcels and their zoning. He noted the Structure Plan map identifies the site and its immediate surroundings as the Suburban Neighborhood place type, which has a principal land use of single unit detached homes with a density of two to five principal units per acre. Other uses include recreational facilities, schools, places of worship, and ADU’s. Schumann discussed the Northwest Subarea Plan guidance for the area which calls out LMN and RL zoning and limited commercial areas. He also noted staff is recommending the site be placed in the residential sign district and lighting context area 1 (LC1). He stated staff finds the property meets the State law eligibility requirements to qualify for a voluntary annexation and that the requested LMN zoning is consistent with the City’s Structure Plan and Northwest Subarea Plan. Additionally, the annexation is consistent with the policies and agreements between Larimer County and the City of Fort Collins. He noted City Council accepted the annexation petition on July 15, 2025. COMMISSION QUESTIONS Chair Sass asked about the role of the Commission in terms of providing a recommendation on annexations. Assistant City Attorney Brad Yatabe replied the Land Use Code specifies that annexations are controlled by State statutes which were analyzed in the staff report. Additionally, the associated zoning is also part of the recommendation and is analyzed in the staff report as well. He stated the Commission should principally examine alignment with City Plan. Commissioner York asked how long the site has been an enclave. Schumann replied it is not an enclave as there is unincorporated property to the north. He added that this annexation would create an enclave of the gas station and two properties on the west side of Taft Hill Road. Commissioner Peel asked how the Subarea Plans are supposed to be considered in this Page 86 Item 5. 8/21/25– MINUTES type of situation, given the Sanctuary on the Green ruling. Assistant City Attorney Yatabe replied the District Court order directed that Subarea Plans are considered to be more than advisory and there must be compliance with the Plans. Commissioner Peel requested a summary of why this annexation is in compliance with the Northwest Subarea Plan. Schumann replied the framework map identifies the area as LMN. Chair Sass asked about a comment related to the property having previously been a landfill and noted any work would need to be done per CDPHE standards if applicable. Schumann replied that work would be part of the development plan. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION Kathy Fieseler, 1950 Laporte Avenue, stated her property borders the entire east side of the subject property. She ceded her remaining time to Jennifer Beccard. Jennifer Beccard, Fort Collins resident, stated the Fieselers have lived at their home for 44 years and expressed concern that the project will significantly impact their property. She opposed the LMN zoning and recommended Low-Density Residential (RL) or Urban Estate (UE) zoning stating those zones would better align with the Northwest Subarea Plan and the neighborhood. She stated the project is contemplating a four-story building and noted there are no four-story buildings anywhere in the area. She also stated the site is in a floodplain and frequently floods. Additionally, she expressed concern about traffic and safety in the area. Raygina Kohlmeier, 273 North Sunset Street, expressed concern about the proposed zoning stating it is not appropriate for the surrounding area. She also commented on the insufficient drainage situation along Laporte Avenue that was only recently addressed. She questioned whether the existing infrastructure could support additional development without negative flooding, noise, lighting, and traffic impacts. Val Vogeler, 520 North Taft Hill Road, described the neighborhood as being quite rural and suggested LMN zoning is not appropriate for the subject property. She expressed concern about flooding, safety, and traffic impacts. Pastor Dee Highland of the church just north of the subject property stated a four-story building would not be bothersome given the height of existing trees. He expressed concern about the floodplain and drainage issues. Miranda Spindel, owner of the property just to the north of the proposed annexation. She stated any future development of the property will directly impact the neighborhood. She stated the framework plan provides guidance, is not regulatory, and is intended to be used together with the Northwest Subarea Plan guidelines. She noted the District Court did make a ruling establishing that the Northwest Subarea Plan is regulatory, and when the Land Use Code and the Subarea Plan conflict, the more stringent guidelines take precedence. She stated there was a conceptual review for a 78,000 square foot, four-story building which is completely out of alignment with the Northwest Subarea Plan. She suggested the property would be better designated as UE or RL. Bill Bertschy, 430 Peterson, commented on the Spring Creek flood and resulting work on Page 87 Item 5. 8/21/25– MINUTES changing floodplain designations and correcting flood mitigation deficiencies. He stated much of the natural drainage in the northwest part of the city was taken out by development with the idea that flow would go into irrigation ditches, which has proven to be inadequate. He also expressed concern about the impact of LMN zoning on the neighborhood character. Jiayi Shou, 1948 Laporte Avenue, concurred with the concerns raised by previous speakers regarding flooding, neighborhood character, and traffic, and opposed the proposed LMN zoning. She stated a four-story building will negatively impact the neighborhood and views from Puente Verde Natural Area. Laura Larson, 320 North Impala, echoed the concerns of Ms. Shou and Ms. Spindel. She stated the proposed project does not conform to the Northwest Subarea Plan and is in direct opposition to the majority of the guidelines outlined in the Plan. She stated the property should be zoning either RL or UE and reiterated the Northwest Subarea Plan is regulatory in nature. Sam Coutts, 236 Linden Street, expressed support for the annexation application and stated plans, policies, and studies that have been completed should be relied upon. He stated it is clear that the framework plan and Structure Plan have the area designated as LMN. STAFF RESPONSE Schumann acknowledged the points that were made, but noted many of them are not related directly to the annexation. He stated there was a conceptual review plan; however, that was purely conceptual and there are no development plans being reviewed. In terms of the proposed zoning, Schumann stated the framework map that is in the Northwest Subarea Plan does speak to zoning a property RL if it is five acres in size or less and adjacent to an existing single-family neighborhood. He stated he was unsure that a single unincorporated neighboring property is in the spirit of zoning the site RL. Clay Frickey, Planning Manager, noted the specific stipulation that the City would zone parcels RL is for parcels that are currently zoned Farming in the County, and this property is zoned RR2 Residential and CC for Commercial; therefore, this property would not be eligible for being zoned RL per the guidance of the Northwest Subarea Plan. COMMISSION QUESTIONS Commissioner Shepard requested additional information regarding the references to floodplain. Schumann replied there is a City floodway and a City floodplain, both predominantly on the north half of the property. He noted the applicant and property owner are well aware of those issues and that was part of the discussion during the conceptual review. Commissioner York asked if an outfall project recently completed in the area to help mitigate flooding. Schumann replied there are several recent projects and future planned projects in the area and noted floodplain staff members are in contact with the applicants regarding floodway issues. Frickey noted there was some recent work done to improve the outfall situation in the northwest part of the community; however, it remains under the City’s floodplain and floodway. Commissioner Shepard stated his understanding is that the West Vine Drainage Basin is a Page 88 Item 5. 8/21/25– MINUTES joint capital project between the County and the City which extends from Soldier Canyon Dam to the outfall on the Poudre. He noted the project is a work in progress. He stated many of the comments were accurate that much of the natural drainage swales were farmed over. Frickey noted the flooding issues are not directly tied to the annexation and zoning and stated that upon development, stormwater staff would review any project for compliance with all floodplain regulations. Commissioner Peel asked if the Subarea Plan would be considered as part of the development review process for any proposed project. Schumann replied in the affirmative and reiterated there are no current developments being proposed. Commissioner Peel asked if neighbors would have another opportunity to weigh in on concerns. Schumann replied in the affirmative. Commissioner Shepard asked if a four-story building is permitted in the LMN zone district. Schumann replied in the affirmative. Chair Sass asked how many land use categories are in the Northwest Subarea Plan. Schumann replied there are more than three types; however, there are three that are categorized as residential. Chair Sass noted the Subarea Plan showed the property as being LMN. Assistant City Attorney Yatabe stated the principal review of a zoning focuses on consistency with the City’s Comprehensive Plan and/or whether the zoning is warranted by changed conditions within the neighborhood. He noted the Land Use Code does list additional considerations that may be taken into consideration, though they are not mandatory: whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment is compatible with existing and proposed uses surrounding the subject land, whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment, and whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in a logical and orderly development pattern. Commissioner Shepard asked if a map amendment can be conditioned. Assistant City Attorney Yatabe replied in the affirmative. Commissioner Shepard asked about a reference to the Fieseler property having a 25-foot- wide natural habitat buffer. Schumann replied he did not have much detail at this time; however, he stated the existing trees are considered a riparian forest so there would be applicable buffering in considering that a natural feature, which would be part of the environmental compliance portion of the development review process. Commissioner Shepard asked about the location of the Laporte access and whether it is considered to be too close to Taft Hill. Steve Gilchrist, Traffic Operations, replied that will need to be closely examined as was referenced in the conceptual review. Assistant City Attorney Yatabe noted the zoning is part of a quasi-judicial process; therefore, the Commission is confined to considering the information that is being presented and what is on the record. Page 89 Item 5. 8/21/25– MINUTES Chair Sass asked if the Structure Plan is a controlling document for this area. Frickey replied the Structure Plan is a component of City Plan and provides specific guidance on the suggested zone districts for properties annexed into the City. He noted the proposed LMN zoning is consistent with the Structure Plan map designation in City Plan. Chair Sass asked if the Structure Plan would need to be amended to zone the property UE. Frickey replied the UE zone district would be more appropriate in a different Structure Plan designation and stated LMN is more consistent with the Structure Plan map than UE. Commissioner Shepard noted that the Commission cannot consider many of the concerns raised by the public participants, though he acknowledged there are challenges with the site in terms of access, drainage, and natural feature buffering. He also noted a shadow analysis, among other Code provisions, will be required to be addressed during the development review process. COMMISSION DELIBERATION Commissioner Peel stated she agrees with the staff recommendation from a pure annexation and zoning perspective. Additionally, she stated she hopes the applicant and neighborhood can work together to develop a project that fits within the area. Chair Sass concurred. Commissioner Shepard asked if the Commission would be interested in adding a condition to the zoning to not allow four-story buildings on the property. He specifically cited height, mass, bulk, and scale, as well as shadowing of the greenhouse buildings on the Fieseler property. Chair Sass stated those would all be standards of approval that would need to be modified should a proposal come forward with a four-story building. Frickey stated the LMN zone only permits three-story buildings unless there is an affordable housing component, which allows for a larger building. Commissioner York thanked the public participants for their input, but reiterated this decision is only about the annexation and zoning. He supported recommending Council approve the annexation and proposed LMN zoning. Vice Chair Connelly concurred and stated staff’s recommendation is appropriate. He stated this is only the beginning of the process and noted any project would need to meet all applicable criteria. Commissioner Shepard stated the Northwest Subarea Plan contains contradictory themes and there is some incongruity within the document that speaks to character and the definition of low-density. He added that the framework plan is quite black and white in terms of designating zoning. He suggested the Subarea Plan needs to be made more consistent with additional outreach at some point in the future. Commissioner York concurred the Subarea Plan could be improved. Chair Sass noted this will move through the development review process and many further discussions will occur. He stated the zoning makes sense for the site. Commissioner Shepard encouraged multiple neighborhood meetings on any future project. He commented on it possibly being beneficial to look at a designation between LMN and Page 90 Item 5. 8/21/25– MINUTES UE. Frickey noted LMN zoning allows between four and twelve dwelling units per acre and UE allows two. Commissioner Shepard stated he is persuaded by the framework plan which calls for LMN zoning, but stated a twelve dwelling unit per acre development plan would likely not satisfy the applicable compatibility and buffering requirements. Commissioner Peel made a motion, seconded by Commissioner York, that the Fort Collins Planning and Zoning Commission recommend that City Council approve the Moor Annexation ANX250001, and zone the property Low-Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood district finding the property meets the State law requirements for annexation, and the annexation is consistent with the intergovernmental agreement for the Fort Collins Growth Management Area between Larimer County and the City of Fort Collins. Placement into the Low-Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (LMN) zone district is consistent with City Plan, including the Structure Plan map and the Northwest Subarea Plan, and placement into the residential neighborhood sign district and the LC1 lighting context area is consistent with the City’s sign and lighting standards. This decision is based upon the agenda materials, the information presented during the work session and this hearing, and Commission discussion. This Commission hereby adopts the information, analysis, findings of fact, and conclusions contained in the hearing staff report. Yeas: York, Shepard, Peel, Connelly, and Sass. Nays: none. THE MOTION CARRIED.  ACADEMY OF ARTS & KNOWLEDGE – SPA250003 DESCRIPTION: This is a Site Plan Advisory Review (SPAR) request to expand the existing school at 4800 Wheaton Drive (parcel #8606207901) to include 4,790 sq. ft. of the second floor. The school currently occupies the first floor of the building. Building renovations include the first-floor kitchen, second floor classroom buildout, bathrooms and outdoor play area. The site is located in the Harmony Corridor (HC) zone district and is subject to a Site Plan Advisory Review (SPAR) review and will go to the Planning and Zoning Commission for review. STAFF: Arlo Schumann, Planner PROPERTY OWNER: Aurora Charter School BC 4424 Innovation DR Fort Collins, CO 80523 APPLICANT: Academy of Arts and Knowledge 4800 Wheaton Dr. Fort Collins, CO 80525 Page 91 Item 5. 8/21/25– MINUTES  PROSPECT RIDGE MULTIFAMILY – PDP230015 DESCRIPTION: This is a request for a Project Development Plan to develop 228 multifamily residential units at the NE corner of the Prospect Rd and I-25 interchange. (parcel # 8715306001). The applicant proposes 228 multifamily dwelling units across six 4-story buildings. The plan includes 314 parking stalls and an amenity/clubhouse building at the NE corner of the site. Access would be primarily taken from a new local street and the future Carriage Pkwy to the east of the site. The site is directly east of Interstate 25 and directly north of E Mulberry St. The property is within the General Commercial District (C-G) zone district, and the project would be subject to a Planning & Zoning Commission (Type 2) Review. STAFF: Kai Kleer, Sr Planner PROPERTY OWNER: PNE Prospect Road Holdings LLC 900 Castleton Road Ste 118 Castle Rock, CO 80109 APPLICANT: Andy Reese Kimley-Horn & Associates 3801 Automation Way, Suite 210 Fort Collins, CO 80521 7. OTHER BUSINESS 8. ADJOURNMENT a. 10:34 PM Minutes approved by the Chair and a vote of the Commission on XX/XX/XX Signature: Page 92 Item 5. -1- ORDINANCE NO. 145, 2025 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AMENDING THE ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AND CLASSIFYING FOR ZONING PURPOSES THE PROPERTY INCLUDED IN THE MOOR ANNEXATION TO THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO, AND APPROVING CORRESPONDING CHANGES TO THE RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD SIGN DISTRICT MAP AND LIGHTING CONTEXT AREA MAP A. On September 16, 2025, the City Council adopted on second reading Ordinance No. 144, 2025, annexing to the City of Fort Collins the property known as the Moor Annexation (the “Property”). B. Division 6.1.1 of the Land Use Code of the City of Fort Collins establishes the Zoning Map and Zone Districts of the City. C. Division 6.25.1 of the Land Use Code of the City of Fort Collins establishes procedures and criteria for reviewing the zoning of land . D. Pursuant to Land Use Code Sections 6.10.3 and 6.25.2, the City Planning and Zoning Commission, at its meeting on August 21, 2025, unanimously on a 5-0 vote (Commissioners Stackhouse and Bruxvoort absent) zoning the Property as Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood District (LMN), as more particularly described below and determined that the proposed zoning is consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan. The City Planning and Zoning Commission also unanimously recommended that the site be placed in the Residential Sign District pursuant to Land Use Code Section 5.16.1 and the LC1 Lighting Context Area pursuant to Land Use Code Section 5.12.1(H). E. The City Council has determined that the proposed zoning of the Property is consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan. F. To the extent applicable, the City Council has also analyzed the proposed zoning against the applicable criteria set forth in Section 6.25.4(H)(3) of the Land Use Code and finds the proposed zoning to be in compliance with all such criteria. G. In accordance with the foregoing, the City Council has considered the zoning of the Property as described below, finds it to be in the best interests of the City, and has determined that the Property should be zoned as provided hereafter. In light of the foregoing recitals, which the Council hereby makes and adopts as determinations and findings, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. The Zoning Map of the City of Fort Collins adopted pursuant to Section 6.1.2 of the Land Use Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby changed and Page 93 Item 5. -2- amended by including in the Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (LMN) zone district the Property more particularly described as: A parcel of land, situate in the Northwest Quarter (NW1/4) of Section Ten (10), Township Seven North (T.7N.), Range Sixty-nine West (R.69W.) of the Sixth Principal Meridian (6th P.M.), County of Larimer, State of Colorado and being more particularly described as follows: COMMENCING at the West Quarter corner of said Section 10 and assuming the South line of the Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter (SW1/4NW1/4) of Section 10 as bearing South 89°31'38” East, being a Grid Bearing of the Colorado State Plane Coordinate System, North Zone, North American Datu m 1983/2011, a distance of 1324.95 feet, monumented by a #6 rebar with 2.5” aluminum cap stamped LS 29407 at the West Quarter corner and a #6 rebar with a 2.5” aluminum cap stamped LS 31169 at the Center-West 1/16th corner and with all other bearings contained herein relative thereto; THENCE South 89°31'38” East, along said South line, a distance of 280.00 feet to the Southeast corner of the Kennedy's West LaPorte Avenue Annexation as recorded November 14, 1972 as Reception No. 42752 of the Larimer County Clerk & Recorder (LCCR) and to the POINT OF BEGINNING; Thence along the East and North lines and extensions thereof, said Reception No. 42752, the following four courses: THENCE North 00°35'52” East a distance of 30.00 feet; THENCE North 89°31'38” West a distance of 30.00 feet to an extension of the West line of that parcel as described in the General Warranty Deed as recorded November 30, 2021 as Reception No. 20210108643 of the LCCR; Thence along the West, South, North and East lines and extensions there of, the following five courses: THENCE North 00°35'52” East a distance of 150.00 feet; THENCE North 89°31'38” West a distance of 199.92 feet to the Easterly Right of Way line of Taft Hill Road and to the Easterly line of the Sanctuary on the Green Annexation as recorded November 16, 2018 as Reception No. 20180069904 of the LCCR; THENCE North 00°37'24” East, along said Easterly lines a distance of 473.87 feet; THENCE South 89°22'36” East a distance of 280.53 feet; THENCE South 00°32'39” West a distance of 653.13 feet to the North line of the City Park Prospect Park and Grandview Cemetery Annexation; THENCE North 89°31'38” West a distance of 51.43 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Said described parcel of land contains 146,728 Square Feet or 3.368 Acres, more or less (±). Page 94 Item 5. -3- Section 2. The Sign District Map adopted pursuant to Section 5.16.1(M) of the Land Use Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby changed and amended by showing that the Property described herein is included in the Residential Neighborhood Sign District. Section 3. The Lighting Context Area Map adopted pursuant to Section 5.12.1(H) of the Land Use Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby changed and amended by showing that the Property described herein is in the LC1 Lighting Context Area. Section 4. The City Manager is hereby authorized and directed to amend said Zoning Map in accordance with this Ordinance. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading on September 2, 2025, and approved on second reading for final passage on September 16, 2025. ______________________________ Mayor ATTEST: ______________________________ Sr. Deputy City Clerk Effective Date: September 26, 2025 Approving Attorney: Brad Yatabe Exhibit: None Page 95 Item 5. File Attachments for Item: 6. First Reading of Ordinance No. 146, 2025, Appropriating Unanticipated Philanthropic Revenue Received Through City Give for Various Programs and Services as Designated by the Donors. The purpose of this item is to request an appropriation of $152,669.11 in philanthropic revenue received through City Give. These miscellaneous gifts to various City departments support a variety of programs and services and are aligned with both the City’s strategic priorities and the respective donors’ designation. In 2019, City Give, a formalized enterprise-wide initiative was launched to create a transparent, non-partisan governance structure for the acceptance and appropriations of charitable gifts. Page 96 City Council Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 1 of 2 September 16, 2025 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Council STAFF Emily Land, Director of Philanthropy & Strategic Partnerships SUBJECT First Reading of Ordinance No. 146, 2025, Appropriating Unanticipated Philanthropic Revenue Received Through City Give for Various Programs and Services as Designated by the Donors. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to request an appropriation of $152,669.11 in philanthropic revenue received through City Give. These miscellaneous gifts to various City departments support a variety of programs and services and are aligned with both the City’s strategic priorities and the respective donors’ designation. In 2019, City Give, a formalized enterprise-wide initiative was launched to create a transparent, non- partisan governance structure for the acceptance and appropriations of charitable gifts. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION The City has long been the beneficiary of local generosity and has a valuable role in our community’s philanthropic landscape. Generosity is demonstrated in both large and modest gifts, each appreciated for its investment in the mission and the range of services the City strives to deliver. The City received several individual philanthropic donations in 2025 totaling $152,669.11 to support various departments, and these funds are currently unappropriated. Both Section 2.5 of the City's Financial Management Policy 2 – Revenue, as approved by Council, and the Administrative Philanthropic Governance Policy 6.04, adopted by the City Manager, (together the “City Give Policies”), provide the bases and processes for the responsible and efficient management of charitable donations to the City. Gifts totaling $152,669.11 have been received for various programs. These gifts include: $10,000 from Flock in support of FCPS Police Leaders Summit, $25,662.87 received from The Greer Foundation in support of Cultural Services, $15,000 from Kentwood Real Estate in support of Cultural Services, $500 from The Ottercares Foundation in support of Volunteer Services, $2,000 from The Bohemian Foundation in support of FC Moves, $87,000 from NoCo Foundation Senior Center Endowment Fund to support The Senior Center, $500 from United Healthcare to support The HR Wellness Fair, $500 from MyWoosah to support the HR Wellness Fair, $500 from Marathon Health to support the HR Wellness Fair, $500 from Nationwide to support the HR Wellness Fair, $40 from Benevity in support of Volunteer Services, $1,500 Page 97 Item 6. City Council Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 2 of 2 from the Kenneth and Myra Monfort Charitable Foundation in support of Forestry, $,8,966.24 and received from individual donors in support of various departments and programs. The respective donors have directed the City to use these generous donations for designated purposes within, and to benefit, City service areas and programs. CITY FINANCIAL IMPACTS Upon adoption, this Ordinance will appropriate in the current fiscal year into the Funds as detailed in the table below in new philanthropic revenue received through City Give in the amount of $152,699.11 and authorize expenditures against those revenues for the purposes and in the amounts as directed by donors to support various City departments to support a range of programs and services. The donations will be spent from the designated fund solely for the donors’ intended purpose. The funds have been received and accepted according to City Give Policies. Fund Amount General Fund $ 13,540.00 Cultural Services Fund $ 41,819.87 Light & Power Fund $ 8.24 Recreation Fund $ 87,801.00 Benefits Fund $ 2,500.00 Transportation Fund $ 7,000.00 The City Manager has also determined that these appropriations are available and previously unappropriated from their designated City Fund and will not cause the total amount appropriated in those Funds to exceed the current estimate of actual and anticipated revenues. BOARD / COMMISSION / COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION None. PUBLIC OUTREACH None. ATTACHMENTS 1. Ordinance No. 146, 2025 Page 98 Item 6. -1- ORDINANCE NO. 146, 2025 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS APPROPRIATING UNANTICIPATED PHILANTHROPIC REVENUE RECEIVED THROUGH CITY GIVE FOR VARIOUS PROGRAMS AND SERVICES AS DESIGNATED BY THE DONORS A. The City has received generous donations in 2025 through its City Give program, both large and modest, as philanthropic gifts to the public and the City programs and activities to serve the community. B. This appropriation benefits the public health, safety, and welfare of the residents of Fort Collins and serves the public purpose of supporting programs or capital expenses throughout the city, including, but not limited to, public safety, cultural services, senior programs, public health, employee health, parks and recreation, and utility payment assistance. C. Article V, Section 9 of the City Charter permits the City Council, upon recommendation of the City Manager, to make a supplemental appropriation by ordinance at any time during the fiscal year, provided that the total amount of such supplement al appropriation, in combination with all previous appropriations for that fiscal year, do not exceed the current estimate of actual and anticipated revenues and all other funds to be received during the fiscal year. D. The City Manager has recommended the appropriations described in Section 1 of this Ordinance and determined that the amount of each of these appropriations are available and previously unappropriated from the respective funds named in Section 1 will not cause the total amount appropriated in each such fund to exceed the current estimate of actual and anticipated revenues to be received in those funds during this fiscal year. E. Article V, Section 11 of the City Charter authorizes the City Council to designate in the ordinance when appropriating funds, a federal, state or private grant or donation, that such appropriation shall not lapse at the end of the fiscal year in which the appropriation is made, but continue until the earlier of the expiratio n of the donation or the City’s expenditure of all funds received from such donation . F. The City Council wishes to designate the appropriation herein for the donation to the Payment Assistance Fund as appropriations that shall not lapse until the earlier of the expiration of the donation or the City’s expenditure of all funds received from such donation. In light of the foregoing recitals, which the Council hereby makes and adopts as determinations and findings, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Page 99 Item 6. -2- Section 1. There is hereby appropriated from the following funds these amounts of philanthropic revenue received in 2025 to be expended as designated by the donors in support of the various City programs and services as described in the Agenda Item Summary. Fund Amount General Fund $13,540.00 Cultural Services & Facilities Fund $41,819.87 Light & Power Fund, donation to the Payment Assistance Fund $8.24 Recreation Fund $87,801.00 Benefits Fund $2,500.00 Transportation Fund $7,000.00 Section 2. The appropriation herein for the donation to the Payment Assistance Fund is hereby designated, as authorized in Article V, Section 11 of the City Charter, as an appropriation that shall not lapse at the end of this fiscal year but until the earlier of the expiration of the donation or the City’s expenditure of all funds received from such donation. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading on September 16, 2025, and approved on second reading for final passage on October 7, 2025. ___________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: ___________________________________ City Clerk Effective Date: October 17, 2025 Approving Attorney: Dianne Criswell Exhibit: None Page 100 Item 6. File Attachments for Item: 7. First Reading of Ordinance No. 147, 2025, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves and Authorizing Transfers of Appropriations for the William Neal and Ziegler Intersection Improvements Project and Related Art in Public Places. The purpose of this item is to appropriate and transfer additional funds for the William Neal and Ziegler Intersection Improvements project (Project). The funds will be used for construction services. If approved, this item will: 1) appropriate $388,773 in Transportation Capital Expansion Fee (TCEF) funds to the Project; 2) appropriate $77 in Transportation Services funds to the Project; 3) transfer $85,000 in Conservation Trust funds to the Project; 4) transfer $45,000 in Community Capital Improvement Program (CCIP) Pedestrian Sidewalk funds to the Project; and transfer $3,850 of Project funds to the Art in Public Places (APP) program. Page 101 City Council Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 1 of 3 September 16, 2025 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Council STAFF John Gerwel, Project Manager Tracy Dyer, Project Manager Dana Hornkohl, Capital Projects Manager SUBJECT First Reading of Ordinance No. 147, 2025, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves and Authorizing Transfers of Appropriations for the William Neal and Ziegler Intersection Improvements Project and Related Art in Public Places. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to appropriate and transfer additional funds for the William Neal and Ziegler Intersection Improvements project (Project). The funds will be used for construction services. If approved, this item will: 1) appropriate $388,773 in Transportation Capital Expansion Fee (TCEF) funds to the Project; 2) appropriate $77 in Transportation Services funds to the Project; 3) transfer $85,000 in Conservation Trust funds to the Project; 4) transfer $45,000 in Community Capital Improvement Prog ram (CCIP) Pedestrian Sidewalk funds to the Project; and transfer $3,850 of Project funds to the Art in Public Places (APP) program. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION The intersection of William Neal Parkway and Ziegler Road is currently side street stop-controlled with high speeds and volumes on Ziegler Road (See Vicinity Map, Attachment 1). Pedestrian and bicycle demand increased following the construction of residential housing to the west (Rigden Farm) including a local trail (Rendezvous Trail), and the Poudre River Trail segments to the east. City staff anticipate a full traffic signal will be warranted at the intersection soon with new development to the east. However, the need to address pedestrian and cyclist safety exists today. It is anticipated that demand for a safe intersection crossing will quickly grow. The Project would close the gap between a local trail and neighborhood and the Poudre River Trail, providing safe connections to Running Deer and Arapaho Bend Natural Areas, as well as the Colorado State University Environmental Learning Center. Because of the extents of the Poudre River Trail, the Project will increase access to schools, natural areas, transit, and the regional community. The Project will install enhanced at-grade bicycle and pedestrian facilities at the intersection. In addition, the Project will improve connectivity to the Poudre River Trail in the vicinity where the Poudre River Trail crosses the Great Western Railway. Improvements at the intersection will meet the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), eliminating or mitigating existing roadway hazards. The Project will Page 102 Item 7. City Council Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 2 of 3 install pedestrian and bike count collection infrastructure. The data will be shared with the North Front Range Metropolitan Planning Organization (NFRMPO) and Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT). Signage and wayfinding will be included in the Project similarly to other City trail projects. The Project is not explicitly defined in the NFRMPO 2021 Regional Active Transportation Plan (RATP). However, the need for safe local trail connections to the Poudre River Trail is identified and the Project will provide such a connection. Staff have requested the local connection be included in the 2025 update to the RATP. The City‘s Active Modes Plan identifies these improvements. This intersection is routinely used in the Safe Routes to School (SRTS) training rides with students. Staff initially submitted to the NFRMPO for Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP) funding for the Project in 2021. The Project was waitlisted at that time. Additional funding became available in 2023 as part of Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) and the TAP funds were awarded. These funds were appropriated by Council in September 2023 (Attachment 2). Since the original scope of the Project was developed, additional elements have been included that have increased the total cost of the Project. These elements include a full traffic signal (rather than the half-signal included in the TAP application), ADA improvements, and trail elements. The requested appropriations and transfers are intended to cover these additional Project costs. CITY FINANCIAL IMPACTS The following is a summary of the funding anticipated for design, right-of-way acquisition, and construction for the William Neal and Ziegler Intersection Improvements project. The total fund amount projected for this Project is $1,244,103 composed of funds appropriated or transferred with prior actions and with this action. The APP contribution for this action is based on the newly appropriated amount of $385,000 from the TCEF and Transportation Services funds ($384,923 TCEF and $77 Transportation Services funds). The APP contribution is included in the total appropriation from TCEF and Transportation Services funds in the chart above. Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP)603,624$ Our Climate Future Fund (OCF)70,700$ Community Capital Improvement Program - Bicycle Infrastructure Improvements (CCIP-BII)55,479$ Art in Public Places(APP)(700)$ Total Prior Appropriation 729,103$ Transportation Capital Expansion Fee (TCEF)388,773$ Transportation Services Fund (TSF)77$ Conservation Trust Fund (CTF)85,000$ Community Capital Improvement Program - Pedestrian Sidewalk (CCIP-PS)45,000$ Net Total Project Funds to be Appropriated 518,850$ Proposed Transfer to Art in Public Places 3,850$ Total Capital Project Funds 1,244,103$ Funds to be Appropriated or Transferred Prior Appropriated or Transferred Funds Page 103 Item 7. City Council Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 3 of 3 BOARD / COMMISSION / COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION The Project was identified as part of the Active Modes Plan adopted by Council in December 2022. PUBLIC OUTREACH FC Moves staff developed and implemented a Public Engagement Plan for the Project in conjunction with the Communications and Public Involvement Office. The Project was presented at the 2024 and 2025 Transportation Project Fairs as part of a group of pedestrian intersection improvement projects. A Project map and web site were completed in August 2025. The community surrounding the Project location was sent informational postcards in early Summer 2025. When a construction start date is set, fact sheets and signage will provide additional information in advance to the community. ATTACHMENTS 1. Vicinity Map 2. Copy of Ordinance No. 129, 2024 3. Ordinance No. 147, 2025 Page 104 Item 7. William Neal and Ziegler Intersection Improvements Vicinity Map PROJECT SITE WILLIAM NEAL PKWY I- 2 5 ZI E G L E R R D Page 105 Item 7. COP Y Page 106 Item 7. COP Y Page 107 Item 7. COP Y Page 108 Item 7. COP Y Page 109 Item 7. -1- ORDINANCE NO. 147, 2025 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS APPROPRIATING PRIOR YEAR RESERVES AND AUTHORIZING TRANSFERS OF APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE WILLIAM NEAL AND ZIEGLER INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT AND RELATED ART IN PUBLIC PLACES A. This proposed Ordinance concerns the design and construction of and funding for an at-grade bicycle and pedestrian crossing, signal, and Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) improvements at the intersection of William Neal Parkway and Ziegler Road to provide a safe crossing point between local trail infrastructure and residential development to the west and Poudre River Trail segments to the east. B. The intersection of William Neal Parkway and Ziegler Road is currently side street stop-controlled with high speeds and volumes on Ziegler Road. Current pedestrian and bicycle demand at the intersection is high after the construction to the west of residential housing (“Rigden Farm”) and a local trail (“Rendezvous Trail”), and the Poudre River Trail segments. C. Pedestrian and cyclist safety is an existing concern, and City staff anticipates that demand for a safe intersection crossing will quickly grow with additional anticipated residential and recreational development. City staff anticipate a full traffic signal will be warranted at the intersection in the future, an increase from the half-signal anticipated earlier in the concept design. D. The William Neal and Ziegler Intersection Improvements Project (the “Project”) has been developed to improve bicycle and pedestrian safety, to improve all modes of traffic flow at the Willian Neal/Ziegler Intersection, and to further develop the City’s transportation infrastructure and interconnected trail network. E. The Project will install enhanced at-grade bicycle and pedestrian facilities at the intersection. In addition, the Project will improve connectivity to the Poudre River Trail in the vicinity where the Poudre River Trail crosses the Great Western Railway. The Project will close the gap between a local trail and neighborhood and the Poudre River Trail, providing safe connections to Running Deer and Arapaho Bend Natural Areas, as well as the Colorado State University Environmental Learning Center. Because of the extents of the Poudre River Trail, the Project will increase access to schools, parks, transit, and the regional community. F. Improvements at the intersection will meet the requirements of the A DA, eliminating or mitigating existing roadway hazards. G. Signage and wayfinding will be included in the Project similarly to other City trail projects. Page 110 Item 7. -2- H. The Project will install pedestrian and bike count collection infrastructure. Data collected from this infrastructure will be shared with the North Front Range Metropolitan Planning Organization (“NFRMPO”) and the Colorado Department of Transportation (“CDOT”). Although the Project is not explicitly defined in the NFRMPO Regional Active Transportation Plan (2021), the need for safe local trail connections to the Poudre River Trail is identified. The Project will provide such a connection. I. The City’s Active Modes Plan recommends these improvements. This intersection is routinely used in the Safe Routes to School (“SRTS”) training rides with students. J. City staff initially submitted to the NFRMPO for federal Transportation Alternatives Program (“TAP”) funding for the Project in 2021. The Project was waitlisted at that time. Additional funding became available in 2023 as part of Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (“IIJA”), and the TAP funds were awarded. These funds were appropriated by City Council in September 2023 (Ordinance No. 129, 2024). K. Since the original scope of the Project was developed, additional elements have been included that have increased the total cost of the Project. These elements include a full traffic signal (rather than the half-signal included in the TAP application), ADA improvements, and trail elements. The requested appropriations and transfers are intended to cover these additional Project costs. L. Article V, Section 9 of the City Charter permits the City Council, upon the recommendation of the City Manager, to make supplemental appropriations by ordinance at any time during the fiscal year from such revenues and funds for expenditure as may be available from reserves accumulated in prior years, notwithstanding that such reserves were not previously appropriated. M. The City Manager has recommended the appropriations described herein and determined that the funds to be appropriated are available and previously unappropriated from the Transportation Capital Expansion Fee fund and the Transportation Services fund and that these appropriations will not cause the total amount appropriated in the Transportation Capital Expansion Fee fund and the Transportation Services fund to exceed the current estimate of actual and anticipate d revenues and all other funds to be received in these funds during this fiscal year N. Article V, Section 10 of the City Charter authorizes the City Council, upon recommendation by the City Manager, to transfer by ordinance any unexpended and unencumbered appropriated amount or portion thereof from one fund or capital project to another fund or capital project, provided that the purpose for which the transferred funds are to be expended remains unchanged, the purpose for which the funds were initially appropriated no longer exists, or the proposed transfer is from a fund or capital project in which the amount appropriated exceeds the amount needed to accomplish the purpose specified in the appropriation ordinance. Page 111 Item 7. -3- O. The City Manager has recommended the transfer of $388,773 from the Transportation Capital Expansion Fee fund to the Capital Projects fund, $77 from the Transportation Services fund to the Capital Projects fund, $85,000 from the Conservation Trust fund to the Capital Projects fund, and $45,000 for the Community Capital Improvement Program Pedestrian Sidewalk budget in the Capital Project s fund to the William Neal and Zieglar Project budget in the Capital Projects fund and has determined that the purpose for which the transferred funds are to be expended remains unchanged. P. This Project involves construction estimated to cost more than $250,000 and, as such, City Code Section 23-304 requires that one percent of these appropriations be transferred to the Cultural Services and Facilities Fund for a contribution to the Art in Public Places (“APP”) program. Q. The total Project cost of $385,000 has been used to calculate the contribution to the APP program. R. The amount to be contributed in this Ordinance will be $3,850. S. Article V, Section 11 of the City Charter authorizes the City Council to designate in the ordinance when appropriating funds for a capital project, that such appropriation shall not lapse at the end of the fiscal year in which the appropriation is made, but continue until the completion of the capital project. T. The City Council wishes to designate the appropriation s herein for the William Neal and Ziegler Intersection Improvements Project as appropriations that shall not lapse at the end of the fiscal year in which the appropriation s are made but continue until the completion of the Project. U. The appropriations in this Ordinance benefit public health, safety and welfare of the residents and traveling public of Fort Collins and serve the public purpose of improving multimodal transportation infrastructure within the City. In light of the foregoing recitals, which the Council hereby makes and adopts as determinations and findings, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. There is hereby appropriated from prior year reserves in the Transportation Capital Expansion Fee fund the amount of Three Hundred Eighty-Eight Thousand Seven Hundred Seventy-Three Dollars ($388,773) to be expended in the Transportation Capital Expansion Fee fund for transfer to the Capital Projects fund and appropriated therein to be expended for the William Neal and Ziegler Intersection Improvements Project. Section 2. There is hereby appropriated from prior year reserves in the Transportation Services fund the amount of Seventy-Seven Dollars ($77) to be expended in the Transportation Services fund for transfer to the Capital Projects fund and Page 112 Item 7. -4- appropriated therein to be expended for the William Neal and Ziegler Intersection Improvements Project. Section 3. The unexpended and unencumbered appropriated amount of Eighty- Five Thousand Dollars ($85,000) is authorized for transfer from the Conservation Trust fund to the Capital Projects fund and appropriated therein to be expended for the William Neal and Ziegler Intersection Improvements Project. Section 4. The unexpended and unencumbered appropriated amount Forty- Five Thousand Dollars ($45,000) is authorized for transfer from the Community Capital Improvement Program Pedestrian Sidewalk Budget in the Capital Project s fund to the William Neal Ziegler Budget in the Capital Project s fund and appropriated therein to be expended for the William Neal and Ziegler Intersection Project. Section 5. The unexpended and unencumbered appropriated amount of Three Thousand Three Dollars ($3,003) in the Capital Projects fund is hereby authorized for transfer to the Cultural Services and Facilities fund and appropriated and expended therein to fund art projects under the APP program. Section 6. The unexpended and unencumbered appropriated amount of Seven Hundred Seventy Dollars ($770) in the Capital Project fund is hereby authorized for transfer to the Cultural Services and Facilities fund and appropriated and expended therein for the operation costs of the APP program. Section 7. The unexpended and unencumbered appropriated amount of Seventy-Seven Dollars ($77) in the Capital Project fund is hereby authorized for transfer to the Cultural Services and Facilities fund and appropriated and expended therein for the maintenance costs of the APP program. Section 8. The appropriations herein for the William Neal and Ziegler Intersection Improvements Project are hereby designated, as authorized in Article V, Section 11 of the City Charter, as appropriations that shall not lapse at the end of this fiscal year but continue until the completion of the Project. Page 113 Item 7. -5- Introduced, considered favorably on first reading on September 16, 2025, and approved on second reading for final passage on October 7, 2025. ______________________________ Mayor ATTEST: ______________________________ City Clerk Effective Date: October 17, 2025 Approving Attorney: Heather Jarvis Exhibit: None Page 114 Item 7. File Attachments for Item: 8. First Reading of Ordinance No. 148, 2025, Making Supplemental Appropriation of Colorado Office of Economic Development and International Trade for the Colorado CHIPS Community Support Program Marketing Grant Funds in the General Fund. The purpose of this item is to appropriate $25,000 of unanticipated revenue from the Colorado Office of Economic Development and International Trade for the Colorado Creating Helpful Incentives to Produce Semiconductors (CHIPS) Community Support Program Marketing grant. This grant provides funding to the Economic Health Office for marketing and promotional activities targeted at semiconductor ecosystem companies and advanced industries. Page 115 City Council Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 1 of 2 September 16, 2025 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Council STAFF SeonAh Kendall, Director, Economic Sustainability Tyler Menzales, Senior Manager, Economic Sustainability Carisa Clinton, Senior Grants Analyst SUBJECT First Reading of Ordinance No. 148, 2025, Making Supplemental Appropriation of Colorado Office of Economic Development and International Trade for the Colorado CHIPS Community Support Program Marketing Grant Funds in the General Fund. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to appropriate $25,000 of unanticipated revenue from the Colorado Office of Economic Development and International Trade for the Colorado Creating Helpful Incentives to Produce Semiconductors (CHIPS) Community Support Program Marketing grant. This grant provides funding to the Economic Health Office for marketing and promotional activities targeted at semiconductor ecosystem companies and advanced industries. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION Colorado General Assembly adopted HB23-1260 on May 2023 to create a state income tax credit opportunity for businesses in semiconductor and advance manufacturing, as well as creation of CHIPS Zones, for eligible businesses within a geographical area. With the adoption of Resolution 2023-052, Fort Collins proposed the first CHIPS Zone to encourage and support investments in semiconductor manufacturing. Colorado and particularly the Front Range is among a handful of places in the U.S. with a strong concentration of semiconductor manufacturing and design. In late 2023, the Colorado Office of Economic Development & International Trade (OEDIT) announced the creation of the Colorado CHIPS Community Support Program to spur investment in semiconductors and other advanced technologies in the state. To support future growth, OEDIT launched three grant programs to spread the development of semiconductor and advanced industry ecosystems across the state, including a competitive process to award marketing grants (Marketing Grants to tribal and local governments). The City’s Economic Health Office applied for a Marketing Grant, for which OEDIT awarded $25,000 to the City to perform marketing efforts to raise awareness of the local community to stakeholders in the semiconductor and advanced industries outside of Colorado to attract new businesses and increase Page 116 Item 8. City Council Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 2 of 2 semiconductor production within our region. The marketing activities that are planned include bringing awareness to local companies in the semiconductor industry, which includes research and development, as well as manufacturing. CITY FINANCIAL IMPACTS This item authorizes the City Manager to accept the grant and obligate the City to comply with the terms and conditions of the grant of the award and appropriates $25,000 in unanticipated revenue and authorizes expenditures against those revenues for the purpose of providing promotional activities by the Economic Health Office towards attracting semiconductor ecosystem companies and advanced industries to the City. The Marketing Grant is reimbursement based, meaning General Fund expenses will be reimbursed for eligible expenses incurred up to $25,000. BOARD / COMMISSION / COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION None. PUBLIC OUTREACH None. ATTACHMENTS 1. Ordinance No. 148, 2025 Page 117 Item 8. - 1 - ORDINANCE NO. 148, 2025 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS MAKING SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATION OF COLORADO OFFICE OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND INTERNATIONAL TRADE FOR THE COLORADO CHIPS COMMUNITY SUPPORT PROGRAM MARKETING GRANT FUNDS IN THE GENERAL FUND A. The City Council finds and determines that the adoption of this Ordinance is necessary for the public's health, safety, and welfare, and therefore, wishes to authorize the expenditures described in this Ordinance and that such expenditures will serve the public purposes for which they are designated. B. City Council, by adoption of Resolution 2023-052, approved the boundaries of a proposed semiconductor manufacturing zone (CHIPS Zone), to maximize the opportunity for Colorado businesses to access federal funding through "American Rescue Plan Act of 2021", the "Creating Helpful Incentives to Produce Semiconductors and Science Act of 2022", or other similar federal legislation, as well as to be eligible for state tax-credits authorized by House Bill 23-1260. C. Related to its administration of House Bill 23-1260, the Colorado Office of Economic Development and International Trade (“OEDIT”) created a Colorado CHIPS Community Support Program to spur investment, which included grant opportunities for tribal and local governments. D. On August 15, 2025, OEDIT awarded the City’s Economic Health Office a $25,000 Colorado CHIPS Community Support Program Marketing Grant (the “Award Notice – Purchase Order and Statement of Work”) attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated by this reference, and the grant terms and conditions (the “State of Colorado Small Dollar Grant Award Terms and Condition s”) attached hereto as Exhibit B and incorporated by this reference, for the purposes of attracting new businesses and increasing semiconductor production within the City and surrounding areas. E. Article V, Section 9 of the City Charter permits the City Council, upon recommendation of the City Manager, to make a supplemental appropriation by ordinance at any time during the fiscal year, provided that the total amount of such supplemental appropriation, in combination with all previous appropriations for that fiscal year, do not exceed the current estimate of actual and anticipated revenues and all other funds to be received during the fiscal year. F. The City Manager has recommended the appropriation described herein and determined that the funds to be appropriated are available and previously unappropriated from the General Fund and that this appropriation will not cause the total amount appropriated in the General Fund to exceed the current estimate of actual and anticipated revenues and all other funds to be received in this Fund during this fiscal year. Page 118 Item 8. - 2 - G. Article V, Section 11 of the City Charter authorizes the City Council to designate in the ordinance when appropriating funds for a federal, state or private grant or donation, that such appropriation shall not lapse at the end of the fiscal year in which the appropriation is made, but continue until the earlier of the expiration of the federal, state or private grant or donation or the City’s expenditure of all funds received from such grant or donation. H. The City Council wishes to designate the appropriation herein for the Colorado CHIPS Community Support Program Marketing Grant as an appropriation that shall not lapse until the earlier of the expiration of the grant or the City’s expenditure of all funds received from such grant. In light of the foregoing recitals, which the Council hereby makes and adopts as determinations and findings, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. There is hereby appropriated from new revenue or other funds in the General Fund the sum of TWENTY-FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS ($25,000) to be expended in the General Fund for the Colorado CHIPS Community Support Program Marketing Grant. Section 2. The appropriation herein for the Colorado CHIPS Community Support Program Marketing Grant is hereby designated, as authorized in Article V, Section 11 of the City Charter, as an appropriation that shall not lapse at the end of this fiscal year but continue until the earlier of the expiration of the grant or the City’s expenditure of all funds received from such grant. Section 3. The City Council authorizes the City Manager or their designee to accept the grant and obligate the City to comply with the terms and conditions of the grant of the award. Page 119 Item 8. - 3 - Introduced, considered favorably on first reading on September 16, 2025, and approved on second reading for final passage on October 7, 2025. ______________________________ Mayor ATTEST: ______________________________ City Clerk Effective Date: October 17, 2025 Approving Attorney: Dianne Criswell Exhibit: Exhibit A: Award Notice – Purchase Order and Statement of Work Exhibit B: State of Colorado Small Dollar Grant Award Terms and Conditions Page 120 Item 8. STATE OF COLORADO Office of the Governor Office of Economic Development Page 1 of 1 ORDER *****IMPORTANT***** Number:POGG1,EDAA,202600002253 The order number and line number must appear on all invoices, packing slips, cartons, and correspondence.Date:8/15/25 Description: Colorado CHIPS Community Support Program Market Study grant BILL TO Office of Economic Development and International Trade 1600 Broadway Suite 2500 DENVER, CO 80202 Effective Date:08/14/25 Expiration Date:10/31/26 SHIP TO Buyer:Aaron Bushman Office of Economic Development and International Trade 1600 Broadway Suite 2500 DENVER, CO 80202 Email:aaron.bushman@state.co.us CITY OF FORT COLLINS City Hall West 300 La Port Avenue; P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 Delivery/Install Date: FOB:EFT REMIT Phone: Grantee to complete tasks and deliverables per Exhibit A, Statement of Work attached and incorporated herein. OEDIT Point of Contact: Dan Salvetti at daniel.salvetti@state.co.us Line Item Commodity/Item Code UOM QTY Unit Cost Total Cost MSDS Req. 1 0 0.00 $25,000.00 Description: Colorado CHIPS Community Support Program Market Study grant TERMS AND CONDITIONS https://www.colorado.gov/osc/purchase-order-terms-conditions DOCUMENT TOTAL = $25,000.00 EXHIBIT A TO ORDINANCE NO. 148, 2025 Page 121 Item 8. Page 1 of 5 Exhibit A Version 06.2024 Exhibit A, Statement of Work 1.Project Description A.In 2022, the federal government enacted the CHIPS (Creating Helpful Incentives to Produce Semiconductors) and Science Act to spur investment in semiconductors and other advanced technologies in the United States. The Colorado General Assembly, in early 2023, passed two bills that created new programs and directed funding to support efforts to draw in the federal funding and private investments of the CHIPS Act: HB23-1260 and SB23-137. B.The latter, SB23-137, appropriated funding from the General Fund to the Colorado Economic Development Fund to “use in connection with the federal [CHIPS] and Science Act of 2022.” The Office of Economic Development and International Trade (herein after called “OEDIT” or “State”), through consultation with stakeholders and with a particular focus on creating benefits for rural and underserved communities, designed a suite of three grants known as the Colorado CHIPS Community Support Program (CCCSP) to expend most of this funding. The CCCSP received approval from the Colorado Economic Development Commission in late 2023. C.OEDIT agrees to award the City of Fort Collins (hereinafter called “Grantee”) with a Colorado CHIPS Community Support Program (CCCSP) Marketing grant. This grant award shall be used to fund marketing and promotional activities targeted to semiconductor ecosystem companies and advanced industries. 2.Parties OEDIT Point of Contact: Dan Salvetti, Semiconductor Industry Manager Daniel.salvetti@state.co.us 720-601-5055 Colorado Office of Economic Development and International Trade 1600 Broadway, Suite 2500 Denver, CO 80202 Grantee Point of Contact: City of Fort Collins Seonah Kendall, Economic Health Analyst skendall@fcgov.com (970) 416-2164 P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522 3.Work Tasks, Deliverables and Timeline A.Project Narrative EXHIBIT A TO ORDINANCE NO. 148, 2025 Page 122 Item 8. Page 2 of 5 Exhibit A Version 06.2024 i)This CCCSP Marketing Grant will provide funding to the City of Fort Collins to hire a contractor to perform a marketing effort in the designated region. The marketing effort will consist of promotional activities targeted at the semiconductor ecosystem and advanced industries. The marketing effort should raise awareness of the local community to stakeholders in the semiconductor and advanced industries outside of Colorado by emphasizing a unique community asset that is relevant for those sectors. ii)This grant will allow the Recipient the ability to pursue a marketing effort based on the City of Fort Collins. The deliverable for the Marketing Grant will be variable based on the applicant’s plan, but should include the following: (1)Executive summary of the marketing effort, including targets, goals, and expected effects of the marketing effort; (2)Detailed distribution of funding across marketing and media platforms; (3)Timeline of marketing strategy; (4)Description of unique asset to be highlighted to the semiconductor and advanced industry sectors; (5)Any associated efforts designed to interact with the marketing effort. iii)As stated above, the outcome of the funds’ use should be an elevation of awareness of the local community to stakeholders in the semiconductor ecosystem and advanced industry sectors outside of Colorado, by emphasizing a unique community asset that is relevant for those sectors. B.Timeline Task / Deliverable Description Due Grantee to begin the contractor selection process One month after execution Grantee to select Contractor Four months after execution Contractor begins work Five months after execution Draft Marketing Report completed Fourteen months after execution Final delivery of Marketing Report to Grantee Fifteen months after execution 4.Acceptance Criteria A.Contractor Selection The State of Colorado requires fair and open competition when purchasing goods and services. The Grantee shall attempt to collect at least three written bids from potential contractors before making a final selection. i)The Grantee will provide to OEDIT’s Semiconductor Industry Manager (herein after called “Program Manager”) their Contractor selection via email per Section 3.B. Timeline. The Grantee shall provide the following information: a.) An identification of the selected bidder, along with an explanation of the choice, including qualifications and capabilities. b.) An evaluation of all the contractor’s qualifications, capacity to perform the work, milestones and deadlines, and budgets. EXHIBIT A TO ORDINANCE NO. 148, 2025 Page 123 Item 8. Page 3 of 5 Exhibit A Version 06.2024 B. Progress/Draft Report During the ten-month period between contractor selection and completing the draft of the Marketing Report, in which the contractor will perform the work relevant to complete the marketing effort (data collection, analysis, drafting, etc.). i.) The Grantee will provide the Program Manager monthly progress reports, to include the following: a.) A simple indication of one of the following choices: (1) Ahead of schedule (2) On schedule (3) Delayed b.) A simple description of the contractor’s progress compared to the predetermined milestones and deadlines. c.) If relevant, a description of planned interventions to get the project back on schedule. ii.) A draft report shall be submitted per Section 2 .B. Timeline. Along with invoices and supporting documents. 5. Monitoring and Compliance A. Draft Marketing Report i) The Grantee will provide to the Program Manager a copy of the draft Marketing Report as an attachment via email by the due date matching the description in Section 3.A. i. and ii. ii) The Program Manager will review the draft report and respond via email that the deliverable is or is not accepted within one week after receipt. iii) Reasons for non-acceptance will be limited to the following: (1) The draft report does not contain all of the sections listed in Section 3.A.ii. (2) The draft report is lacking sufficient detail. (3) The marketing activities contained therein are not applicable to elevation of awareness of the local community to stakeholders in the semiconductor and advanced industries outside of Colorado. iv) Should this deliverable not be accepted for one or more of the reasons shown the Grantee will have 30 days to correct the issue and an Amendment will need to be issued to extend the Timeline details. v) The Program Manager will have one week to accept the revised draft report. If the Program Manager is unable to accept at this time, this Small Dollar Grant Award will be terminated. B. Final Report EXHIBIT A TO ORDINANCE NO. 148, 2025 Page 124 Item 8. Page 4 of 5 Exhibit A Version 06.2024 The Grantee will provide to the Program Manager a copy of the final report as an attachment via email by the due date matching the description in Section 3. B. Timeline 6. Budget A. The maximum amount payable under this Purchase Order to Grantee by OEDIT shall be $25,000. as determined by the State from available funds. Satisfactory performance under the terms of this Small Dollar Grant Award shall be a condition precedent to OEDIT’s obligation to compensate the Grantee. B. This Small Dollar Grant Award will fund the items defined under the Project Narrative, Tasks, and Deliverables. C. Allowable Use of Funds: i) Contractor Personnel Reimbursable Hours or Fees (1) Creative Development (a) Graphic Design (b) Copywriting (c) Video Production (d) Photography (2) Market Research (a) Audience Segmentation (b) Competitive Analysis (c) Consumer Insights (3) Tracking and Analytics (a) Tracking and measuring KPIs (b) Analyzing metrics (c) Generating reports ii) Other Costs (1) Media Placement Fees (2) Search Engine Optimization Fees (3) Printing/Shipping Costs D. This grant does not reimburse travel expenses that are not directly related to the Allowable Use of Funds in Section C. All travel needs to be pre-approved by the OEDIT Program Manager and shall not exceed $10,000. E. Grant Administration expenses shall not exceed $5,000. F. Unallowable Expenses: i) Purchases with no receipts or no contract ii) Promotional expenses for the Recipient or Contractor not related to the selection of a contractor or input from community members iii) Personal expenses incurred during travel that are primarily for the benefit of the traveler and not directly related to the relocation, such as premium add-on costs on airline tickets iv) Certain insurance coverage, including supplemental life insurance for airlines, trip cancellation insurance, personal accident and personal effects insurance on rental vehicles, collision damage EXHIBIT A TO ORDINANCE NO. 148, 2025 Page 125 Item 8. Page 5 of 5 Exhibit A Version 06.2024 waiver on rental vehicles, and supplemental liability insurance, except for the $1,000,000 insurance on rental vehicles v) Alcohol and dispensary related expenses vi) Food and beverage vii) Lobbying activities, political contributions, donations and activities viii) Charitable or pass-through contributions ix) Promotional giveaways or gift cards x) Entertainment /entertainers, social events, amusement and hospitality activities xi) Traffic fines, parking tickets xii) Legal fees, unless specifically necessary for the project xiii) Reimbursing staff or board members for personal expenses xiv) Incentives to staff/participants/volunteers, including luncheons xv) On-going operational expenses, such as office rent, internet, accounting fees (supplanting) 7. Payment A. Payments will be made by reimbursement request, and must include, at a minimum, the invoice plus documentation to provide proof of work completed and bids obtained before purchase. B. Grantee should submit reimbursement requests monthly. C. Grant funds are subject to availability and expiration of this Small Dollar Grant Award. Funds not invoiced by the Small Dollar Grant Award term expiration date may not be paid, absent any extensions for time or early termination by either party. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Small Dollar Grant Award, OEDIT will not be responsible for payment of any Grant Funds after the Expiration Date. EXHIBIT A TO ORDINANCE NO. 148, 2025 Page 126 Item 8. EXHIBIT B TO ORDINANCE NO. 148, 2025 1 Note: This document is the generally applicable grant terms and conditions, titled “Colorado Small Dollar Grant Award Terms and Conditions,” incorporated by reference on page 4 of the “Colorado CHIPS Community Support Program Market Study Grant Award Notice – Purchase Order and Statement of Work.” Available at: https://www.colorado.gov/osc/purchase-order-terms-conditions. State of Colorado Small Dollar Grant Award Terms and Conditions Offer/Acceptance. This Small Dollar Grant Award, together with these terms and conditions (including, if applicable, Addendum 1: Additional Terms and Conditions for Information Technology, and Addendum 2: Additional Terms and Conditions for Federal Provisions, below), and any other attachments, exhibits, specifications, or appendices, whether attached or incorporated by reference (collectively the “Agreement”) shall represent the entire and exclusive agreement between the State of Colorado, by and through the agency identified on the face of the Small Dollar Grant Award (“State”) and the Subrecipient identified on the face of the Small Dollar Grant Award (“Grantee”). If this Agreement refers to Grantee’s bid or proposal, this Agreement is an ACCEPTANCE of Grantee’s OFFER TO PERFORM in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement. If a bid or proposal is not referenced, this Agreement is an OFFER TO ENTER INTO AGREEMENT, subject to Grantee’s acceptance, demonstrated by Grantee’s beginning performance or written acceptance of this Agreement. Any COUNTER-OFFER automatically CANCELS this Agreement, unless a change order is issued by the State accepting a counter-offer. Except as provided herein, the State shall not be responsible or liable for any Work performed prior to issuance of this Agreement. The State’s financial obligations to the Grantee are limited by the amount of Grant Funds awarded as reflected on the face of the Small Dollar Grant Award. Page 127 Item 8. EXHIBIT B TO ORDINANCE NO. 148, 2025 2 Order of Precedence. In the event of a conflict or inconsistency within this Agreement, such conflict or inconsistency shall be resolved by giving preference to the documents in the following order of priority: (1) if applicable, Addendum 2: Additional Terms and Conditions for Federal Provisions, below; (2) the Small dollar Grant Award document; (3) these terms and conditions (including, if applicable, Addendum 1 below); and (4) any attachments, exhibits, specifications, or appendices, whether attached or incorporated by reference. Notwithstanding the above, if this Agreement has been funded, in whole or in part, with a Federal Award, in the event of a conflict between the Federal Grant and this Agreement, the provisions of the Federal Grant shall control. Grantee shall comply with all applicable Federal provisions at all times during the term of this Agreement. Any terms and conditions included on Grantee’s forms or invoices not included in this Agreement are void. Changes. Once accepted in accordance with §1, this Agreement shall not be modified, superseded or otherwise altered, except in writing by the State and accepted by Grantee. Definitions. The following terms shall be construed and interpreted as follows: (a) “Award” means an award of Federal financial assistance, and the grant setting forth the terms and conditions of that financial assistance, that a Non-Federal Entity receives or administer.;(b) “Budget” means the budget for the Work described in this Agreement; (c) “Business Day” means any day in which the State is open and conducting business, but shall not include Saturday, Sunday or any day on which the State observes one of the holidays listed in CRS §24-11- 101(1); (d) “UCC” means the Uniform Commercial Code in CRS Title 4; (e) “Effective Date” means the date on which this Agreement is issued as shown on the face of the Small Dollar Grant Award; (f) “Federal Award” means an award of federal financial assistance or a cost-reimbursement contract, by a Federal Awarding Agency to the Recipient. “Federal Award” also means an agreement setting forth the terms and conditions of the Federal Award, which terms and conditions shall flow down to the Award unless such terms and conditions specifically indicate otherwise. The term does not include payments to a contractor or payments to an individual that is a beneficiary of a Federal program; (g) “Federal Awarding Agency” means a Federal agency providing a Federal Award to a Recipient as described in 2 CFR 200.1; (h) “Grantee” means the party or parties identified as Page 128 Item 8. EXHIBIT B TO ORDINANCE NO. 148, 2025 3 such in the Grant to which these Terms and Conditions apply. Grantee also means Subrecipient; (i) “Grant Funds” means the funds that have been appropriated, designated, encumbered, or otherwise made available for payment by the State under this Agreement; (j) “Matching Funds” mean the funds provided by the Grantee to meet cost sharing requirements described in this Agreement; (k) “Non-Federal Entity” means a State, local government, Indian tribe, institution of higher education, or nonprofit organization that carries out a Federal Award as a Recipient or Subrecipient; (l) “Recipient” means the State agency identified on the face of the Small Dollar Grant Award; (m) “Subcontractor” means third parties, if any, engaged by Grantee to aid in performance of the Work; (n) “Subrecipient” means an entity that receives a subaward from a pass-through entity to carry out part of a Federal award. The term subrecipient does not include a beneficiary or participant. A subrecipient may also be a recipient of other Federal awards directly from a Federal agency; (o) “Uniform Guidance” means the Office of Management and Budget Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards. The terms and conditions of the Uniform Guidance flow down to awards to Subrecipients unless the Uniform Guidance or the terms and conditions of the Federal Award specifically indicate otherwise; and (p) “Work” means the goods delivered or services, or both, performed pursuant to this Agreement and identified as Line Items on the face of the Small Dollar Grant Award. Delivery. Grantee shall furnish the Work in strict accordance with the specifications and price set forth in this Agreement. The State shall have no liability to compensate Grantee for the performance of any Work not specifically set forth in the Agreement. Rights to Materials. [Not Applicable to Agreements issued either in whole in part for Information Technology, as defined in CRS § 24-37.5-102(2); in which case Addendum 1 §2 applies in lieu of this section.] Unless specifically stated otherwise in this Agreement, all materials, including without limitation supplies, equipment, documents, content, information, or other material of any type, whether tangible or intangible (collectively “Materials”), furnished by the State to Grantee or delivered by Grantee to the State in performance of its obligations under this Agreement shall be the exclusive property the State. Grantee shall return or deliver all Materials to the State upon completion or termination of this Agreement. Page 129 Item 8. EXHIBIT B TO ORDINANCE NO. 148, 2025 4 Grantee Records. Grantee shall make, keep, maintain, and allow inspection and monitoring by the State of a complete file of all records, documents, communications, notes and other written materials, electronic media files, and communications, pertaining in any manner to the Work (including, but not limited to the operation of programs) performed under this Agreement (collectively “Grantee Records”). Grantee must collect, transmit, and store information related to this Agreement in open and machine-readable formats (2 CFR 200.336). Unless otherwise specified by the State, the Grantee shall retain Grantee Records for a period (the “Record Retention Period”) of three years following the date of submission to the State of the final expenditure report, or if this Award is renewed quarterly or annually, from the date of the submission of each quarterly or annual report, respectively. If any litigation, claim, or audit related to this Award starts before expiration of the Record Retention Period, the Record Retention Period shall extend until all litigation, claims or audit finding have been resolved and final action taken by the State or Federal Awarding Agency. The Federal Awarding Agency, a cognizant agency for audit, oversight, or indirect costs, and the State, may notify Grantee in writing that the Record Retention Period shall be extended. For records for real property and equipment, the Record Retention Period shall extend three years following final disposition of such property. Grantee shall permit the State, the federal government, and any other duly authorized agent of a governmental agency to audit, inspect, examine, excerpt, copy and transcribe Grantee Records during the Record Retention Period. Grantee shall make Grantee Records available during normal business hours at Grantee’s office or place of business, or at other mutually agreed upon times or locations, upon no fewer than two Business Days’ notice from the State, unless the State determines that a shorter period of notice, or no notice, is necessary to protect the interests of the State. The State, in its discretion, may monitor Grantee’s performance of its obligations under this Agreement using procedures as determined by the State. The federal government and any other duly authorized agent of a governmental agency, in its discretion, Grantee shall allow the State to perform all monitoring required by the Uniform Guidance, based on the State’s risk analysis of Grantee and this Agreement, and the State shall have the right, in its discretion, to change its monitoring procedures and requirements at any time during the term of this Agreement. The State will monitor Grantee’s performance in a manner that does not unduly interfere with Grantee’s performance of the Work. Grantee shall promptly submit to the State a copy of any final audit report of an audit performed on Grantee Records Page 130 Item 8. EXHIBIT B TO ORDINANCE NO. 148, 2025 5 that relates to or affects this Agreement or the Work, whether the audit is conducted by Grantee, a State agency or the State’s authorized representative, or a third party. If applicable, the Grantee may be required to perform a single audit under 2 CFR 200.501, et seq. Grantee shall submit a copy of the results of that audit to the State within the same timelines as the submission to the federal government. Reporting. If Grantee is served with a pleading or other document in connection with an action before a court or other administrative decision- making body, and such pleading or document relates to this Agreement or may affect Grantee’s ability to perform its obligations under this Agreement, Grantee shall, within 10 days after being served, notify the State of such action and deliver copies of such pleading or document to the State. Grantee shall disclose, in a timely manner, in writing to the State and the Federal Awarding Agency, all violations of federal or State criminal law involving fraud, bribery, or gratuity violations potentially affecting the Award. The State or the Federal Awarding Agency may impose any penalties for noncompliance allowed under 2 CFR Part 180 and 31 U.S.C. 3321, which may include, without limitation, suspension or debarment. Conflicts of Interest. Grantee acknowledges that with respect to this Agreement, even the appearance of a conflict of interest is harmful to the State’s interests. Absent the State’s prior written approval, Grantee shall refrain from any practices, activities, or relationships that reasonably may appear to be in conflict with the full performance of Grantee’s obligations to the State under this Agreement. If a conflict or appearance of a conflict of interest exists, or if Grantee is uncertain as to such, Grantee shall submit to the State a disclosure statement setting forth the relevant details for the State’s consideration. Failure to promptly submit a disclosure statement or to follow the State’s direction in regard to the actual or apparent conflict constitutes a breach of this Agreement. Grantee certifies that to their knowledge, no employee of the State has any personal or beneficial interest whatsoever in the service or property described in this Agreement. Grantee has no interest and shall not acquire any interest, direct or indirect, that would conflict in any manner or degree with the performance of Grantee’s Services and Grantee shall not employ any person having such known interests. Taxes. The State is exempt from federal excise taxes and from State and local sales and use taxes. Page 131 Item 8. EXHIBIT B TO ORDINANCE NO. 148, 2025 6 Payment. Payments to Grantee are limited to the unpaid, obligated balance of the Grant Funds. The State shall not pay Grantee any amount under this Agreement that exceeds the Document Total shown on the face of the Small Dollar Grant Award. The State shall pay Grantee in the amounts and in accordance with the schedule and other conditions set forth in this Agreement. Grantee shall initiate payment requests by invoice to the State, in a form and manner approved by the State. The State shall pay Grantee for all amounts due within 45 days after receipt of an Awarding Agency’s approved invoicing request, or in instances of reimbursement grant programs a request for reimbursement, compliant with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) and, if applicable Government Accounting Standards Board (GASB) of amount requested. Amounts not paid by the State within 45 days of the State’s acceptance of the invoice shall bear interest on the unpaid balance beginning on the 45th day at the rate set forth in CRS §24-30- 202(24) until paid in full. Interest shall not accrue if a good faith dispute exists as to the State’s obligation to pay all or a portion of the amount due. Grantee shall invoice the State separately for interest on delinquent amounts due, referencing the delinquent payment, number of day’s interest to be paid, and applicable interest rate. The acceptance of an invoice shall not constitute acceptance of any Work performed under this Agreement. Except as specifically agreed in this Agreement, Grantee shall be solely responsible for all costs, expenses, and other charges it incurs in connection with its performance under this Grantee. Term. The parties’ respective performances under this Agreement shall commence on the “Service From” date identified on the face of the Small Dollar Grant Award, unless otherwise specified, and shall terminate on the “Service To” date identified on the face of the Small Dollar Grant Award unless sooner terminated in accordance with the terms of this Agreement. Payment Disputes. If Grantee disputes any calculation, determination or amount of any payment, Grantee shall notify the State in writing of its dispute within 30 days following the earlier to occur of Grantee’s receipt of the payment or notification of the determination or calculation of the payment by the State. The State will review the information presented by Grantee and may make changes to its determination based on this review. The calculation, determination or payment amount that results from the State’s review shall not be subject to additional dispute Page 132 Item 8. EXHIBIT B TO ORDINANCE NO. 148, 2025 7 under this subsection. No payment subject to a dispute under this subsection shall be due until after the State has concluded its review, and the State shall not pay any interest on any amount during the period it is subject to dispute under this subsection. Matching Funds. Grantee shall provide Matching Funds, if required by this Agreement. If permitted under the terms of the grant and per this Agreement, Grantee may be permitted to provide Matching Funds prior to or during the course of the project or the match will be an in-kind match. Grantee shall report to the State regarding the status of such funds upon request. Grantee’s obligation to pay all or any part of any Matching Funds, whether direct or contingent, only extend to funds duly and lawfully appropriated for the purposes of this Agreement by the authorized representatives of Grantee and paid into Grantee’s treasury or bank account. Grantee represents to the State that the amount designated “Grantee’s Matching Funds” pursuant to this Agreement, has been legally appropriated for the purposes of this Agreement by its authorized representatives and paid into its treasury or bank account. Grantee does not by this Agreement irrevocably pledge present cash reserves for payments in future fiscal years, and this Agreement is not intended to create a multiple-fiscal year debt of Grantee. Grantee shall not pay or be liable for any claimed interest, late charges, fees, taxes or penalties of any nature, except as required by Grantee’s laws or policies. Reimbursement of Grantee Costs. If applicable, the State shall reimburse Grantee’s allowable costs, not exceeding the maximum total amount described in this Agreement for all allowable costs described in the grant except that Grantee may adjust the amounts between each line item of the Budget without formal modification to this Agreement as long as the Grantee provides notice to, and received approval from the State of the change, the change does not modify the total maximum amount of this Agreement, and the change does not modify any requirements of the Work. If applicable, the State shall reimburse Grantee for the properly documented allowable costs related to the Work after review and approval thereof, subject to the provisions of this Agreement. However, any costs incurred by Grantee prior to the Effective Date shall not be reimbursed absent specific allowance of pre-award costs. Grantee’s costs for Work performed after the “Service To” date identified on the face of the Small Dollar Grant Award, or after any phase performance period end date for a respective phase of the Work, shall not be reimbursable. The State shall only Page 133 Item 8. EXHIBIT B TO ORDINANCE NO. 148, 2025 8 reimburse allowable costs described in this Agreement and shown in the Budget if those costs are (a) reasonable and necessary to accomplish the Work, and (b) equal to the actual net cost to Grantee (i.e. the price paid minus any items of value received by Grantee that reduce the costs actually incurred). Close-Out. Grantee shall close out this Award within 45 days after the “Service To” date identified on the face of the Small Dollar Grant Award, including any modifications. To complete close-out, Grantee shall submit to the State all deliverables (including documentation) as defined in this Agreement and Grantee’s final reimbursement request or invoice. In accordance with the Agreement, the State may withhold a percentage of allowable costs until all final documentation has been submitted and accepted by the State as substantially complete. Assignment. Grantee’s rights and obligations under this Agreement may not be transferred or assigned without the prior, written consent of the State and execution of a new agreement. Any attempt at assignment or transfer without such consent and new agreement shall be void. Any assignment or transfer of Grantee’s rights and obligations approved by the State shall be subject to the provisions of this Agreement. Subcontracts. Grantee shall not enter into any subcontract in connection with its obligations under this Agreement without the prior, written approval of the State. Grantee shall submit to the State a copy of each subcontract upon request by the State. All subcontracts entered into by Grantee in connection with this Agreement shall comply with all applicable federal and state laws and regulations, shall provide that they are governed by the laws of the State of Colorado, and shall be subject to all provisions of this Agreement. Severability. The invalidity or unenforceability of any provision of this Agreement shall not affect the validity or enforceability of any other provision of this Agreement, which shall remain in full force and effect, provided that the Parties can continue to perform their obligations in accordance with the intent of the Agreement. Page 134 Item 8. EXHIBIT B TO ORDINANCE NO. 148, 2025 9 Survival of Certain Agreement Terms. Any provision of this Agreement that imposes an obligation on a party after termination or expiration of the Agreement shall survive the termination or expiration of the Agreement and shall be enforceable by the other party. Third Party Beneficiaries. Except for the parties’ respective successors and assigns, this Agreement does not and is not intended to confer any rights or remedies upon any person or entity other than the Parties. Enforcement of this Agreement and all rights and obligations hereunder are reserved solely to the parties. Any services or benefits which third parties receive as a result of this Agreement are incidental to the Agreement, and do not create any rights for such third parties. Waiver. A party’s failure or delay in exercising any right, power, or privilege under this Agreement, whether explicit or by lack of enforcement, shall not operate as a waiver, nor shall any single or partial exercise of any right, power, or privilege preclude any other or further exercise of such right, power, or privilege. Indemnification. [Not Applicable to Inter-governmental agreements] Grantee shall indemnify, save, and hold harmless the State, its employees, agents and assignees (the “Indemnified Parties”), against any and all costs, expenses, claims, damages, liabilities, court awards and other amounts (including attorneys’ fees and related costs) incurred by any of the Indemnified Parties in relation to any act or omission by Grantee, or its employees, agents, Subcontractors, or assignees in connection with this Agreement. This shall include, without limitation, any and all costs, expenses, claims, damages, liabilities, court awards and other amounts incurred by the Indemnified Parties in relation to any claim that any work infringes a patent, copyright, trademark, trade secret, or any other intellectual property right or any claim for loss or improper disclosure of any confidential information or personally identifiable information. If Grantee is a public agency prohibited by applicable law from indemnifying any party, then this section shall not apply. Page 135 Item 8. EXHIBIT B TO ORDINANCE NO. 148, 2025 10 Notice. All notices given under this Agreement shall be in writing, and shall be delivered to the contacts for each party listed on the face of the Small Dollar Grant Award. Either party may change its contact or contact information by notice submitted in accordance with this section without a formal modification to this Agreement. Insurance. Except as otherwise specifically stated in this Agreement or any attachment or exhibit to this Agreement, Grantee shall obtain and maintain insurance as specified in this section at all times during the term of the Agreement: (a) workers’ compensation insurance as required by state statute, and employers’ liability insurance covering all Grantee employees acting within the course and scope of their employment, (b) Commercial general liability insurance written on an Insurance Services Office occurrence form, covering premises operations, fire damage, independent contractors, products and completed operations, blanket contractual liability, personal injury, and advertising liability with minimum limits as follows: $1,000,000 each occurrence; $1,000,000 general aggregate; $1,000,000 products and completed operations aggregate; and $50,000 any one fire, and (c) Automobile liability insurance covering any auto (including owned, hired and non-owned autos) with a minimum limit of $1,000,000 each accident combined single limit. If Grantee will or may have access to any protected information, then Grantee shall also obtain and maintain insurance covering loss and disclosure of protected information and claims based on alleged violations of privacy right through improper use and disclosure of protected information with limits of $1,000,000 each occurrence and $1,000,000 general aggregate at all times during the term of the Small Dollar Grant Award. Additional insurance may be required as provided elsewhere in this Agreement or any attachment or exhibit to this Agreement. All insurance policies required by this Agreement shall be issued by insurance companies with an AM Best rating of A-VIII or better. If Grantee is a public agency within the meaning of the Colorado Governmental Immunity Act, then this section shall not apply and Grantee shall instead comply with the Colorado Governmental Immunity Act. Termination Prior to Grantee Acceptance. If Grantee has not begun performance under this Agreement, the State may cancel this Agreement by providing written notice to the Grantee. Page 136 Item 8. EXHIBIT B TO ORDINANCE NO. 148, 2025 11 Termination for Cause. If Grantee refuses or fails to timely and properly perform any of its obligations under this Agreement with such diligence as will ensure its completion within the time specified in this Agreement, the State may notify Grantee in writing of non-performance and, if not corrected by Grantee within the time specified in the notice, terminate Grantee’s right to proceed with the Agreement or such part thereof as to which there has been delay or a failure. Grantee shall continue performance of this Agreement to the extent not terminated. Grantee shall be liable for excess costs incurred by the State in procuring similar Work and the State may withhold such amounts, as the State deems necessary. If after rejection, revocation, or other termination of Grantee’s right to proceed under the Colorado Uniform Commercial Code (CUCC) or this clause, the State determines for any reason that Grantee was not in default or the delay was excusable, the rights and obligations of the State and Grantee shall be the same as if the notice of termination had been issued pursuant to termination under §28. Termination in Public Interest. The State is entering into this Agreement for the purpose of carrying out the public interest of the State, as determined by its Governor, General Assembly, Courts, or Federal Awarding Agency. If this Agreement ceases to further the public interest of the State as determined by its Governor, General Assembly, Courts, or Federal Awarding Agency, the State, in its sole discretion, may terminate this Agreement in whole or in part and such termination shall not be deemed to be a breach of the State’s obligations hereunder. This section shall not apply to a termination for cause, which shall be governed by §27. A determination that this Small Dollar Grant Award should be terminated in the public interest shall not be equivalent to a State right to terminate for convenience. The State shall give written notice of termination to Grantee specifying the part of the Agreement terminated and when termination becomes effective. Upon receipt of notice of termination, Grantee shall not incur further obligations except as necessary to mitigate costs of performance. The State shall pay the Agreement price or rate for Work performed and accepted by State prior to the effective date of the notice of termination. The State’s termination liability under this section shall not exceed the total Agreement price. Termination for Funds Availability. The State is prohibited by law from making commitments beyond the term of the current State Fiscal Year. Payment to Grantee beyond the current State Fiscal Year is contingent on the Page 137 Item 8. EXHIBIT B TO ORDINANCE NO. 148, 2025 12 appropriation and continuing availability of Grant Funds in any subsequent year (as provided in the Colorado Special Provisions). If federal funds or funds from any other non-State funds constitute all or some of the Grant Funds, the State’s obligation to pay Grantee shall be contingent upon such non-State funding continuing to be made available for payment. Payments to be made pursuant to this Agreement shall be made only from Grant Funds, and the State’s liability for such payments shall be limited to the amount remaining of such Grant Funds. If State, federal or other funds are not appropriated, or otherwise become unavailable to fund this Agreement, the State may, upon written notice, terminate this Agreement, in whole or in part, without incurring further liability. The State shall, however, remain obligated to pay for Work performed and accepted prior to the effective date of notice of termination, and this termination shall otherwise be treated as if this Agreement were terminated in the public interest as described in §28. Grantee’s Termination Under Federal Requirements. If the Grant Funds include any federal funds, then Grantee may request termination of this Grant by sending notice to the State, or to the Federal Awarding Agency with a copy to the State, which includes the reasons for the termination and the effective date of the termination. If this Grant is terminated in this manner, then Grantee shall return any advanced payments made for Work that will not be performed prior to the effective date of the termination. Governmental Immunity. Liability for claims for injuries to persons or property arising from the negligence of the State, its departments, boards, commissions committees, bureaus, offices, employees and officials shall be controlled and limited by the provisions of the Colorado Governmental Immunity Act, CRS §24-10-101, et seq., the Federal Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. Pt. VI, Ch. 171 and 28 U.S.C. 1346(b), and the State’s risk management statutes, CRS §§24-30-1501, et seq. No term or condition of this Agreement shall be construed or interpreted as a waiver, express or implied, of any of the immunities, rights, benefits, protections, or other provisions, contained in these statutes. Grant Recipient. Grantee shall perform its duties hereunder as a grant recipient and not as an employee. Neither Grantee nor any agent or employee of Grantee shall be deemed to be an agent or employee of the State. Grantee shall not have authorization, express or implied, to bind the State to any Page 138 Item 8. EXHIBIT B TO ORDINANCE NO. 148, 2025 13 agreement, liability or understanding, except as expressly set forth herein. Grantee and its employees and agents are not entitled to unemployment insurance or workers compensation benefits through the State and the State shall not pay for or otherwise provide such coverage for Grantee or any of its agents or employees. Grantee shall pay when due all applicable employment taxes and income taxes and local head taxes incurred pursuant to this Agreement. Grantee shall (a) provide and keep in force workers' compensation and unemployment compensation insurance in the amounts required by law, (b) provide proof thereof when requested by the State, and (c) be solely responsible for its acts and those of its employees and agents. Compliance with Law. Grantee shall comply with all applicable federal and State laws, rules, and regulations in effect or hereafter established, including, without limitation, laws applicable to discrimination and unfair employment practices. Choice of Law, Jurisdiction and Venue. [Not Applicable to Inter-governmental agreements] Colorado law, and rules and regulations issued pursuant thereto, shall be applied in the interpretation, execution, and enforcement of this Agreement. Any provision included or incorporated herein by reference which conflicts with said laws, rules, and regulations shall be null and void. All suits or actions related to this Agreement shall be filed and proceedings held in the State of Colorado and exclusive venue shall be in the City and County of Denver. Any provision incorporated herein by reference which purports to negate this or any other provision in this Agreement in whole or in part shall not be valid or enforceable or available in any action at law, whether by way of complaint, defense, or otherwise. Any provision rendered null and void by the operation of this provision or for any other reason shall not invalidate the remainder of this Agreement, to the extent capable of execution. Grantee shall exhaust administrative remedies in CRS §24-109-106, prior to commencing any judicial action against the State regardless of whether the Colorado Procurement Code applies to this Agreement. Prohibited Terms. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed as a waiver of any provision of CRS §24-106-109. Any term included in this Agreement that requires the State to indemnify or hold Grantee harmless; requires the State to agree to binding arbitration; limits Grantee’s liability for Page 139 Item 8. EXHIBIT B TO ORDINANCE NO. 148, 2025 14 damages resulting from death, bodily injury, or damage to tangible property; or that conflicts with that statute in any way shall be void ab initio. Public Contracts for Services. [Not Applicable to offer, issuance, or sale of securities, investment advisory services, fund management services, sponsored projects, intergovernmental grant agreements, or information technology services or products and services] Grantee certifies, warrants, and agrees that it does not knowingly employ or contract with an illegal alien who will perform work under this Agreement and will confirm the employment eligibility of all employees who are newly hired for employment in the United States to perform work under this Agreement, through participation in the E-Verify Program or the Department program established pursuant to CRS §8-17.5- 102(5)(c), Grantee shall not knowingly employ or contract with an illegal alien to perform work under this Agreement or enter into a contract or agreement with a Subcontractor that fails to certify to Grantee that the Subcontractor shall not knowingly employ or contract with an illegal alien to perform work under this Agreement. Grantee shall (a) not use E-Verify Program or Department program procedures to undertake pre- employment screening of job applicants during performance of this Agreement, (b) notify Subcontractor and the State within three days if Grantee has actual knowledge that Subcontractor is employing or contracting with an illegal alien for work under this Agreement, (c) terminate the subcontract if Subcontractor does not stop employing or contracting with the illegal alien within three days of receiving notice, and (d) comply with reasonable requests made in the course of an investigation, undertaken pursuant to CRS §8-17.5-102(5), by the Colorado Department of Labor and Employment. If Grantee participates in the Department program, Grantee shall deliver to the State a written, notarized affirmation that Grantee has examined the legal work status of such employee, and shall comply with all of the other requirements of the Department program. If Grantee fails to comply with any requirement of this provision or CRS §8-17.5-101 et seq., the State may terminate this Agreement for breach and, if so terminated, Grantee shall be liable for damages. Public Contracts with Natural Persons. Grantee, if a natural person 18 years of age or older, hereby swears and affirms under penalty of perjury that the person (a) is a citizen or otherwise lawfully present in the United States pursuant to federal law, (b) shall comply with the provisions of CRS §24-76.5-101 et seq., and Page 140 Item 8. EXHIBIT B TO ORDINANCE NO. 148, 2025 15 (c) has produced a form of identification required by CRS §24-76.5-103 prior to the date Grantee begins Work under terms of the Agreement. Whistle Blower Protections. An employee of a grantee must not be discharged, demoted, or otherwise discriminated against as a reprisal for disclosing to a person or body described in paragraph (a)(2) of 41 U.S.C. 4712 information that the employee reasonably believes is evidence of gross mismanagement of a Federal contract or grant, a gross waste of Federal funds, an abuse of authority relating to a Federal contract or grant, a substantial and specific danger to public health or safety, or a violation of law, rule, or regulation related to a Federal contract (including the competition for or negotiation of a contract) or grant. The subrecipient must inform their employees in writing of employee whistleblower rights and protections under 41 U.S.C. 4712. See statutory requirements for whistleblower protections at 10 U.S.C. 4701, 41 U.S.C. 4712, 41 U.S.C. 4304, and 10 U.S.C. 4310. Accessibility. Grantee shall comply with the Accessibility Standards for Individuals with a Disability, as adopted by the Office of Information Technology pursuant to §24-85-103 C.R.S. The State may require Grantee’s compliance with the Accessibility Standards for Individuals with a Disability adopted by the Office of Information Technology pursuant to §24-85-103 C.R.S. is determined and tested by a qualified third party selected by the State. The State may ask the Grantee to review the selection of the third party. Grantee shall be responsible for all costs associated with the third-party vendor’s assessment. If Grantee is not in compliance as determined by the third- party vendor, at the State’s request and at the State’s direction, Grantee shall promptly take all necessary actions to come into compliance using a State-approved vendor, at no additional cost to the State. Grantee shall indemnify, save, hold harmless, and assume liability on behalf of the State, its officers, employees, agents and assignees (collectively the “Indemnified Parties”), for any and all costs, expenses, claims, damages, liabilities, court awards, attorney fees and related costs, and other amounts incurred by any of the Indemnified Parties in relation to Contractor’s noncompliance with §§24-85-101, et seq., C.R.S., or the Accessibility Standards for Individuals with a Disability as established by the Office of Information Technology pursuant to Section §24-85-103, C.R.S. State employees are considered third parties for the purposes of this section. Page 141 Item 8. EXHIBIT B TO ORDINANCE NO. 148, 2025 16 Page 142 Item 8. EXHIBIT B TO ORDINANCE NO. 148, 2025 17 Addendum 1: Additional Terms & Conditions for Information Technology If any part of the subject matter of this Agreement is Information Technology, as defined in CRS ¤ 24-37.5-102(2), the following provisions also apply to this Agreement. A. Definitions. The following terms shall be construed and interpreted as follows: (a) “CJI” means criminal justice information collected by criminal justice agencies needed for the performance of their authorized functions, including, without limitation, all information defined as criminal justice information by the U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Criminal Justice Information Services Security Policy, as amended, and all Criminal Justice Records as defined under CRS §24-72-302; (b) “Incident” means any accidental or deliberate event that results in or constitutes an imminent threat of the unauthorized access, loss, disclosure, modification, disruption, or destruction of any communications or information resources of the State, pursuant to CRS §§24-37.5-401 et seq.; (c) “PCI” means payment card information including any data related to credit card holders’ names, credit card numbers, or the other credit card information as may be protected by state or federal law; (d) “PHI” means any protected health information, including, without limitation any information whether oral or recorded in any form or medium that relates to the past, present or future physical or mental condition of an individual; the provision of health care to an individual; or the past, present or future payment for the provision of health care to an individual; and that identifies the individual or with respect to which there is a reasonable basis to believe the information can be used to identify the individual including, without limitation, any information defined as Individually Identifiable Health Information by the federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act; (e) “PII” means personally identifiable information including, without limitation, any information maintained by the State about an individual that can be used to distinguish or trace an individual‘s identity, such as name, social security number, date and place of birth, mother’s maiden name, or biometric records, including, without limitation, all information defined as personally identifiable information in CRS §24-72-501; (f) “State Confidential Information” means any and all State Records not subject to disclosure under the Colorado Open Records Act and includes, without limitation, PII, PHI, PCI, Tax Information, CJI, and State personnel records Page 143 Item 8. EXHIBIT B TO ORDINANCE NO. 148, 2025 18 not subject to disclosure under the Colorado Open Records Act, (g) “State Fiscal Rules” means those fiscal rules promulgated by the Colorado State Controller pursuant to CRS §24-30- 202(13)(a); (h) “State Fiscal Year” means a 12 month period beginning on July 1 of each calendar year and ending on June 30 of the following calendar year; (i) “State Records” means any and all State data, information, and records, regardless of physical form; (j) “Tax Information” means federal and State of Colorado tax information including, without limitation, federal and State tax returns, return information, and such other tax-related information as may be protected by federal and State law and regulation, including, without limitation all information defined as federal tax information in Internal Revenue Service Publication 1075; and (k) “Work Product” means the tangible and intangible results of the delivery of goods and performance of services, whether finished or unfinished, including drafts. Work Product includes, but is not limited to, documents, text, software (including source code), research, reports, proposals, specifications, plans, notes, studies, data, images, photographs, negatives, pictures, drawings, designs, models, surveys, maps, materials, ideas, concepts, know-how, information, and any other results of the Work, but does not include any material that was developed prior to the Effective Date that is used, without modification, in the performance of the Work. B. Intellectual Property. Except to the extent specifically provided elsewhere in this Agreement, any State information, including without limitation pre-existing State software, research, reports, studies, data, photographs, negatives or other documents, drawings, models, materials; or Work Product prepared by Grantee in the performance of its obligations under this Agreement shall be the exclusive property of the State (collectively, “State Materials”). All State Materials shall be delivered to the State by Grantee upon completion or termination of this Agreement. The State’s exclusive rights in any Work Product prepared by Grantee shall include, but not be limited to, the right to copy, publish, display, transfer, and prepare derivative works. Grantee shall not use, willingly allow, cause or permit any State Materials to be used for any purpose other than the performance of Grantee’s obligations hereunder without the prior written consent of the State. The State shall maintain complete and accurate records relating to (a) its use of all Grantee and third party software licenses and rights to use any Grantee or third party software granted under this Agreement and its attachments to which the State is a party and (b) Page 144 Item 8. EXHIBIT B TO ORDINANCE NO. 148, 2025 19 all amounts payable to Grantee pursuant to this Agreement and its attachments and the State’s obligations under this Agreement or any amounts payable to Grantee in relation to this Agreement, which records shall contain sufficient information to permit Grantee to confirm the State’s compliance with the use restrictions and payment obligations under this Agreement or to any third party use restrictions to which the State is a party. Grantee retains the exclusive rights, title and ownership to any and all pre-existing materials owned or licensed to Grantee including, but not limited to all pre-existing software, licensed products, associated source code, machine code, text images, audio, video, and third party materials, delivered by Grantee under the Agreement, whether incorporated in a deliverable or necessary to use a deliverable (collectively, “Grantee Property”). Grantee Property shall be licensed to the State as set forth in a State-approved license agreement (a) entered into as exhibits or attachments to this Agreement, (b) obtained by the State from the applicable third party Grantee, or (c) in the case of open source software, the license terms set forth in the applicable open source license agreement. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary herein, the State shall not be subject to any provision incorporated in any exhibit or attachment attached hereto, any provision incorporated in any terms and conditions appearing on any website, any provision incorporated into any click through or online agreements, or any provision incorporated into any other document or agreement between the parties that (a) requires the State or the State to indemnify Grantee or any other party, (b) is in violation of State laws, regulations, rules, State Fiscal Rules, policies, or other State requirements as deemed solely by the State, or (c) is contrary to this Agreement. C. Information Confidentiality. Grantee shall keep confidential, and cause all Subcontractors to keep confidential, all State Records, unless those State Records are publicly available. Grantee shall not, without prior written approval of the State, use, publish, copy, disclose to any third party, or permit the use by any third party of any State Records, except as otherwise stated in this Agreement, permitted by law, or approved in writing by the State. If Grantee will or may have access to any State Confidential Information or any other protected information, Grantee shall provide for the security of all State Confidential Information in accordance with all applicable laws, rules, policies, publications, and guidelines. Grantee shall comply with all Colorado Office of Information Security (“OIS”) policies and procedures which OIS has issued pursuant to CRS §§24- Page 145 Item 8. EXHIBIT B TO ORDINANCE NO. 148, 2025 20 37.5-401 through 406 and 8 CCR §1501-5 and posted at http://oit.state.co.us/ois, all information security and privacy obligations imposed by any federal, state, or local statute or regulation, or by any industry standards or guidelines, as applicable based on the classification of the data relevant to Grantee’s performance under this Agreement. Such obligations may arise from: Health Information Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA); IRS Publication 1075; Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard (PCI-DSS); FBI Criminal Justice Information Service Security Addendum; Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) Minimum Acceptable Risk Standards for Exchanges; and Electronic Information Exchange Security Requirements and Procedures for State and Local Agencies Exchanging Electronic Information with The Social Security Administration. Grantee shall immediately forward any request or demand for State Records to the State’s principal representative. D. Other Entity Access and Nondisclosure Agreements. Grantee may provide State Records to its agents, employees, assigns and Subcontractors as necessary to perform the work, but shall restrict access to State Confidential Information to those agents, employees, assigns, and Subcontractors who require access to perform their obligations under this Agreement. Grantee shall ensure all such agents, employees, assigns, and Subcontractors sign agreements containing nondisclosure provisions at least as protective as those in this Agreement, and that the nondisclosure provisions are in force at all times the agent, employee, assign, or Subcontractors has access to any State Confidential Information. Grantee shall provide copies of those signed nondisclosure provisions to the State upon execution of the nondisclosure provisions if requested by the State. E. Use, Security, and Retention. Grantee shall use, hold, and maintain State Confidential Information in compliance with any and all applicable laws and regulations only in facilities located within the United States, and shall maintain a secure environment that ensures confidentiality of all State Confidential Information. Grantee shall provide the State with access, subject to Grantee’s reasonable security requirements, for purposes of inspecting and monitoring access and use of State Confidential Information and evaluating security control effectiveness. Upon the expiration or termination of this Agreement, Grantee shall return State Records provided to Grantee or destroy such State Records and certify to the State that it has done so, as directed by the State. If Grantee is prevented by law or regulation from returning or destroying State Confidential Page 146 Item 8. EXHIBIT B TO ORDINANCE NO. 148, 2025 21 Information, Grantee warrants it will guarantee the confidentiality of, and cease to use, such State Confidential Information. F. Incident Notice and Remediation. If Grantee becomes aware of any Incident, it shall notify the State immediately and cooperate with the State regarding recovery, remediation, and the necessity to involve law enforcement, as determined by the State. Unless Grantee can establish none of Grantee or any of its agents, employees, assigns or Subcontractors are the cause or source of the Incident, Grantee shall be responsible for the cost of notifying each person who may have been impacted by the Incident. After an Incident, Grantee shall take steps to reduce the risk of incurring a similar type of Incident in the future as directed by the State, which may include, but is not limited to, developing and implementing a remediation plan that is approved by the State at no additional cost to the State. The State may adjust or direct modifications to this plan, in its sole discretion and Grantee shall make all modifications as directed by the State. If Grantee cannot produce its analysis and plan within the allotted time, the State, in its sole discretion, may perform such analysis and produce a remediation plan, and Grantee shall reimburse the State for the reasonable actual costs thereof. G. Data Protection and Handling. Grantee shall ensure that all State Records and Work Product in the possession of Grantee or any Subcontractors are protected and handled in accordance with the requirements of this Agreement at all times. Upon request by the State made any time prior to 60 days following the termination of this Agreement for any reason, whether or not this Agreement is expiring or terminating, Grantee shall make available to the State a complete and secure download file of all data that is encrypted and appropriately authenticated. This download file shall be made available to the State within 10 Business Days following the State’s request, and shall contain, without limitation, all State Records, Work Product, and any other information belonging to the State. Upon the termination of Grantee’s services under this Agreement, Grantee shall, as directed by the State, return all State Records provided by the State to Grantee, and the copies thereof, to the State or destroy all such State Records and certify to the State that it has done so. If legal obligations imposed upon Grantee prevent Grantee from returning or destroying all or part of the State Records provided by the State, Grantee shall guarantee the confidentiality of all State Records in Grantee’s possession and will not actively process such data. The State Page 147 Item 8. EXHIBIT B TO ORDINANCE NO. 148, 2025 22 retains the right to use the established operational services to access and retrieve State Records stored on Grantee’s infrastructure at its sole discretion and at any time. H. Compliance. If applicable, Grantee shall review, on a semi-annual basis, all OIS policies and procedures which OIS has promulgated pursuant to CRS §§ 24-37.5-401 through 406 and 8 CCR § 1501-5 and posted at http://oit.state.co.us/ois, to ensure compliance with the standards and guidelines published therein. Grantee shall cooperate, and shall cause its Subcontractors to cooperate, with the performance of security audit and penetration tests by OIS or its designee. I. Safeguarding PII. If Grantee or any of its Subcontractors will or may receive PII under this Agreement, Grantee shall provide for the security of such PII, in a manner and form acceptable to the State, including, without limitation, all State requirements relating to non-disclosure, use of appropriate technology, security practices, computer access security, data access security, data storage encryption, data transmission encryption, security inspections, and audits. Grantee shall take full responsibility for the security of all PII in its possession or in the possession of its Subcontractors, and shall hold the State harmless for any damages or liabilities resulting from the unauthorized disclosure or loss thereof. Grantee shall be a “Third-Party Service Provider” as defined in CRS §24-73-103(1)(i) and shall maintain security procedures and practices consistent with CRS §§24-73-101 et seq. In addition, as set forth in §24-74-102, et seq., C.R.S., Grantee, including, but not limited to, Grantee’s employees, agents and subcontractors, agrees not to share any PII with any third parties for the purpose of investigating for, participating in, cooperating with, or assisting with Federal immigration enforcement. If Grantee is given direct access to any State databased containing PII, Grantee shall execute, on behalf of itself and its employees, the Certification PII Individual Certification Form or PII Entity Certification Form on an annual basis and Grantee’s duty shall continue as long as Grantee has direct access to any State databases containing PII. If Grantee uses any subcontractors to perform services requiring direct access to State databases containing PII, the Grantee shall require such subcontractors to execute and deliver the certification to the State on an annual basis, so long as the subcontractor has access to State databases containing PII. J. Software Piracy Prohibition. Page 148 Item 8. EXHIBIT B TO ORDINANCE NO. 148, 2025 23 The State or other public funds payable under this Agreement shall not be used for the acquisition, operation, or maintenance of computer software in violation of federal copyright laws or applicable licensing restrictions. Grantee hereby certifies and warrants that, during the term of this Agreement and any extensions, Grantee has and shall maintain in place appropriate systems and controls to prevent such improper use of public funds. If the State determines that Grantee is in violation of this provision, the State may exercise any remedy available at law or in equity or under this Agreement, including, without limitation, immediate termination of this Agreement and any remedy consistent with federal copyright laws or applicable licensing restriction K. Information Technology. To the extent that Grantee provides physical or logical storage of State Records; Grantee creates, uses, processes, discloses, transmits, or disposes of State Records; or Grantee is otherwise given physical or logical access to State Records in order to perform Grantee’s obligations under this Agreement, the following terms shall apply. Grantee shall, and shall cause its Subcontractors, to: Provide physical and logical protection for all hardware, software, applications, and data that meets or exceeds industry standards and the requirements of this Agreement; Maintain network, system, and application security, which includes, but is not limited to, network firewalls, intrusion detection (host and network), annual security testing, and improvements or enhancements consistent with evolving industry standards; Comply with State and federal rules and regulations related to overall security, privacy, confidentiality, integrity, availability, and auditing; Provide that security is not compromised by unauthorized access to workspaces, computers, networks, software, databases, or other physical or electronic environments; Promptly report all Incidents, including Incidents that do not result in unauthorized disclosure or loss of data integrity, to a designated representative of the OIS; Comply with all rules, policies, procedures, and standards issued by the Governor’s Office of Information Technology (OIT), including project lifecycle methodology and governance, technical standards, documentation, and other requirements posted at www.oit.state.co.us/about/policies. Grantee shall not allow remote access to State Records from outside the United States, including access by Grantee’s employees or agents, without the prior express written consent of OIS. Grantee shall communicate any request regarding non-U.S. Page 149 Item 8. EXHIBIT B TO ORDINANCE NO. 148, 2025 24 access to State Records to the State. The State, acting by and through OIS, shall have sole discretion to grant or deny any such request. Page 150 Item 8. EXHIBIT B TO ORDINANCE NO. 148, 2025 25 Grant Federal Provisions If any part of this PO has been funded, in whole or in part, with federal funds, then following provisions shall also apply to this PO. Applicability of Provisions. 1.1. The Grant to which these Federal Provisions are attached has been funded, in whole or in part, with an Award of Federal funds. In the event of a conflict between the provisions of these Federal Provisions, the Special Provisions, the body of the Grant, or any attachments or exhibits incorporated into and made a part of the Grant, the provisions of these Federal Provisions shall control. These Federal Provisions are subject to the Award as defined in §2 of these Federal Provisions, as may be revised pursuant to ongoing guidance from the relevant Federal or State of Colorado agency or institutions of higher education. Definitions. 2.1. For the purposes of these Federal Provisions, the following terms shall have the meanings ascribed to them below. For a full list of definitions (as of October 1, 2024) under the Uniform Guidance, see 2 CFR 200.1. 2.1.1. “Award” means an award of Federal financial assistance, and the Grant setting forth the terms and conditions of that financial assistance, that a non-Federal Entity receives or administers. 2.1.2. “Entity” means: 2.1.2.1. a non-federal entity; 2.1.2.2. a non-profit organization or for-profit organization; 2.1.3. “Executive” means an officer, managing partner or any other employee in a management position. 2.1.4. “Federal Awarding Agency” means a Federal agency providing a Federal Award to a Recipient as described in 2 CFR 200.1 2.1.5. “Grant” means the Grant to which these Federal Provisions are attached. Page 151 Item 8. EXHIBIT B TO ORDINANCE NO. 148, 2025 26 2.1.6. “Grantee” means the party or parties identified as such in the Grant to which these Federal provisions are attached. Grantee also means Subrecipient. 2.1.7. “Non-Federal Entity” means a State, local government, Indian tribe, institution of higher education, or nonprofit organization that carries out a Federal Award as a Recipient or a Subrecipient. 2.1.8. “Nonprofit Organization” organization, that: 2.1.8.1. Is operated primarily for scientific, educational, service, charitable, or similar purposes in the public interest; 2.1.8.2. Is not organized primarily for profit; and 2.1.8.3. Uses net proceeds to maintain, improve, or expand the organization’s operations; and 2.1.8.4. Is not an IHE. 2.1.9. “OMB” means the Executive Office of the President, Office of Management and Budget. 2.1.10. “Pass-through Entity” means a recipient or subrecipient that provides a Subaward to a Subrecipient (including lower tier subrecipients) to carry out part of a Federal program. The authority of the pass-through entity under this part flows through the Subaward agreements between the pass-through entity and subrecipient. 2.1.11. “Recipient” means the Colorado State agency or institution of higher education identified as the Grantor in the Grant to which these Federal Provisions are attached. 2.1.12. “Subaward” means an award provided by a pass-through entity to a Subrecipient to contribute to the goals and objectives of the project by carrying out part of a Federal award received by the pass-through entity. The term does not include payments to a contractor, beneficiary or participant. 2.1.13. “Subrecipient” means an entity that receives a subaward from a pass-through entity to carry out part of a Federal award. The term subrecipient does not include a beneficiary or participant. A subrecipient may also be a recipient of Page 152 Item 8. EXHIBIT B TO ORDINANCE NO. 148, 2025 27 other Federal awards directly from a Federal agency. Subrecipient also means Grantee. 2.1.14. “System for Award Management (SAM)” means the Federal repository into which an Entity must enter the information required under the Transparency Act, which may be found at http://www.sam.gov. 2.1.15. “Total Compensation” means the cash and noncash dollar value an Executive earns during the entity’s preceding fiscal year. This includes all items of compensation as prescribed in 17 CFR 229.402(c)(2). 2.1.16. “Transparency Act” means the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 (Public Law 109-282), as amended by §6202 of Public Law 110-252. 2.1.17. “Unique Entity ID” (UEI) is the universal identifier for federal financial assistance applicants, as well as recipients and their direct subrecipients (first tier subrecipients). 2.1.18. “Uniform Guidance” means the Office of Management and Budget Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards. The terms and conditions of the Uniform Guidance flow down to Awards to Subrecipients unless the Uniform Guidance or the terms and conditions of the Federal Award specifically indicate otherwise. Compliance. 3.1. Subrecipient shall comply with all applicable provisions of the Transparency Act and the regulations issued pursuant thereto, all applicable provisions of the Uniform Guidance, and all applicable Federal Laws and regulations required by this Federal Award. Any revisions to such provisions or regulations shall automatically become a part of these Federal Provisions, without the necessity of either party executing any further instrument. The State of Colorado, at its discretion, may provide written notification to Subrecipient of such revisions, but such notice shall not be a condition precedent to the effectiveness of such revisions. Page 153 Item 8. EXHIBIT B TO ORDINANCE NO. 148, 2025 28 System for Award Management (SAM) and Unique Entity ID Requirements. 4.1. SAM. Subrecipient must obtain a UEI but are not required to fully register in Sam.gov. Subrecipient shall maintain the currency of its information in SAM until the Subrecipient submits the final financial report required under the Award or receives final payment, whichever is later. Subrecipient shall review and update SAM information at least annually after the initial registration, and more frequently if required by changes in its information. 4.2. Unique Entity ID. Subrecipient shall provide its Unique Entity ID to its Recipient, and shall update Subrecipient’s information at http://www.sam.gov at least annually after the initial registration, and more frequently if required by changes in Subrecipient’s information. Total Compensation. 5.1.1. Subrecipient shall include Total Compensation in SAM for each of its five most highly compensated Executives for the preceding fiscal year if: 5.1.2. The total Federal funding authorized to date under the Award is $30,000 or more; and 5.1.3. In the preceding fiscal year, Subrecipient received: 5.1.3.1. 80% or more of its annual gross revenues from Federal procurement contracts and subcontracts and/or Federal financial assistance Awards or Subawards subject to the Transparency Act; and 5.1.3.2. $25,000,000 or more in annual gross revenues from Federal procurement contracts and subcontracts and/or Federal financial assistance Awards or Subawards subject to the Transparency Act; and 5.1.3.3. The public does not have access to information about the compensation of such Executives through periodic reports filed under section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a), 78o(d) or § 6104 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986. Page 154 Item 8. EXHIBIT B TO ORDINANCE NO. 148, 2025 29 Reporting. 6.1. Pursuant to the Transparency Act, Subrecipient shall report data elements to SAM and to the Recipient as required in this Exhibit. No direct payment shall be made to Subrecipient for providing any reports required under these Federal Provisions and the cost of producing such reports shall be included in the Grant price. The reporting requirements in this Exhibit are based on guidance from the OMB, and as such are subject to change at any time by OMB. Any such changes shall be automatically incorporated into this Grant and shall become part of Subrecipient’s obligations under this Grant. Effective Date and Dollar Threshold for Reporting. 7.1. Reporting requirements in §8 below apply to new Awards as of October 1, 2010, if the initial award is $30,000 or more. If the initial Award is below $30,000 but subsequent Award modifications result in a total Award of $30,000 or more, the Award is subject to the reporting requirements as of the date the Award exceeds $30,000. If the initial Award is $30,000 or more, but funding is subsequently de-obligated such that the total award amount falls below $30,000, the Award shall continue to be subject to the reporting requirements. 7.2. The procurement standards in §9 below are applicable to new Awards made by Recipient as of December 26, 2015. The standards set forth in §11 below are applicable to audits of fiscal years beginning on or after December 26, 2014. Subrecipient Reporting Requirements. 8.1. Subrecipient shall report as set forth below. 8.1.1. To Recipient. A Subrecipient shall report the following data elements in SAM for each Federal Award Identification Number (FAIN) assigned by a Federal agency to a Recipient no later than the end of the month following the month in which the Subaward was made: 8.1.1.1. Subrecipient Unique Entity ID; 8.1.1.2. Subrecipient Unique Entity ID if more than one electronic fund transfer (EFT) account; Page 155 Item 8. EXHIBIT B TO ORDINANCE NO. 148, 2025 30 8.1.1.3. Subrecipient parent’s organization Unique Entity ID; 8.1.1.4. Subrecipient’s address, including: Street Address, City, State, Country, Zip + 4, and Congressional District; 8.1.1.5. Subrecipient’s top 5 most highly compensated Executives if the criteria in §4 above are met; and Subrecipient’s Total Compensation of top 5 most highly compensated Executives if the criteria in §4 above met. 8.1.1.6. Primary Place of Performance Information, including: Street Address, City, State, Country, Zip Code +4, and Congressional District. 8.1.2. The Recipient is required to submit this information to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act Subaward Reporting System (FSRS) at http://www.frsrs.gov. Procurement Standards. 9.1. Procurement Procedures. A Subrecipient shall use its own documented procurement procedures which reflect applicable State, local, and Tribal laws and applicable regulations, provided that the procurements conform to applicable Federal law and the standards identified in the Uniform Guidance, including without limitation, 2 CFR 200.318 through 200.327 thereof. 9.2. Domestic preference for procurements (2 CFR 200.322). As appropriate and to the extent consistent with law, the non-Federal entity should, to the greatest extent practicable under a Federal award, provide a preference for the purchase, acquisition, or use of goods, products, or materials produced in the United States (including but not limited to iron, aluminum, steel, cement, and other manufactured products). The requirements of this section must be included in all subawards including all contracts and purchase orders for work or products under this award. 9.3. Procurement of Recovered Materials. If a Subrecipient is a State Agency or an agency of a political subdivision of the State, its contractors must comply with section 6002 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. The requirements of Section 6002 include procuring only items designated in guidelines Page 156 Item 8. EXHIBIT B TO ORDINANCE NO. 148, 2025 31 of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) at 40 CFR part 247, that contain the highest percentage of recovered materials practicable, consistent with maintaining a satisfactory level of competition, where the purchase price of the item exceeds $10,000 or the value of the quantity acquired during the preceding fiscal year exceeded $10,000; procuring solid waste management services in a manner that maximizes energy and resource recovery; and establishing an affirmative procurement program for procurement of recovered materials identified in the EPA guidelines. 9.4. Never contract with the enemy (2 CFR 200.215). Federal awarding agencies and recipients are subject to the regulations implementing “Never contract with the enemy” in 2 CFR part 183. The regulations in 2 CFR part 183 affect covered contracts, grants and cooperative agreements that are expected to exceed $50,000 during the period of performance, are performed outside the United States and its territories, and are in support of a contingency operation in which members of the Armed Forces are actively engaged in hostilities. 9.5. Prohibition on certain telecommunications and video surveillance equipment or services (2 CFR 200.216). Subrecipient is prohibited from obligating or expending loan or grant funds on certain telecommunications and video surveillance services or equipment pursuant to 2 CFR 200.216. Access to Records. 10.1. A Subrecipient shall permit Recipient and its auditors to have access to Subrecipient’s records and financial statements as necessary for Recipient to meet the requirements of 2 CFR 200.332 (Requirements for pass-through entities), 2 CFR 200.300 (Statutory and national policy requirements) through 2 CFR 200.309 (Modification to period of performance), 2 CFR 200.337 (Access to Records) and Subpart F-Audit Requirements of the Uniform Guidance. 10.2. A Subrecipient must collect, transmit, and store information related to this Subaward in open and machine-readable formats (2 CFR 200.336). Single Audit Requirements. 11.1. If a Subrecipient expends $1,000,000 or more in Federal Awards during the Subrecipient’s fiscal year, the Subrecipient shall procure or arrange for a single or Page 157 Item 8. EXHIBIT B TO ORDINANCE NO. 148, 2025 32 program-specific audit conducted for that year in accordance with the provisions of Subpart F-Audit Requirements of the Uniform Guidance, issued pursuant to the Single Audit Act Amendments of 1996, (31 U.S.C. 7501-7507). 2 CFR 200.501. 11.1.1. Election. A Subrecipient shall have a single audit conducted in accordance with Uniform Guidance 2 CFR 200.514 (Scope of audit), except when it elects to have a program-specific audit conducted in accordance with 2 CFR 200.507 (Program- specific audits). The Subrecipient may elect to have a program-specific audit if Subrecipient expends Federal Awards under only one Federal program (excluding research and development) and the Federal program’s statutes, regulations, or the terms and conditions of the Federal award do not require a financial statement audit of Recipient. A program-specific audit may not be elected for research and development unless all of the Federal Awards expended were received from Recipient and Recipient approves in advance a program-specific audit. 11.1.2. Exemption. If a Subrecipient expends less than $1,000,000 in Federal Awards during its fiscal year, the Subrecipient shall be exempt from Federal audit requirements for that year, except as noted in 2 CFR 200.503 (Relation to other audit requirements), but records shall be available for review or audit by appropriate officials of the Federal agency, the State, and the Government Accountability Office. 11.1.3. Subrecipient Compliance Responsibility. A Subrecipient shall procure or otherwise arrange for the audit required by Subpart F of the Uniform Guidance and ensure it is properly performed and submitted when due in accordance with the Uniform Guidance. Subrecipient shall prepare appropriate financial statements, including the schedule of expenditures of Federal awards in accordance with 2 CFR 200.510 (Financial statements) and provide the auditor with access to personnel, accounts, books, records, supporting documentation, and other information as needed for the auditor to perform the audit required by Uniform Guidance Subpart F-Audit Requirements. Page 158 Item 8. EXHIBIT B TO ORDINANCE NO. 148, 2025 33 Required Provisions for Subrecipient with Subcontractors. 12.1. In addition to other provisions required by the Federal Awarding Agency or the Recipient, Subrecipients shall include all of the following applicable provisions; 12.1.1. For agreements with Subrecipients – Include the terms in the Grant Federal Provisions Exhibit (this exhibit) 12.1.2. For contracts with Subcontractors – Include the terms in the Contract Federal Provisions Exhibit. Certifications. 13.1. Unless prohibited by Federal statutes or regulations, Recipient may require Subrecipient to submit certifications and representations required by Federal statutes or regulations on an annual basis. 2 CFR 200.415. Submission may be required more frequently if Subrecipient fails to meet a requirement of the Federal award. Subrecipient shall certify in writing to the State at the end of the Award that the project or activity was completed or the level of effort was expended. If the required level of activity or effort was not carried out, the amount of the Award must be adjusted. Exemptions. 14.1. These Federal Provisions do not apply to an individual who receives an Award as a natural person, unrelated to any business or non-profit organization he or she may own or operate in his or her name. 14.2. A Subrecipient with gross income from all sources of less than $300,000 in the previous tax year is exempt from the requirements to report Subawards and the Total Compensation of its most highly compensated Executives. Event of Default and Termination. 15.1. Failure to comply with these Federal Provisions shall constitute an event of default under the Grant and the State of Colorado may terminate the Grant upon 30 days prior written notice if the default remains uncured five calendar days following the termination of the 30-day notice period. This remedy will be in addition to any other remedy available to the State of Colorado under the Grant, at law or in equity. Page 159 Item 8. EXHIBIT B TO ORDINANCE NO. 148, 2025 34 15.1.1. Termination (2 CFR 200.340). The Federal Award may be terminated in whole or in part as follows: 15.1.1.1. By the Federal Awarding Agency or Pass-through Entity, if a Non- Federal Entity fails to comply with the terms and conditions of a Federal Award; 15.1.1.2. By the Federal awarding agency or Pass-through Entity with the consent of the Non-Federal Entity, in which case the two parties must agree upon the termination conditions, including the effective date and, in the case of partial termination, the portion to be terminated; 15.1.1.3. By the Non-Federal Entity upon sending to the Federal Awarding Agency or Pass-through Entity written notification setting forth the reasons for such termination, the effective date, and, in the case of partial termination, the portion to be terminated. However, if the Federal Awarding Agency or Pass-through Entity determines in the case of partial termination that the reduced or modified portion of the Federal Award or Subaward will not accomplish the purposes for which the Federal Award was made, the Federal Awarding Agency or Pass-through Entity may terminate the Federal Award in its entirety; or 15.1.1.4. By the Federal Awarding Agency or Pass-through Entity pursuant to termination provisions included in the Federal Award Additional Federal Requirements. 16.1. Whistle Blower Protections 16.1.1. An employee of a subrecipient must not be discharged, demoted, or otherwise discriminated against as a reprisal for disclosing to a person or body described in paragraph (a)(2) of 41 U.S.C. 4712 information that the employee reasonably believes is evidence of gross mismanagement of a Federal contract or grant, a gross waste of Federal funds, an abuse of authority relating to a Federal contract or grant, a substantial and specific danger to public health or safety, or a Page 160 Item 8. EXHIBIT B TO ORDINANCE NO. 148, 2025 35 violation of law, rule, or regulation related to a Federal contract (including the competition for or negotiation of a contract) or grant. The subrecipient must inform their employees in writing of employee whistleblower rights and protections under 41 U.S.C. 4712. See statutory requirements for whistleblower protections at 10 U.S.C. 4701, 41 U.S.C. 4712, 41 U.S.C. 4304, and 10 U.S.C. 4310. Page 161 Item 8. File Attachments for Item: 9. Items Related to Appropriating Additional Funds for 2025. A. First Reading of Ordinance No. 149, 2025, Making Supplemental Appropriations in Various City Funds. B. First Reading of Ordinance No. 150, 2025, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves and Authorizing Transfers of Appropriations in Various City Funds. The purpose of these items is to combine dedicated and unanticipated revenues or reserves that need to be appropriated before the end of the year to cover the related expenses that were not anticipated and therefore not included in the 2025 annual budget appropriation. The unanticipated revenue is primarily from fees, charges, rents, contributions and grants that have been paid to City departments to offset specific expenses. Page 162 City Council Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 1 of 11 September 16, 2025 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Council STAFF Caleb Weitz, Chief Financial Officer Lawrence Pollack, Budget Director SUBJECT Items Related to Appropriating Additional Funds for 2025. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A. First Reading of Ordinance No. 149, 2025, Making Supplemental Appropriations in Various City Funds. B. First Reading of Ordinance No. 150, 2025, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves and Authorizing Transfers of Appropriations in Various City Funds. The purpose of these items is to combine dedicated and unanticipated revenues or reserves that need to be appropriated before the end of the year to cover the related expenses that were not anticipated and therefore not included in the 2025 annual budget appropriation. The unanticipated revenue is primarily from fees, charges, rents, contributions and grants that have been paid to City departments to offset specific expenses. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinances on First Reading. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION These Ordinances appropriate additional revenue and funds received this fiscal year and from prior year reserves in various City funds and authorize the transfer of previously appropriated amounts between funds and/or capital projects. The City Charter permits the City at any time during a fiscal year to make supplemental appropriations of additional revenue and other funds received as a result of rate/fee increases or new revenue sources, such as grants and reimbursements. The Charter also permits Council to provide, by ordinance, for payment of any expense from prior-year reserves through a supplemental appropriation. Additionally, it authorizes Council to transfer any unexpended and unencumbered appropriated amount from one fund or project to another fund or project upon recommendation of the City Manager, provided that the purpose for which the transferred funds are to be expended: 1) remains unchanged; 2) the purpose for which they were initially appropriated no longer exists; or 3) the proposed transfer is from a Fund or project account in which the amount appropriated exceeds the amount needed to accomplish the purpose specified in the appropriation ordinance. Page 163 Item 9. City Council Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 2 of 11 The City Manager is recommending the proposed appropriations in these Ordinances and has determined that they are available and previously unappropriated from their respective funds and will not cause the total amount appropriated from such funds to exceed the current estimate of actual and anticipated revenues and all other funds to be received in each such fund during this fiscal year. The City Manager is also recommending the proposed transfers of existing appropriations in these Ordinances and has determined that the purposes for which these transferred funds are to be expended remains unchanged. If these appropriations are not approved, the City will have to reduce expenditures even though revenue and reimbursements have been received to cover those expenditures. These items were presented to the Council Finance Committee (CFC) on September 4, 2025. A couple of questions for follow up were asked and those will be responded to in Council’s weekly Thursday communication, prior to 1st Reading. The table below is a summary of the expenses in each fund that make up the increase in the requested appropriations. Also included are transfers between funds, which do not increase net appropriations, but per the City Charter, require Council approval to make the transfer. A table with the specific use of prior year reserves appears at the end of this Agenda Item Summary. Funding Additional Revenue Prior Year Reserves Transfers TOTAL General Fund $811,080 $370,329 $0 $1,181,409 Cultural Services Fund 711,000 0 0 711,000 Recreation Fund 450,000 0 0 450,000 Transportation Services Fund 140,000 0 115,000 255,000 Self-Insurance Fund 653,461 0 0 653,461 Utility CS&A Fund 0 543,582 0 543,582 Light & Power Fund 2,009,443 0 0 2,009,443 Water Fund 352,958 0 0 352,958 Wastewater Fund 106,479 0 0 106,479 Stormwater Fund 51,479 0 0 51,479 Golf Fund 550,000 374,600 0 924,600 GRAND TOTAL $5,835,900 $1,288,511 $115,000 $7,239,411 A. GENERAL FUND 1. Fort Collins Police Services (FCPS) has received revenue from various sources. A listing of these items follows: a. $7,590 – Police Northern Colorado Drug Taskforce: As a part of the City of Fort Collins contribution to the Northern Colorado Drug Taskforce, any Drug Offender Surcharge or Court Ordered Restitution that is remitted from Larimer County Court to Fort Collins Police, is then passed along to the NCDTF. Any additional restitution that is collected by FCPS is additionally passed along to the NCDTF. b. $3,000 – Police 2024/2025 HVE Grant: Police Services was awarded a grant from Law Enforcement Assistance Fund to pay for overtime for DUI enforcement. There was a $3,000 amendment to the original grant. Page 164 Item 9. City Council Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 3 of 11 c. $95,443 – Police Miscellaneous Revenue: Police Services receives revenue from the sale of Police reports along with other miscellaneous revenue, like restitution payments, evidence revenue and SWAT training. d. $468,863 – Police Reimbursable Overtime: Police Services help schedule security and traffic control for large events. Since these events are staffed by officers outside of their normal duties, officers are paid overtime. The organization who requested officer presence is then billed for the costs of the officers' overtime. For example, FCPS partners with Larimer County to staff events at The Ranch. Police receive reimbursement from Larimer County for officers’ hours worked at Ranch events. e. $120,498 – Police School Resource Officers: Police Services has a contract with Poudre School District to provide Officers on location at a majority of the schools for safety and support. The school district pays Police Services based on a predetermined contract amount and also partially reimbursing for overtime incurred. This request is for the previously billed overtime and anticipated overtime for the remaining year. f. $4,978 – Police DUI Enforcement: Proceeds that have been received for DUI enforcement. TOTAL APPROPRIATION FROM: Unanticipated Revenue (Police Northern Colorado Drug Taskforce) $7,590 FROM: Unanticipated Revenue (2024-2025 HVE Grant) $3,000 FROM: Unanticipated Revenue (Police Miscellaneous Revenue) $95,443 FROM: Unanticipated Revenue (Police Reimbursable Overtime) $468,863 FROM: Unanticipated Revenue (School Resource Officers) $120,498 FROM: Unanticipated Revenue (DUI Enforcement) $4,978 TOTAL: $700,372 FOR: Northern Colorado Drug Taskforce $7,590 FOR: Monitor DUI Compliance $3,000 FOR: Police Miscellaneous Revenue $95,443 FOR: Police Reimbursable Overtime for Events $468,863 FOR: Overtime for School Resource Officers $120,498 FOR: DUI Enforcement $4,978 TOTAL: $700,372 2. Forestry Payment In Lieu The Forestry Division receives Payment in Lieu (PIL) revenue when a developer cannot plant enough trees on a development site to meet City requirements. These funds are used to support planting trees elsewhere in the City. FROM: Unanticipated PIL Revenue $21,750 FOR: Citywide Tree Planting $21,750 3. Parks- Overland Park Unanticipated Revenue The Parks Department collected higher than anticipated revenues from rental facilities at the Overland Park complex. The funds are used to support general operations in the Overland Park. FROM: Unanticipated Rental Revenue $10,575 FOR: Overland Park $10,575 Page 165 Item 9. City Council Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 4 of 11 4. Manufacturing Equipment Use Tax Finance requests the appropriation of $28,329 to cover the amount due for the 2024 Manufacturing Equipment Use Tax Rebate program as established in Chapter 25, Article II, Division 5, of the Municipal Code. The rebate program was established to encourage investment in new manufacturing equipment by local manufacturing firms. This item appropriates the use tax funds to cover the payment of the rebates. FROM: Prior Year Reserves (Manufacturing Rebate Reserve within the General Fund) $28,329 FOR: Manufacturing Equipment Use Tax $28,329 5. Fort Collins Retail Strategy funded by PRPA Platte River Power Authority (PRPA) annually contributes to the economic health of the Fort Collins community. In the past, the City has utilized these funds to support local, small businesses and continue to utilize these funds in this manner. This year, the funds were utilized to support a citywide retail study to understand the changing landscape of retail, implications to our sales tax base, and development of Council Priority #4 - Advance a 15-Min City by Igniting Neighborhood Centers. FROM: Unanticipated Revenue (PRPA) $52,500 FOR: Citywide retail study $52,500 6. Radon Kits Environmental Services sells radon test kits at cost as part of its program to reduce lung -cancer risk from in-home radon exposure. This appropriation recovers kit sales revenue for the purpose of restocking radon test kits annually. FROM: Unanticipated Revenue (radon kit sales) $1,403 FOR: Purchase of radon kits to sell $1,403 7. Conflict Transformation Works Program - Revenue Recovery Conflict Transformation Works (CTW), which includes restorative justice and community mediation programs, receives payment for work it does for other City departments through its workplace mediation program and also has program fees for parts of its programming. In addition, this year CTW contracted with another community in Washington to train on the Restore model, a restorative justice model for shoplifting offenses which was designed and implemented here in Fort Collins. CTW would like to appropriate these funds to use for expenses related to volunteer training, support and appreciation. Also, a small portion of the funding will be used to pay victim restitution for victims of restorative justice cases in the CTW programs. Youth in the program do volunteer work to earn the victim restitution. This is provided for families unable to pay the restitution their youth owes and for youth too young or otherwise unable to do paid work for the restitution. This assures the victim receives restitution despite a family's inability to pay. Program staff cannot predict how many youths will request this support and who will qualify. FROM: Unanticipated Revenue (CTW) $16,680 FOR: Conflict Transformation Works Program $16,680 8. Grocery Rebate Program Participation The Grocery Tax Rebate is intended to provide financially insecure residents relief from City sales tax charged on purchased food. The rebate amount is currently $80 per person. From January to July 2025, the City processed 2,160 applications. The total amount issued during this period is $439,000; a 33% increase year-over-year from 2024. The FY2025 budget affords $450,000 for rebates, leaving $11,000 for the remainder of 2025. Page 166 Item 9. City Council Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 5 of 11 A monthly average of $66,200 for August-December 2025 is anticipated, bringing the total rebate obligation for 2025 to $770,000. Additional appropriation to cover the gap of $320,000 will come from General Fund sub-reserves from Payments in Lieu of Taxes (PILOTs) and will meet the anticipated 2025 grocery rebate obligations. FROM: Prior Year Reserves (PILOT) $320,000 FOR: Grocery rebates for financially insecure residents $320,000 9. Land Bank Operating Expenses This request is intended to cover expenses related to the land bank property operation costs for 2025. Since expenses vary from year to year, funding is requested annually through the Annual Adjustment process to cover these costs. Expenses in 2025 include general maintenance of properties, raw water and sewer expenses, electricity, repairs, pest control, and other as applicable. FROM: Prior Year Reserves (Land Bank) $22,000 FOR: Land Bank Operational Expenses $22,000 10. Volunteer Services Hourly Personnel Support This is a request to appropriate $7,800 in unanticipated revenue collected from NextGenServe Volunteer services to fund hourly employees that support the Volunteer Services programs. NextGenServe is the City’s teen volunteer service club run out of HR and funded from the Volunteer Service Program budget. NextGen is in its fifth year and has been grant -supported thus far. To move to a more sustainable funding model, Volunteer Services launched a fee-based program in 2025. Each participant was required to pay $200 unless they accessed our scholarship program through GetFoCo. With 43 participants, the program generated $7,800 in unanticipated revenue to help support Volunteer services hourly personnel. FROM: Unanticipated Revenue from NextGenServe $7,800 FOR: Fund hourly employees that support Volunteer Services $7,800 B. CULTURAL SERVICES FUND 1. Lincoln Center Artists & Musicians Fees The Lincoln Center is requesting additional budget for the expenses related to LC live show promoters and artists to accommodate higher than expected revenues and expenditures for additional productions, as well as national and international tour shows presented or produced by the City. This appropriation has no net impact on the Cultural Services and Facilities Fund and requires no subsidy from the General Fund. In 2025, the Lincoln Center brought major touring shows to Fort Collins, including Dear Evan Hansen, Mean Girls, and Ain’t Too Proud. In addition, since the adoption of the 2025 budget, we added additional shows for the Live at The Gardens concert series that the LC manages, including well-known artists Mary Chapin Carpenter/Brandy Clark, The Music of Billy Joel with the Fort Collins Symphony, and The Commodores. The existing budget for Artist Fees paid for shows is not sufficient to cover the expenses related to the shows in 2025. The additional cost will be covered by revenue by a margin of at least 100% for at least a net zero impact to the Lincoln Center budget. FROM: Unanticipated Revenue $711,000 Page 167 Item 9. City Council Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 6 of 11 FOR: Lincoln Center live show promoters and artists $711,000 C. RECREATION FUND 1. Excess Revenue from Higher Participation The purpose of this item is to consider an appropriation of $450,000 of unanticipated 2025 revenue in the Recreation Fund to support expenses related to higher participation rates than anticipated during the 2025-2026 Budgeting for Outcomes cycle. Recreation is currently forecasted to finish 2025 with surplus revenue of about $700,000 and needs to appropriate a portion of these funds to cover the expenses related to increased participation compared to budget (driven primarily by increased hourly support). FROM: Unanticipated Revenue $450,000 FOR: Expenses related to higher participation rate $450,000 D. TRANSPORTATION SERVICES FUND 1. Open Streets Vendor Fees Open Streets is an annual FC Moves event that promotes active modes of transportation and invites folks to experience streets without cars. At Open Streets, participants can expect 1-2 miles of car- free, family-friendly streets. Participants are encouraged to Ride the Route and explore areas called “Activity Hubs”- temporary clusters of activity provided by local businesses and organizations. Vendors for Open Streets are charged $50 if they are a non-profit, $100 if they are a private business. This request includes $1,400 in fees that have been collected to date in 2025, and a projection of another $3,600 we expect to collect for the remainder of 2025. It is important that we are able to offset our costs with these fees, since our operating budget is not large enough to support this event without incoming revenue. FROM: Unanticipated Revenue (Vendor Fees) $5,000 FOR: Open Streets Program $5,000 2. Spin Annual Payment Per the contract between the City and Spin, Spin pays an annual fee of $10,000. These funds can be used at the City's discretion and typically are used for projects related to the Spin program. In 2025, funds were used to install bike/scooter boxes for better parking options, and to support the Which Wheels Go Where project to update City code regulating what types of micromobility can be used on what facilities. FROM: Unanticipated Revenue (Spin annual payment) $10,000 FOR: Installation of bike and scooter boxes for parking $10,000 3. Crushing Facility Work for Other Program The Planning, Development and Transportation Work for Others program is a self-supported program for all “Work for Others” activities within Streets. Customers are charged for the products they purchase from the Hoffman Mill Crushing Facility. Due to unant icipated projects and equipment/parts needs, additional funding of $125,000 is requested to cover expenses through the Page 168 Item 9. City Council Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 7 of 11 end of 2025. Revenue generated at the facility will offset the expense (expense will not be incurred if revenue is not received). FROM: Unanticipated Revenue (Work for Others) $125,000 FOR: Work for Others program within the Streets Department $125,000 4. Transfer of Appropriations for Concrete Work The Laporte Avenue Bridges capital project (400902140) was completed in 2023. There was an issue with the concrete used on the side path. The City and the contractor agreed that $115,000 would be withheld by the City for the deficient work. This withheld funding is proposed to be transferred to the Streets Department operating fund. This funding will be utilized for concrete work within the Streets program in 2025. FROM: Previous Unexpended Appropriation $115,000 FOR: Concrete work $115,000 E. SELF-INSURANCE FUND 1. Self Insurance Fund Revenue City insurance premiums and claim settlements are projected to exceed the 2025 budget within the Self Insurance Fund. 2025 Fund revenues in the amount of $653,461 are available for appropriation to cover excess insurance expenditures. FROM: Unanticipated Revenue $653,461 FOR: City insurance premiums and claim settlements $653,461 F. UTILITY CS&A FUND 1. Banking & Credit Card Fee Appropriation Appropriate additional banking and credit card fees based on an increased number of customers utilizing online banking services to pay utility bills via eCheck or credit card. Utilities absorbs transaction fees for online payments (1) $0.50 per eCheck and (2) Debit/Credit Cards are 1.15% up to $1,500, increasing to 2.75% for transactions over $1,500. Additional fee budget is offset by the increase in fund revenues attributed to customer transaction growth and utility rate increases. FROM: Prior-year Reserves in the Utility Customer Service and Administration Fund $506,778 FOR: Utilities Banking & Credit Card Fees $506,778 2. Utilities Legal Expenses Appropriation - Part 1 of 5 This request will appropriate revenue received from the Open International judgement to cover the related unplanned legal expenses incurred in 2025. Legal expenses will exceed currently budgeted amounts in Light & Power, Water, Wastewater, Stormwater, and Customer Service & Administration (CS&A) Funds. Page 169 Item 9. City Council Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 8 of 11 FROM: Prior-year Reserves in the Utility Customer Service and Administration Fund $36,804 FOR: Unplanned legal expenses $36,804 G. LIGHT & POWER FUND 1. Light & Power System Additions for Development Revenue This request will appropriate additional Light & Power development fee revenue to cover the related electric infrastructure costs to serve new and/or upgraded residential and commercial developments. Expenses for electric system additions are development-dependent and are anticipated to end the year over the original budgeted amounts. Through July 2025, revenues generated from development are over budget by $1,504,528. FROM: Unanticipated Revenue Light & Power Development Fees $1,504,528 FOR: Electric Infrastructure Costs $1,504,528 2. Utilities Payment in Lieu of Taxes (PILOT) - Part 1 of 3 This request will appropriate additional PILOT revenue to cover associated PILOT expenses for Utilities funds. PILOT revenues (6% of electric, water, and wastewater charges) collected by Utilities are a direct pass-through expense to the City's General Fund. Fund PILOT revenues and expenses are exceeding budgeted 2025 amounts. FROM: Unanticipated Revenue PILOT $299,000 FOR: PILOT Expenses $299,000 3. Utilities Legal Expenses Appropriation - Part 2 of 5 This request will appropriate revenue received from the Open International judgement to cover the related unplanned legal expenses incurred in 2025. Legal expenses will exceed currently budgeted amounts in Light & Power, Water, Wastewater, Stormwater, and Customer Service & Administration (CS&A) Funds. FROM: Unanticipated Revenue from Open Intl judgement $205,915 FOR: Unplanned legal expenses $205,915 H. WATER FUND 1. Utilities Payment in Lieu of Taxes (PILOT) - Part 2 of 3 This request will appropriate additional PILOT revenue to cover associated PILOT expenses for Utilities funds. PILOT revenues (6% of electric, water, and wastewater charges) collected by Utilities are a direct pass-through expense to the City's General Fund. Fund PILOT revenues and expenses are exceeding budgeted 2025 amounts. FROM: Unanticipated Revenue PILOT $250,000 Page 170 Item 9. City Council Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 9 of 11 FOR: PILOT Expenses $250,000 2. Utilities Legal Expenses Appropriation - Part 3 of 5 This request will appropriate revenue received from the Open International judgement to cover the related unplanned legal expenses incurred in 2025. Legal expenses will exceed currently budgeted amounts in Light & Power, Water, Wastewater, Stormwater, and Customer Service & Administration (CS&A) Funds. FROM: Unanticipated Revenue from Open Intl judgement $102,958 FOR: Unplanned legal expenses $102,958 I. WASTEWATER FUND 1. Utilities Payment in Lieu of Taxes (PILOT) - Part 3 of 3 This request will appropriate additional PILOT revenue to cover associated PILOT expenses for Utilities funds. PILOT revenues (6% of electric, water, and wastewater charges) collected by Utilities are a direct pass-through expense to the City's General Fund. Fund PILOT revenues and expenses are exceeding budgeted 2025 amounts. FROM: Unanticipated Revenue PILOT $55,000 FOR: PILOT Expenses $55,000 2. Utilities Legal Expenses Appropriation - Part 4 of 5 This request will appropriate revenue received from the Open International judgement to cover the related unplanned legal expenses incurred in 2025. Legal expenses will exceed currently budgeted amounts in Light & Power, Water, Wastewater, Stormwater, and Customer Service & Administration (CS&A) Funds. FROM: Unanticipated Revenue from Open Intl judgement $51,479 FOR: Unplanned legal expenses $51,479 J. STORMWATER FUND 1. Utilities Legal Expenses Appropriation - Part 5 of 5 This request will appropriate revenue received from the Open International judgement to cover the related unplanned legal expenses incurred in 2025. Legal expenses will exceed currently budgeted amounts in Light & Power, Water, Wastewater, Stormwater, and Customer Service & Administration (CS&A) Funds. FROM: Unanticipated Revenue from Open Intl judgement $51,479 FOR: Unplanned legal expenses $51,479 K. GOLF FUND 1. Banking & Contract Labor Expenses Golf has seen record revenue and rounds over the past couple of years which has resulted in higher banking fees and contract labor expenses. The requested annual adjustment is to account for this increased revenue ($550,000) and related increased expenses ($50,000 for banking fees and $500,000 for contract labor). Page 171 Item 9. City Council Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 10 of 11 FROM: Unanticipated Revenue $550,000 FOR: Contract Labor & Banking Fees $550,000 2. Capital Projects and City Park 9 Fairway Damages Golf is experiencing unforeseen increases in expenses related to minor capital projects and City Park 9 fairway damages. This requested adjustment is to cover these additional costs ($362,600 for minor capital expenses and $12,000 for City Park 9 fairway damages). This request would be paid for by Golf Fund reserves. FROM: Golf Fund Reserves $374,600 FOR: Minor capital projects and City Park 9 Fairway Damages $374,600 CITY FINANCIAL IMPACTS These Ordinances increase total City 2025 appropriations by $7,239,411. Of that amount, these Ordinances increase General Fund 2025 appropriations by $1,181,409, including use of $370,329 in prior year reserves. Funding for the total increase to City appropriations is $5,835,900 from unanticipated revenue, $1,288,511 from prior year reserves, and $115,000 from transfers from reserves or previously appropriated funds. The following is a summary of the items requesting prior-year reserves: Item # Fund Use Amount A4 General Fund Manufacturing Equipment Use Tax $28,329 A8 General Fund Grocery Rebate Program participation 320,000 A9 General Fund Land Bank Operating Expenses 22,000 F1 Utility CS&A Fund Banking & Credit Card Fee Appropriation 506,778 F2 Utility CS&A Fund Utilities Legal Expenses Appropriation 36,804 K2 Golf Fund Capital Projects and City Park 9 Fairway Damages 374,600 Total Use of Prior Year Reserves: $1,288,511 BOARD / COMMISSION / COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION The 2025 Annual Adjustment Ordinances were reviewed by the Council Finance Committee during their September 4, 2025, meeting. The members supported the ordinances moving forward to the full Council on September 16, 2025, on the Consent Agenda. PUBLIC OUTREACH None. Page 172 Item 9. City Council Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 11 of 11 ATTACHMENTS 1. Ordinance No. 149, 2025 2. Ordinance No. 150, 2025 Page 173 Item 9. - 1 - ORDINANCE NO. 149, 2025 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS MAKING SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS IN VARIOUS CITY FUNDS A. The City has received additional revenue and other funds this fiscal year that were not anticipated. B. The City has also received revenue and other funds that has been anticipated but which was not appropriated in the 2025 annual appropriation or previous supplemental appropriations. C. Article V, Section 9 of the City Charter permits the City Council, upon recommendation of the City Manager, to make supplemental appropriations by ordinance at any time during the fiscal year, provided that the total amount of such supplemental appropriations, in combination with all previous appropriations for that fiscal year, does not exceed the current estimate of actual and anticipated revenues and all other funds to be received during the fiscal year. D. The City Manager is recommending the appropriations described herein and determined that these appropriations are available and previously unappropriated from the funds named within Section 1 of this Ordinance and will not cause the total amount appropriated in each fund named within Section 1 of this Ordinance to exceed the current estimate of actual and anticipated revenues and all other funds to be received in each such fund during this fiscal year. E. Article V, Section 11 of the City Charter authorizes the City Council to designate in the ordinance when appropriating funds for a capital project or for a federal, state or private grant or donation, that such appropriation shall not lapse at the end of the fiscal year in which the appropriation is made, but continue until completion of the capital project or the earlier of the expiration of the federal, state or private grant o r donation or the City’s expenditure of all funds received from such grant or donation . F. The City Council wishes to designate the appropriations described herein within Section 1 of this Ordinance, the Police – 2024/2025 HVE Grant, as non-lapsing for the capital projects and the federal, state or private grants as appropriations that shall not lapse until completion of the capital project and the earlier of the expiration of the grant or the City’s expenditure of all funds received from such grant . G. The City Council finds and determines that the adoption of this Ordinance is necessary for the public's health, safety, and welfare, and therefore, wishes to authorize the expenditures described in this Ordinance and that such expenditures will serve the public purposes for which they are designated. Page 174 Item 9. - 2 - In light of the foregoing Recitals, which the Council hereby makes and adopts as determinations and findings, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. There is hereby appropriated from the following funds the amounts of additional revenue and other funds existing appropriations as described below, to be expended for the public purposes stated below. GENERAL FUND FROM: Unanticipated Revenue (Police Northern CO Drug Taskforce) $7,590 FOR: Northern Colorado Drug Taskforce $7,590 FROM: Unanticipated Revenue (2024-2025 HVE Grant) $3,000 FOR: Monitor DUI Compliance (non-lapsing) $3,000 FROM: Unanticipated Revenue (Police Miscellaneous Revenue) $95,443 FOR: Police Miscellaneous Revenue $95,443 FROM: Unanticipated Revenue (Police Reimbursable Overtime) $468,863 FOR: Police Reimbursable Overtime for events $468,863 FROM: Unanticipated Revenue (School Resource Officers) $120,498 FOR: Overtime for School Resource Officers $120,498 FROM: Unanticipated Revenue (DUI Enforcement) $4,978 FOR: DUI enforcement $4,978 FROM: Unanticipated PIL Revenue $21,750 FOR: Citywide Tree Planting $21,750 FROM: Unanticipated rental revenue $10,575 FOR: Overland Park $10,575 FROM: Unanticipated Revenue (PRPA) $52,500 FOR: Citywide retail study $52,500 FROM: Unanticipated Revenue (Radon kit sales) $1,403 FOR: Purchase of radon kits to sell $1,403 FROM: Unanticipated Revenue (Conflict Transformation Works) $16,680 FOR: Conflict Transformations Works Program $16,680 FROM: Unanticipated Revenue from NextGenServe $7,800 FOR: Fund hourly employees that support Volunteer Services $7,800 Page 175 Item 9. - 3 - CULTURAL SERVICES & FACILITIES FUND FROM: Unanticipated Revenue $711,000 FOR: Lincoln Center live show promoters and artists $711,000 RECREATION FUND FROM: Unanticipated Revenue $450,000 FOR: Expenses related to higher participation rate $450,000 TRANSPORTATION SERVICES FUND FROM: Unanticipated Revenue (Vendor fees) $5,000 FOR: Open Streets Program $5,000 FROM: Unanticipated Revenue (Spin annual payment) $10,000 FOR: Installation of bike and scooter boxes for parking $10,000 FROM: Unanticipated Revenue (Work for Others) $125,000 FOR: Work For Others program within the Streets Dept $125,000 SELF INSURANCE FUND FROM: Unanticipated Revenue $653,461 FOR: City insurance premiums and claim settlements $653,461 LIGHT & POWER FUND FROM: Unanticipated Revenue Light & Power Development Fees $1,504,528 FOR: Electric Infrastructure Costs $1,504,528 FROM: Unanticipated Revenue PILOT $299,000 FOR: PILOT Expenses $299,000 FROM: Unanticipated Revenue from Open Intl judgement $205,915 FOR: Unplanned legal expenses $205,915 WATER FUND FROM: Unanticipated Revenue PILOT $250,000 FOR: PILOT Expenses $250,000 FROM: Unanticipated Revenue from Open Intl judgement $102,958 FOR: Unplanned legal expenses $102,958 Page 176 Item 9. - 4 - WASTEWATER FUND FROM: Unanticipated Revenue PILOT $55,000 FOR: PILOT Expenses $55,000 FROM: Unanticipated Revenue from Open Intl judgement $51,479 FOR: Unplanned legal expenses $51,479 STORMWATER FUND FROM: Unanticipated Revenue from Open Intl judgement $51,479 FOR: Unplanned legal expenses $51,479 GOLF FUND FROM: Unanticipated Revenue $550,000 FOR: Contract Labor and Banking Fees $550,000 Section 2. The appropriations identified above as non-lapsing in Section 1 of this Ordinance, the Police - 2024/2025 HVE Grant, for the capital projects and the federal, state or private grants, as authorized in Article V, Section 11 of the City Charter, as appropriations that shall not lapse until completion of the capital projects and the earlier of the expiration of the grants or the City’s expenditure of all funds received from such grants. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading on September 16, 2025, and approved on second reading for final passage on October 7, 2025. ______________________________ Mayor ATTEST: ______________________________ City Clerk Effective Date: October 17, 2025 Approving Attorney: Dianne Criswell Exhibit: None Page 177 Item 9. - 1 - ORDINANCE NO. 150, 2025 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS APPROPRIATING PRIOR YEAR RESERVES AND AUTHORIZING TRANSFERS OF APPROPRIATIONS IN VARIOUS CITY FUNDS A. The City has prior year-reserves available for appropriation. B. Article V, Section 9 of the City Charter permits the City Council, upon recommendation of the City Manager, to appropriate by ordinance at any time during the fiscal year such funds for expenditure as may be available from reserves accumulated in prior years, notwithstanding that such funds were not previously appropriated. C. The City Manager is recommending the appropriations described herein and has determined that these appropriations are available and previously unappropriated from the funds named within Section 1 of this Ordinance and will not cause the total amount appropriated in each fund named within Section 1 of this Ordinance to exceed the current estimate of actual and anticipated revenues and all other funds to be received in each such fund during this fiscal year. D. Article V, Section 10 of the City Charter authorizes the City Council, upon recommendation by the City Manager, to transfer by ordinance any unexpended and unencumbered appropriated amount or portion thereof from one fund or capital project to another fund or capital project, provided that the purpose for which the transferred funds are to be expended remains unchanged, the purpose for which the funds were initially appropriated no longer exists, or the proposed transfer is from a fund or capital project in which the amount appropriated exceeds the amount needed to accomplish the purpose specified in the appropriation ordinance. E. The City Manager has recommended the transfer of $115,000 from the non- lapsing Capital Projects Fund – Laporte Avenue Bridge Project to the lapsing project budget in the Transportation Services Fund in the Streets program for concrete work within 2025 and determined that the purpose for which the transferred funds are to be expended remains unchanged. F. The City Council finds and determines that the adoption of this Ordinance is necessary for the public’s health, safety, and welfare, and therefore, wishes to authorize the expenditures described in this Ordinance and that su ch expenditures will serve the public purposes for which they are designated in Section 1 below. In light of the foregoing recitals, which the Council hereby makes and adopts as determinations and findings, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. There is hereby appropriated from the following funds the amounts of prior year reserves set forth below to be expended for the public purposes stated below. Page 178 Item 9. - 2 - GENERAL FUND FROM: Prior Year Reserves (Manufacturing Rebate reserve within the General Fund) $28,329 FOR: Manufacturing Equipment Use Tax $28,329 FROM: Prior Year Reserves (PILOT) $320,000 FOR: Grocery rebates for financially insecure residents $320,000 FROM: Prior Year Reserves (Land Bank) $22,000 FOR: Land Bank Operational Expenses $22,000 UTILITY CS&A FUND FROM: Prior-year Reserves in the Utility Customer Service and Administration Fund $506,778 FOR: Utilities Banking & Credit Card Fees $506,778 FROM: Prior-year Reserves in the Utility Customer Service and Administration Fund $36,804 FOR: Unplanned legal expenses $36,804 GOLF FUND FROM: Golf Fund Reserves $374,600 FOR: Minor capital projects and City Park 9 Fairway Damages $374,600 Section 2. The following unexpended and unencumbered appropriated amounts are hereby authorized for transfer between the following funds and appropriated therein as detailed below to be expended for the public purposes stated below. TRANSPORTATION SERVICES FUND FROM: Transfer from Capital Projects Fund (Previous $115,000 Unexpected Appropriation) FOR: Concrete work within Streets Program $115,000 Section 3. The unexpended and unencumbered appropriated amount of ONE HUNDRED AND FIFTEEN THOUSAND DOLLARS ($115,000) is authorized for transfer from the Capital Projects Fund – Laporte Avenue Bridge Budget to the Transportation Services Fund budget in the Steets program and appropriated therein to be expended for concrete work within the Streets program in 2025. Page 179 Item 9. - 3 - Introduced, considered favorably on first reading on September 16, 2025, and approved on second reading for final passage on October 7, 2025. ______________________________ Mayor ATTEST: ______________________________ City Clerk Effective Date: October 17, 2025 Approving Attorney: Dianne Criswell Exhibit: None Page 180 Item 9. File Attachments for Item: 10. First Reading of Ordinance No. 151, 2025, Amending Sections 26-148 and 26-149 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins Regarding Water Supply Requirement Credits for Water Services. The purpose of this item is to ensure that City Code (Code) more comprehensively addresses how Fort Collins Utilities (Utilities) credits existing water services when they are changed, typically during redevelopment. Code currently addresses how Utilities credits nonresidential services when they are redeveloped and replaced with a new nonresidential service. However, Code does not currently address how Utilities should credit residential services that are redeveloped into nonresidential services, or when nonresidential services are redeveloped into residential services. This item would fill those gaps. Page 181 City Council Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 1 of 2 September 16, 2025 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Council STAFF Jen Dial, Utilities Water Resources Manager SUBJECT First Reading of Ordinance No. 151, 2025, Amending Sections 26-148 and 26-149 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins Regarding Water Supply Requirement Credits for Water Services. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to ensure that City Code (Code) more comprehensively addresses how Fort Collins Utilities (Utilities) credits existing water services when they are changed, typically during redevelopment. Code currently addresses how Utilities credits nonresidential services when they are redeveloped and replaced with a new nonresidential service. However, Code does not currently address how Utilities should credit residential services that are redeveloped into nonresidential services, or when nonresidential services are redeveloped into residential services. This item would fill those gaps. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading. BACKGROUND In order to receive a new water service or to replace an existing service with a larger size, Utilities’ customers must meet a Water Supply Requirement (WSR). The WSR accounts for the additional water demand a new development or redevelopment brings into the water service area. Currently the WSR can be met with cash and/or City certificates/credits. In the case of the replacement of an existing service with a larger size or other change to an existing service for nonresidential services, Utilities will give a credit towards the nonresidential service permit in the amount of the annual allotment for the existing service. If the credit is greater than the WSR or annual allotment that would otherwise be required or assigned for the new service permit, the credit establishes the WSR or annual allotment for the new service permit and no cash refund or water certificates issued by the City shall be provided to the applicant. However, there is currently no analogous provision to credit a nonresidential service changed to a residential service, or a residential service changed to nonresidential service. While these are rare occurrences, staff recommend addressing this scenario in code to provide fair and equitable credits for existing residential and nonresidential services. Thus, staff is proposing a new Code Section 26-148(d) regarding the credit Utilities gives for residential services along with certain analogous modifications to Code Section 26-149(h). Page 182 Item 10. City Council Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 2 of 2 WSR credits for residential services The proposed new Code Section 26-148(d) under ‘Water supply requirement (WSR); residential service’ states that in the case of the replacement of an existing service with a larger size, conversion of a residential service to a nonresidential service, or other change to an existing service, Utilities will give credit towards the service permit for the amount of the WSR that would be required for that existing service under Code Section 26-148. If the credit is greater than the WSR or the nonresidential annual allotment that would otherwise be required or assigned for the new service permit, the credit establishes the WSR or nonresidential annual allotment for the new service and no cash refund or water certificates issued by the City shall be provided to the applicant. The credit authorized under this subsection is not transferrable to other properties or services. WSR credits for nonresidential services The proposed modified Code Section 26-149(h) under ‘Water supply requirement (WSR); nonresidential service’ clarifies that in the case of the conversion of a nonresidential service to a residential service Utilities will give a credit towards the new service permit for the amount of the annual allotment for the existing service. If the credit is greater than the WSR or annual allotment that would otherwise be required or assigned for the new service permit, the credit shall establish the WSR or annual allotment for the new service permit and no cash refund or water certificates issued by the City shall be provided to the applicant. The credit authorized under this subsection is not transferrable to other properties or services. CITY FINANCIAL IMPACTS None. BOARD / COMMISSION / COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION None. PUBLIC OUTREACH None. ATTACHMENTS 1. Ordinance No. 151, 2025 Page 183 Item 10. -1- ORDINANCE NO. 151, 2025 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AMENDING SECTIONS 26-148 AND 26-149 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS REGARDING WATER SUPPLY REQUIREMENT CREDITS FOR WATER SERVICES A. The City owns and operates a water utility that provides water service to customers in its service area pursuant to the City Charter, City Code, and other applicable laws. B. The City Council is empowered and directed by Article XII, Section 6, of the City Charter to fix, establish, maintain, and provide for the collection of such rates, fees, or charges for utility services furnished by the City as well as produce revenues sufficient to pay the costs, expenses, and other obligations of the water utility, as set fort h therein. C. City water utility customers must meet the Water Supply Requirement (“WSR”) to receive new water service or to replace an existing meter or service with a larger size. See City Code Section 26-147. The WSR is set forth in City Code Sections 26-146 through 26-150. The WSR is calculated, in gallons, considering the annual volume of water a customer is anticipated to use. The WSR for residential water service is set forth in City Code Section 26-148. The WSR for nonresidential water service is set forth in City Code Section 26-149. D. In the case of the replacement of an existing meter with a larger size or other change to an existing nonresidential service, the utility will give a credit towards the nonresidential service permit pursuant to City Code Section 26-149(h). However, there is currently no analogous provision for the utility to give a credit for nonresidential services being changed to residential services, or for residential services being changed to nonresidential services. E. To provide for fair and equitable credits to be given for existing residential and nonresidential services, the City Council is in this Ordinance adopting a new City Code Section 26-148(d) regarding the utility giving a credit for residential services with certain analogous modifications to City Code Section 26-149(h). In light of the foregoing recitals, which the Council hereby makes and adopts as determinations and findings, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. Section 26-148 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby amended by the addition of a new Subsection (d) which reads in its entirety as follows: Sec. 26-148. - Water supply requirement (WSR); residential service. . . . Page 184 Item 10. -2- (d) In the case of the replacement of an existing meter with a larger size, conversion of a residential service to a nonresidential service, or other change to an existing service, the utility will give a credit towards the new service permit as follows. The credit towards the new service permit shall be for the amount of the WSR that would be required for the existing service under this section. If the credit is greater than the WSR or the nonresidential annual allotment that would otherwise be required or assigned for the new service permit, the credit shall establish the WSR or nonresidential annual allotment for the new service and no cash refund or water certificates issued by the City shall be provided to the applicant. The credit authorized under this subsection is not transferrable to other properties or services. Section 2. Section 26-149(h) of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby amended as follows: Sec. 26-149. – Water supply requirement (WSR); nonresidential service. . . . (h) In the case of the replacement of an existing meter with a larger size, conversion of a nonresidential service to a residential service, or other change to an existing service, the utility will give a credit the nonresidential user towards the new service permit as follows. The credit towards the new service permit shall be for the amount of the annual allotment for the existing service. If the credit towards the service is greater than the WSR or annual allotment that would otherwise be required or assigned for the new service permit, the credit for the service shall establish the WSR or annual allotment for the new service permit and no cash refund or water certificates issued by the City shall be provided to the applicant. The credit authorized un der this subsection is not transferrable to other properties or services. . . . Page 185 Item 10. -3- Introduced, considered favorably on first reading on September 16, 2025, and approved on second reading for final passage on October 7, 2025. ______________________________ Mayor ATTEST: ______________________________ City Clerk Effective Date: October 17, 2025 Approving Attorney: Eric Potyondy Exhibit: None Page 186 Item 10. File Attachments for Item: 11. First Reading of Ordinance No. 152, 2025, Amending Chapter 24 Article IV of the Code of the City of Fort Collins Relating to Portable Signs. The purpose of this item is to update the City Code (Code) pertaining to portable signs. This ordinance updates the areas where portable signs are allowed to more accurately reflect the designated downtown areas as well as the timeframe of when a portable sign permit is valid and the requirements to obtain a permit. Page 187 City Council Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 1 of 2 September 16, 2025 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Council STAFF Kenneth Zetye, Construction Inspection Manager for Engineering Brad Buckman, City Engineer Ginny Sawyer, Lead Project Manager, City Manager’s Office SUBJECT First Reading of Ordinance No. 152, 2025, Amending Chapter 24 Article IV of the Code of the City of Fort Collins Relating to Portable Signs. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to update the City Code (Code) pertaining to portable signs. This ordinance updates the areas where portable signs are allowed to more accurately reflect the designated downtown areas as well as the timeframe of when a portable sign permit is valid and the requirements to obtain a permit. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION Staff set out to address certain issues that have arisen with regard to the provisions of the sign Code. This came about primarily because of the geographical growth of the downtown over the past fifteen years since the downtown portable sign area was last updated. Through the proposed changes, staff also seeks to make the permitting process less onerous on applicants and to obtain a higher rate of compliance. Existing Code provides that the portable sign placement area means the area shown on a map dated April 3, 2009, on file in the City Clerk’s Office. That map is outdated with the downtown area growth, and referring to a static map limits the ability to grow with the downtown area. Proposed Code changes refer to the Downtown zone district as identified in the Land Use Code, which allows the portable sign placement area to grow along with the downtown area. For a sign permit, existing Code requires an applicant must: (1) sign an indemnity agreement; (2) obtain a $1 million insurance policy naming City as insured; and (3) pay an annual fee. Of the large number of portable signs downtown, only approximately 15% of them are permitted. Proposed changes intend to lessen the burden on applicants to encourage compliance. Proposed changes continue the indemnity agreement requirement, remove the insurance requirement, provide for a one -time fee for the duration of the permit, and extend the validity of a permit to last as long as the indemnification statement remains valid or until revoked. Page 188 Item 11. City Council Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 2 of 2 Regarding revocation, existing Code contains an outdated citation and does not provide guidance for when a permit may be revoked. Proposed Code changes provide criteria for permit revocation. Existing Code provides that the City Manager issues the permits and also provides for appeals to the City Manager. Proposed changes provide for the City Engineer to issue and manage the permits and continue to provide that appeals go to the City Manager. Proposed changes also update who may be issued a permit to comply with First Amendment case law and update the treatment of any impounded signs to comply with recent State changes to unclaimed property laws. CITY FINANCIAL IMPACTS None. BOARD / COMMISSION / COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION None. PUBLIC OUTREACH None. ATTACHMENTS 1. Ordinance No. 152, 2025 Page 189 Item 11. -1- ORDINANCE NO. 152, 2025 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AMENDING CHAPTER 24 ARTICLE IV OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS RELATING TO PORTABLE SIGNS A. City Code currently regulates the permitting and placement of portable signs on City sidewalks in Article IV of Chapter 24 of the City Code. Since the time these provisions were last updated in 2009, issues have arisen as a result of the geographical growth of the downtown over the past fifteen years. B. The City Code provides for a portable sign placement area shown on a map dated April 3, 2009, that has been on file in the office of the City Clerk. That map is outdated with the downtown area growth, and referring to a static map limits the ability to grow with the downtown area. This Ordinance uses the Downtown zone district as identified in the Land Use Code, as the portable sign placement area, allowing that defined area to grow along with the downtown area. C. To obtain a sign permit, the City Code requires that an applicant must: (1) sign an indemnity agreement; (2) obtain a $1 million insurance policy naming City as insured; and (3) pay an annual fee. Although there is a large number of portable signs downtown, only approximately 15% of them are permitted. This Ordinance lessens the burdens for obtaining a permit to encourage compliance. This Ordinance specifically continues the indemnity agreement requirement, removes the insurance requirement, provides for a one-time fee for the duration of the permit, and extend s the validity of a permit to last as long as the indemnification statement remains valid or until revoked. D. The City Code contains an outdated citation to the revocation section and does not provide guidance for when a permit may be revoked. This Ordinance adds criteria for permit revocation. E. The City Code provides that the City Manager issues the portable sign permit and also considers any appeals of permit denials. This Ordinance provides that the City Engineer will issue and manage the permits and continues to provide that appeals go to the City Manager. F. This Ordinance also updates the Code to conform to legal developments, including the enactment of new Colorado laws. G. The City Council has determined that the changes to City Code herein improve the regulation of portable signs in the downtown area, ensure protection of individual rights, improve compliance with said regulations, and are in the public’s, City’s, and permittees’ best interests to protect the safety and welfare of persons using downtown sidewalks, including persons entering and leaving buildings and persons providing essential utility and emergency services. Page 190 Item 11. -2- In light of the foregoing recitals, which the Council hereby makes and adopts as determinations and findings, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. Section 24-151 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby amended to read as follows: Sec. 24-151. – Definitions. The following words, terms and phrases, when used in this Article, shall have the meaning respectively ascribed to them in this Sectionunless the context otherwise clearly indicates: Permittee shall means the person authorized by the City and issued a portable sign permit to place a portable sign upon a City sidewalk or sidewalk railing and responsible for maintaining and otherwise attending to such sign. Person shall means any person or entity, including but not limited to a corporation, limited liability company, partnership, unincorporated association or joint venture . Portable sign shall means a sign that rests on the sidewalk or is attached to sidewalk railings and that is neither temporarily nor permanently affixed to the sidewalk or railing or to an adjacent building or structure. Portable Sign Placement Area shall means the area shown on the "Map of Portable Sign Placement Area" dated April 3, 2009, and on file in the office of the City Clerk the Downtown Zone District. Sidewalk shall means any surface provided for the use of pedestrians. Section 2. Section 24-152 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby amended to read as follows: Sec. 24-152. – Portable sign permit required. It shall be unlawful for any person to erect, place or maintain any portable sign on or within any public right-of-way in the City expect within the Portable Sign Placement Area pursuant to a permit from the City Manager Engineer approving the location, construction, stability and other aspects of such portable sign under the provisions of this Article. Any portable sign that has not been authorized by a valid permit issued by the City under this Article may be removed by the City without notice, notwithstanding any provision in § 17- 42 of this Code to the contrary. Section 3. Section 24-153 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby amended to read as follows: Page 191 Item 11. -3- Sec. 24-153. – Portable sign permits; term; transfer of permit. (a) Portable sign permits may be issued only to the owner or proprietor of the business adjacent to the location where the portable sign will be displayed. (a)(b) Applications for a portable sign permit must be submitted to the City ManagerEngineer in writing on a form provided by the City and shall be accompanied by: (1) A certificate of insurance with a limit of at least one million dollars ($1,000,000.) per occurrence, showing the City as an additional insured, covering any liability arising out of the placement or maintenance of the portable sign. The insurance carrier must be rated B+ or better. The application shall contain: (a) The name and address of the applicant; (b) The proposed location of the portable sign; and (c) The signature of the applicant. (2) Aa written statement, in a form satisfactory to the City Attorney, agreeing to indemnify and hold harmless the City, its officers and employees from any loss, liability or damage, including expenses and costs, for bodily or personal injury or property damage sustained by any person as a result of the installation, use or maintenance of the portable sign for which the permit is issued. Nothing herein shall be construed as a waiver of immunity as provided by the provisions of the Colorado Governmental Immunity Act, Section 24-10-101 et seq., C.R.S. Upon approval of the applicationAs a condition of issuance, each permittee shall must pay an annual fee of ten dollars ($10.) per permit prior to the issuance or renewal of the permit a one (1) time fee of forty dollars ($40) per permit for the duration in Subsection (c) of this Section. (b)(c) The City Manager’sEngineer’s decision whether to issue or deny the issuance of a permit shall be made within fifteen (15) business days following the date that a complete application has been submitted to the City. (c)(d) Permits shall be valid for one (1) year unless earlier so long as the permittee’s indemnification statement under Subsection (a) of this Section remains valid or until revoked pursuant to § 24-10 § 24-156 of this Chapter or pursuant to Article IX, Section 11 Article XI, Section 10 of the Charter. (d)(e) Permits shallare not be transferrable to another person or another location. Section 4. Section 24-154 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby amended to read as follows: Page 192 Item 11. -4- Sec. 24-154. – Placement and removal of portable signs. . . . (b) No portable sign placed on the surface of a sidewalk may be placed, installed, used or maintained: . . . (5) On any portion of a utility cover, meter and/or valve box cover, vent cover for underground utilities or on any granite or other decorative sidewalk without special approval by the City Manager Engineer; . . . (8) At a location used for public utilities, transportation or other public or governmental purposes that, in the judgment of the City Manager Engineer, is incompatible with portable signs; . . . (c) Portable signs placed on the surface of a sidewalk shall not be secured to any City property such as a light pole, sign post or tree, and shall not be secured to the surfaces upon which they are situated by bolts, but must instead be secured by weight or other anchoring device approved by the City Manager Engineer, and shall not be anchored by penetration of soil beneath tree grates. (d) No more than one (1) portable sign, or two (2) sign surfaces in the case of portable signs attached to sidewalk railings, shall be permitted for each business contained permittee in the building that is adjacent to the location of the sign. . . . Section 5. Section 24-156 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby amended to read as follows: Sec. 24-156. – Revocation. (a) The City Engineer may revoke any permits issued hereunder: (1) If conditions change so that the permit application could have been denied in the first instance; (2) In the event of a local emergency under City Code § 2-666 or a national special security event under 6 USC § 601(9); Page 193 Item 11. -5- (3) If continuation of the permit presents a clear and present danger to the public; (4) If it is in the City’s or public’s interest to revoke the permit; or (5) For noncompliance with permit terms and conditions. (b) The permittee is not entitled to a refund of any fees paid, and the p ermittee may be liable to pay additional costs incurred by the City due to the revocation. (c) In the event that the Colorado Department of Transportation determines to take jurisdiction of the issuance of permits on sidewalks adjacent to state highways, and requests the City to revoke permits granted under this Article, the City Manager Engineer may summarily revoke any permits issued hereunder. Section 6. Section 24-157 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby amended to read as follows: Sec. 24-157. – Violations. (a) Upon determination by the City ManagerEngineer that a portable sign has been installed, used or maintained in violation of the provisions of this Article, the City ManagerEngineer may order the permittee to correct the offending condition. Such order shallwill be sent by facsimile transmissionelectronic mail or by registered mail, return receipt requested, to the permittee. The order shallwill describe the offending condition, state the actions necessary to correct the condition and establish a date for compliance that is not less than five (5) working business days from the date that the order is sent to the permittee. The order shallwill inform the permittee of the right to appeal pursuant to § 24-12 § 24-158 of this ChapterArticle. The City ManagerEngineer may remove the offending portable sign and revoke the portable sign permit if the permittee has not appealed the order or removed the sign by the date set for compliance in the order and the offending condition has not been cured by said date. The City ManagerEngineer shall will cause an inspection to be made of any corrected condition of a portable sign or of a portable sign that is reinstated after removal under this ArticleSection. (b) Any impounded portable sign shall will be treated as unclaimed property and disposed of by the City if not claimed within thirty (30) calendar daysone (1) year of the date of impoundment. Page 194 Item 11. -6- Introduced, considered favorably on first reading on September 16, 2025, and approved on second reading for final passage on October 7, 2025. ______________________________ Mayor ATTEST: ______________________________ City Clerk Effective Date: October 17, 2025 Approving Attorney: Heather N. Jarvis Exhibit: None Page 195 Item 11. File Attachments for Item: 12. First Reading of Ordinance No. 153, 2025, Creating a New Article VI in Chapter 24 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins Relating to Electric Vehicle Charging by Temporary Cord Draping. The purpose of this item is to secure and promote the public health, safety, and general welfare of persons using City sidewalks by regulating the placement, covering over, use, and removal of electric vehicle charging cords located upon certain public sidewalks within the City. To expand charging opportunities for electric vehicles for persons without dedicated off-street parking at their residence, this proposed new City Code (Code) regulates the safe draping of an electric vehicle charging cord across a sidewalk or other public right-of-way at the person’s residence for the purpose of providing a charge to a curbside vehicle at the person’s residence. Page 196 City Council Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 1 of 2 September 16, 2025 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Council STAFF Kenneth Zetye, Construction Inspection Manager for Engineering Brad Buckman, City Engineer Ginny Sawyer, Lead Project Manager, City Manager’s Office SUBJECT First Reading of Ordinance No. 153, 2025, Creating a New Article VI in Chapter 24 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins Relating to Electric Vehicle Charging by Temporary Cord Draping. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to secure and promote the public health, safety, and general welfare of persons using City sidewalks by regulating the placement, covering over, use, and removal of electric vehicle charging cords located upon certain public sidewalks within the City. To expand charging opportunities for electric vehicles for persons without dedicated off-street parking at their residence, this proposed new City Code (Code) regulates the safe draping of an electric vehicle charging cord across a sidewalk or other public right-of-way at the person’s residence for the purpose of providing a charge to a curbside vehicle at the person’s residence. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION Staff set out to address certain issues that have arisen because of the needs of residents who do not have access to off-street parking to be able to charge their electric and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles. Through the proposed Code, staff seeks to provide for a resident to temporarily and safely drape a cord across the right-of-way to charge their electric vehicle while also maintaining ADA accessibility/requirements on city sidewalks. The proposed Code aims to expand charging opportunities for residents without dedicated off- street parking by providing regulations for how to safely cover a charging cord draped perpendicularly across a sidewalk or public right-of-way for the purpose of providing a charge a curbside vehicle. Cord draping is a permitted use for any person who complies with all the requirements of the proposed Article VI, but the City Engineer may rescind cord draping permission from any person for failure to comply with any of the requirements and may also remove any unsafe equipment. The proposed new code provisions provide that if off-street parking is available for a residence, a person must use such off-street parking for electric vehicle charging rather than using the street to charge by cord draping. Also, a person may only charge one vehicle at a time at their residence, only when the residence does not have available dedicated off-street parking or alley access at the residence, and only when the residence is a single-unit or multi-unit residence. Page 197 Item 12. City Council Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 2 of 2 The proposed new code provisions also provide that a person charging their electric vehicle by temporary cord draping must: • Place the electric vehicle charging cord perpendicular across to the sidewalk and must cover the cord with a highly visible, stable, and secure low-angle cable ramp while charging. • Plug the electric vehicle charging cord into an outlet linked to the person’s utility bill for the person’s single-unit or multi-unit residence. • Remove all charging equipment and covering when not charging an electric vehicle. • Use only Level 1 (110-120V) charging equipment. No Level 2 (240V) charging cords may cross the right-of-way. • Follow all local parking regulations, both temporary and permanent. • Comply with all relevant sections of the National Electric Code and NFPA 70. • Not sell charging time or space. • Not use signage or other means to reserve a parking space. Under the proposed code, cord draping is a permitted use for any person who complies with all the requirements of the proposed Article VI, but the City Engineer may rescind cord draping permission from any person for failure to comply with any of the requirements, may issue citations, and may remove any equipment that has been placed, used, failed to be covered, or failed to be removed in violation of the proposed Article VI. CITY FINANCIAL IMPACTS None. BOARD / COMMISSION / COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION None. PUBLIC OUTREACH None. ATTACHMENTS 1. Ordinance No. 153, 2025 Page 198 Item 12. -1- ORDINANCE NO. 153, 2025 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS CREATING A NEW ARTICLE VI IN CHAPTER 24 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS RELATING TO ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING BY TEMPORARY CORD DRAPING A. This Ordinance expands charging opportunities for residents without dedicated off-street parking to charge electric vehicles by establishing safety protocols for a charging cord draped perpendicularly across a sidewalk or public right -of-way to charge a curbside vehicle. B. This Ordinance promotes public health, safety, and general welfare of persons using City sidewalks by addressing the placement, covering over, use, and removal of electric vehicle charging cords located upon certain public sidewalks within the City. This code allows a resident to temporarily and safely drape a cord across the right-of-way to charge their electric vehicle while also maintaining ADA accessibility and meeting ADA requirements on city sidewalks. C. Cord draping is defined as the practice of temporarily extending an electric vehicle charging cable across a public pathway, sidewalk, or other right -of-way to reach a vehicle parked on the street. If off-street parking is available for a residence, a person must use off-street parking for electric vehicle charging rather than using the street to charge by cord draping. Further, a person may only charge one vehicle at a time at their residence, only when the residence does not have available dedicated off -street parking or alley access at the residence, and only when the residence is a single-unit or multi-unit residence. D. The City Code provisions enacted herein also provide that a person charging their electric vehicle by temporary cord draping must: • Place the electric vehicle charging cord perpendicular across to the sidewalk and must cover the cord with a highly visible, stable, and secure low-angle cable ramp while charging; • Plug the electric vehicle charging cord into an outlet linked to the person’s utility bill for the person’s single-unit or multi-unit residence; • Remove all charging equipment and covering when not charging an electric vehicle; • Use only Level 1 (110-120V) charging equipment. No Level 2 (240V) charging cords may cross the right-of-way; • Follow all local parking regulations, both temporary and permanent ; • Comply with all relevant sections of the National Electric Code and NFPA 70; • Not sell charging time or space; and, • Not use signage or other means to reserve a parking space. E. As provided in this Ordinance, the City Code will allow cord draping by any person who complies with all the requirements of the proposed Article VI, while Page 199 Item 12. -2- authorizing the City Engineer to rescind cord draping permission from any person for failure to comply with any of the requirements, to issue citations, and to remove any equipment that has been placed, used, failed to be covered, or failed to be removed in violation of the proposed Article VI. F. The City Council has determined that the additions to City Code herein provide necessary regulation of charging electric vehicles by cord draping and are in the public’s and City’s best interests to protect the safety and welfare of persons using the sidewalks and City rights-of-way. In light of the foregoing recitals, which the Council hereby makes and adopts as determinations and findings, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS that Chapter 24 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby amended by the addition of a new Article VI, which reads in its entirety as follows: ARTICLE VI. ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING BY TEMPORARY CORD DRAPING Sec. 24-180. Intent and purpose. The purpose of this Article is to secure and promote the public health, safety and general welfare of persons using City sidewalks by regulating the placement, covering over, use, and removal of electric vehicle charging cords located upon certain public sidewalks within the City. To expand charging opportunities for electric vehicles for persons without dedicated off-street parking at their residence, this Article regulates the safe draping of an electric vehicle charging cord across a sidewalk or other public right -of-way at the person’s residence for the purpose of providing a charge to a curbside vehicle at the person’s residence. Sec. 24-181. Definitions. The following words and phrases, when used in this Article, have the meaning respectively ascribed to them unless the context otherwise clearly indicates: City Engineer means the City Engineer or their designee. Cord draping means the practice of temporarily extending an electric vehicle charging cable across a public pathway, sidewalk, or other right-of-way to reach a vehicle parked on the street. Electric vehicle means a plug-in electric motor vehicle or plug-in hybrid motor vehicle whose propulsion is powered fully or mostly by an electric motor that draws electricity from a battery and is capable of being charged from an external source. Electric vehicle charging cord means a cable that is used to provide electricity to an electric vehicle, is designed to ensure that a safe connection has been made between the Page 200 Item 12. -3- electric grid and the vehicle, and is able to communicate with the electric vehicle’s control system so that electricity flows at an appropriate voltage and current level. Person means any person or entity, including but not limited to a corporation, limited liability company, partnership, unincorporated association or joint venture. Residential cord draper means the person who is authorized by the City through compliance with this Article to charge an electric vehicle by cord draping. Sidewalk means any surface provided for the use of pedestrians. Sec. 24-182. Authorization to charge a vehicle by cord draping at a person’s residence. (a) Cord draping is a permitted use for any person who complies with all the requirements of this Article VI, but the City Engineer may rescind cord draping permission from any person for failure to comply with any of the requirements of this Article VI. (b) If off-street parking is available for a residence a person must use such off -street parking for electric vehicle charging rather than using the street to charge by cord draping. (c) A residential cord draper may charge an electric vehicle on the stree t by cord draping at the residential cord draper’s residence, provided: (1) The residential cord draper charges a vehicle only when the residence does not have available dedicated off -street parking or alley access at the residence and only when the residence is a single-unit or multi-unit residence; and (2) The residential cord draper charges only one vehicle at a time at their residence; and (3) The residential cord draper complies with all regulations in this Article including the placement, covering, removal, and safety requirements in Section 24-183; and (4) The electric vehicle being charged at the residential cord draper’s residence must be legally parked while charging. (d) Each electric vehicle charging cord for a vehicle being charged by cord draping must: (1) Be Level 1 (110-120V) charging equipment. No Level 2 (240V) charging cords may cross the right-of-way; and (2) Be inserted into an outlet linked to the residential cord draper’s utility bill for the residential cord draper’s single-unit or multi-unit residence; Page 201 Item 12. -4- (3) Be placed, covered, removed, and labeled as provided in Section 24-183 of this Article. Sec. 24-183. Placement, covering, and removal of electric vehicle charging cords. (a) Perpendicular placement. An electric vehicle charging cord must cross perpendicular to the sidewalk to minimize obstacles to mobility. (b) Electric vehicle charging cord covering. Electric vehicle charging cords while charging a vehicle must be covered by a highly visible, stable, and secure low angle cable ramp according to the requirements in this Subsection. (1) If the total height of the equipment (both cord and ramp) does not exceed one half (1/2) inch in height, the following requirements apply as illustrated in Figure 1: a. The ramp must cover the charging cord completely across the sidewalk or other right-of-way and can be no less than four (4) feet in length; and b. The ramp must be no steeper than a fifty percent (50%) grade (1:2 gradient). (2) If the total height of the equipment (both cord and ramp) exceeds one half (1/2) inch in height, the following requirements apply as illustrated in Figure 2 and Figure 3: a. The ramp must be no steeper than an 8.3% grade (1:12 gradient); and b. A three (3) foot by five (5) foot clear landing on the sidewalk must be on either side of the ramp; and c. The ramp must cover the entire width of the sidewalk and can be no less than four (4) feet wide; and d. A five (5) foot by four (4) foot or greater landing platform must be at the top of the ramp; and Page 202 Item 12. -5- e. The landing must be flat, with no more than a two percent (2%) slope (1:50 gradient) in any direction; and f. Perpendicular to the direction of travel, the ramp must not have a cross slope exceeding a two percent (2%) grade (1:50 gradient). (3) In no event may the total height of the equipment (both cord and ramp) exceed one (1) inch in height. (c) Safety and removal of electric vehicle charging cords. Any person c harging a vehicle by cord draping must comply with the following safety requirements: (1) When not charging a vehicle, all electric vehicle charging equipment must be removed from the right-of-way; and (2) All local parking regulations, both temporary and permanent, remain unchanged and must be followed; and (3) Any person charging a vehicle by cord draping must comply with all relevant sections of the National Electric Code and NFPA 70; and (d) Labeling. The cable ramp must have affixed to the underside of the ramp a label containing the name and address of the residential cord draper, the electronic mail address to reach the residential cord draper, the telephone number of a working telephone service to reach the residential cord draper, and the residential cord draper’s homeowners/tenant liability insurance policy company and number. Sec. 24-184. Selling of charging time or space prohibited. The selling of charging time or space is prohibited. In accordance with City Code Section 26-445, nothing in this Article allows a person or entity other than the electric utility of the City of Fort Collins, Colorado, to engage in the sale of electric service. No person shall Page 203 Item 12. -6- sell any parking space or electric vehicle charging equipment draped across any City right-of-way to charge a vehicle under this Article. No person shall use signage or other means to reserve a parking space for charging a vehicle by cord draping under this Article. Sec. 24-185. Violations. (a) Upon determination by the City Engineer that an electric vehicle charging cord has been placed, used, failed to be covered, or failed to be removed in violation of this Article, the City Engineer may order the residential cord draper to correct the offe nding condition. Any such order to correct an offending condition may be issued by electronic mail or sent by registered mail, return receipt requested, to the residential cord draper. The order will describe the offending condition, state the actions nece ssary to correct the condition, establish a date for compliance that is not more than five (5) business days from the date the order is sent to the residential cord draper, and inform the residential cord draper of the right to appeal pursuant to Section 24-186 of this Article. If the residential cord draper has not cured the offending condition within five (5) business days of the order, residential cord draping will no longer be permitted in this location unless and until further agreement by the City Engineer to ensure safety and compliance, and the City Engineer may remove the offending electric vehicle charging cord and equipment, impose a fine for expenses incurred to restore the public right-of-way, issue a citation for violation of this Article, or may take any combination of the actions provided in this Section. The City Engineer will cause an inspection to be made of any corrected condition of an electric vehicle charging cord under this Section. (b) Notwithstanding the notice, opportunity to cure, and appeal provisions in Subsection (a) of this Section, in the interest of public safety and welfare, if at any time the City Engineer determines that any electric vehicle charging cord or cord covering has been placed or installed in or on public property in violation of this Article and such equipment poses an imminent threat to public safety and welfare, the City Engineer may without notice remove the equipment. The City Engineer will attempt to notify th e equipment owner on the date of removal that if not claimed by the owner the equipment will be disposed of as provided in Subsection (e) of this Section. (c) The City will not be held liable for any damage to any electric vehicle charging cord, cable ramp, or other charging equipment removed under this Section. (d) Whenever the City Engineer finds an electric vehicle charging cord cable ramp that does not have affixed to the cable ramp the name, address, and telephone number of the residential cord draper as required under Section 24-183(b)(1), the City Engineer will make reasonable efforts to ascertain who the residential cord draper is and notify the residential cord draper of the violation. (e) Any impounded electric vehicle charging cord will be treated as unclaimed property and disposed of by the City if not claimed within one (1) year of the date of impoundment. Page 204 Item 12. -7- Sec. 24-186. Appeals. Any person aggrieved by a notice, order, or action taken pursuant to this Article may appeal to the City Manager as provided in Chapter 2, Article VI, of this Code. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading on September 16, 2025, and approved on second reading for final passage on October 7, 2025. ______________________________ Mayor ATTEST: ______________________________ City Clerk Effective Date: October 17, 2025 Approving Attorney: Heather N. Jarvis Exhibit: None Page 205 Item 12. File Attachments for Item: 13. First Reading of Ordinance No. 154, 2025, Expanding the Boundaries of the Fort Collins, Colorado Downtown Development Authority and Amending the Plan of Development of the Authority. The purpose of this item is to expand the boundaries of the Fort Collins Downtown Development Authority (the “DDA”) and amend the Plan of Development of the Authority to include a property at 313 North Meldrum Street and adjacent street right-of-way on North Meldrum Street. The property is a commercially zoned lot in the Old Town District and is the location of the historic Emma Malaby Grocery building. The right-of-way is being added as a housekeeping step to more efficiently describe the overall DDA boundary. There is no impact to the City from the inclusion of this right-of-way. Page 206 City Council Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 1 of 2 September 16, 2025 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Council STAFF Matt Robenalt, DDA Executive Director Todd Dangerfield, DDA Project Manager SUBJECT First Reading of Ordinance No. 154, 2025, Expanding the Boundaries of the Fort Collins, Colorado Downtown Development Authority and Amending the Plan of Development of the Authority. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to expand the boundaries of the Fort Collins Downtown Development Authority (the “DDA”) and amend the Plan of Development of the Authority to include a property at 313 North Meldrum Street and adjacent street right-of-way on North Meldrum Street. The property is a commercially zoned lot in the Old Town District and is the location of the historic Emma Malaby Grocery building. The right-of-way is being added as a housekeeping step to more efficiently describe the overall DDA boundary. There is no impact to the City from the inclusion of this right-of-way. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION The parcel is located on North Meldrum Street adjacent to the Fort Collins DDA boundary that runs north- south along the east side. The location is directly across the street from one DDA project investment located at 302 North Meldrum-320 Maple Street (Myridium) and within one block of a second project investment at 325 Cherry Street (Cherry Street Lofts). The parcel is zoned “neighborhood conservation – buffer district”, as is the east DDA boundary adjacent to Library Park, and is eligible for inclusion according to state statute and DDA policy. The DDA has received a formal petition from the property owner seeking inclusion of land in the DDA district boundary (see Attachment 3, DDA Resolution 2024-03, with Petition). Petitioner: Larimer County Historic Alliance (a.k.a. Historic Larimer County), P.O. Box 1909, Fort Collins, 80522. The criteria for inclusion of additional property into the DDA boundary area, pursuant to Colorado Revised Statutes § 31-25-822, are met by the property; adjacency to the existing DDA boundaries and evidence of ownership of the property are documented. Page 207 Item 13. City Council Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 2 of 2 In 2009, the DDA Board of Directors established a policy to guide future inclusions of property into the district. A thorough examination of land adjacent to the DDA boundary was evaluated for compatibility with the DDA’s mission and vision, and the property associated with the Petitioner’s request is considered acceptable because of the shared intent of preserving the historic Emma Malaby Grocery building located on this property. There are public benefits associated with the proposed inclusion of this property. Inclusion will enable a future DDA investment in building façade restorations. This inclusion of property resulting in a boundary line adjustment will effectively amend the DDA’s Plan of Development. CITY FINANCIAL IMPACTS There is no fiscal impact to the City from the inclusion of this property and right-of-way into the DDA boundary. The Petition submitted by Larimer County Historical Alliance is a voluntary request. The Petitioner recently applied for and received a tax-exempt status for the property from the Larimer County Assessor. Based on this tax-exempt status, inclusion into the DDA boundary of the Petitioner’s property will not result in any change to the mill levy or operating revenue. BOARD / COMMISSION / COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION On April 11, 2024, the DDA Board of Directors voted unanimously to recommend Council inclusion of the property, as requested by Larimer County Historic Alliance for the parcel located at 313 North Meldrum Street and adjacent street ROW on North Meldrum Street (Attachment 2). PUBLIC OUTREACH The publicly noticed DDA Board of Directors meeting was held on April 11, 2024, during which the Board unanimously approved DDA Resolution 2024-03, recommending the Council amend the Plan of Development boundary area in accordance with DDA statute. ATTACHMENTS 1. Boundary Map with proposed expansion 2. Proposed 313 North Meldrum Street Inclusion map 3. Copy of DDA Resolution 2024-03, with Petition 4. Ordinance No. 154, 2025 Page 208 Item 13. CajetanSt Sycamore St Cherry St Maple St Isotope Dr Co r d o v a R d Ma t h e w s S t La n d m a r k W a y Pe t e r s o n S t Wh e d b e e S t N W h i t c o m b S t Sm i t h S t Collamer Dr Pascal St E Laurel St 12 t h S t Waln u t S t MchughSt St o v e r S t OsianderSt Abbo t t L n Mu d d l e r C t Ma t u k a C t Su g a r p i n e S t N Lin k L n Lopez Ct Pi o n e e r T r a i l R d Bl o n d e l S t Bl u e S p r u c e D r MulleinDr Locust St E Magnolia St Mo r g a n S t Lupine Dr Old Main Dr Birdwhistle Ln E Myrtle St Re n e g a d e C t E Plum St TenMileRange Ln Spurge Cir Wi l l i a m s S t Main St El l i s S t ChestnutSt En d i c o t t S t E Elizabeth St Garfield St 10 t h S t EastdaleDr Ne w s o m S t Mangold Ln Logan Ave StearleyLn Steely Dr Ke n r o y C t AspenHeightsWay Romero St Trujillo St San Cristo St LongleafLn ForgetMeNotLn Gold Dr N M a s o n S t E Olive St E Oak St Bo l d o r L n N S h e r w o o d S t Copper Mountain Ln Hes c h e l S t JeromeSt Conifer St 3r d S t Ma r t i n e z S t 2n d S t 1s t S t Al t a V i s t a S t W Myrtle St W Magnolia St W Olive St Bau m S t Schl a g e l S t Lind e n S t Ba s s o n o L n Pine S t Alpine St PoudreRiverDrS S h e r w o o d S t AlfordSt Doctors Ln Co l o r a d o S t Co w a n S t Ov a l D r Ca t h e r i n e L n Steamboat Ln S W h i t c o m b S t EOliveCt Locust Ct Hickory St Redwood St HoffmanMillRd Echo Mountain Ln Frontage Rd Buckingham St Clover d a l e D r La Garita Ln Sangre De Cristo Ln So l V i s t a L n ElmSt N M e l d r u m S t MaryJane Way Re d C e d a r C i r Mason Ct EmighSt Hemlock St S M a s o n S t Re m b r a n d t D r Li b b i e C o y W a y Co l l e g i a t e W a y RivendalDr W Oak St Lu k e S t Ho s p i t a l L n PattonSt S M e l d r u m S t Li l a c L n Willo w S t Poud r e S t Duff D r Am y V a n D y k e n W a y W Plum St Pennock Pl Robertson St 11 t h S t Can y o n A v e Le s s e r D r University Ave Webste r A v e Woodlaw n D r E Suniga Rd Li n d e n m e i e r R d EmmausLn Linden Center Dr Woodward Way Laporte Ave Rive r s i d e A v e S Lemay Ave S College Ave N H o w e s S t 9t h S t W Laurel St E Mountain Ave N College Ave Re m i n g t o n S t S M a s o n S t W Mountain Ave W Mulberry St N M a s o n S t Jeff e r s o n S t E Lincoln Ave E Vine Dr Li n d e n m e i e r R d E Mulberry St S H o w e s S t LincolnAve E Suniga Rd NLemayAve WXYZÕ14 I³287 Downtown Development Authority Proposed Boundary Expansion Parcels Proposed Inclusion DDA Boundary 0 0.13 0.25 Miles © Printed: March 18, 2024 Amended: March 7, 2017Page 209 Item 13. Sycamore St N S h e r w o o d S t Cherry St Maple St N M e l d r u m S t N H o w e s S t Downtown Development Authority Proposed Inclusion Area 313 N. Meldrum St Parcels DDA Boundary Proposed Inclusion 0 100 200 Feet © Printed: March 18, 2024 Amended: March 7, 2017Page 210 Item 13. COP Y Page 211 Item 13. COP Y Page 212 Item 13. COP Y Page 213 Item 13. -1- ORDINANCE NO. 154, 2025 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS EXPANDING THE BOUNDARIES OF THE FORT COLLINS, COLORADO DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND AMENDING THE PLAN OF DEVELOPMENT OF THE AUTHORITY A. On April 21, 1981, the City Council of the City of Fort Collins, Colorado (“City Council”) adopted Ordinance No. 046, 1981, creating The Fort Collins, Colorado Downtown Development Authority (the “Authority”) and establishing the boundaries of the Authority. B. On September 8, 1981, by Resolution 81-129, the City Council approved the Authority’s plan of development (the “Plan of Development”), which also describes the boundaries of the Authority. C. Pursuant to Colorado Revised Statutes Section 31-25-822, subsequent to the organization of a downtown development authority, additional property may be included in the district of the authority, pursuant to a petition signed by the owner or owners in fee of each parcel of land sought to the included . D. If the Board of Directors of the Authority (the “Board”) approves said application, Board is to then submit the application to the City Council and, if the City Council also approves the application, it is to amend the ordinance creating the Authority so as to include the additional property as described in the petition. E. The City Council has, on seventeen previous occasions, amended Ordinance No. 046, 1981, by the adoption of the following ordinances: Ordinance No. 162, 1981; Ordinance No. 002, 1983; Ordinance No. 002, 1993; Ordinance No. 199, 1998; Ordinance No. 148, 2000; Ordinance No. 038, 2004; Ordinance No. 067, 2004; Ordinance No. 099, 2005; Ordinance No. 035, 2008; Ordinance No. 067, 2008; Ordinance No. 080, 2009; Ordinance No. 022, 2010; Ordinance No. 045, 2013; Ordinance No. 049, 2013; Ordinance No. 104, 2013; Ordinance No. 123, 2013; and Ordinance No. 034, 2017 (the “Amending Ordinances”). F. The Board has received a petition for the inclusion of a parcel of property into the boundaries of the Authority from the fee owner thereof . G. The legal description and the name of the fee owner of the property which is the subject of the petition for inclusion referred to herein are set forth on Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference (the property described in Exhibit A referred to hereinafter as the “Property”). H. The Board has determined that the addition of the Property into the Authority boundaries would further the objectives and purposes of the Authority, as Page 214 Item 13. -2- contained in the Plan of Development, and the Board has, by Resolution DDA-2024-03, recommended approval of the inclusion of such Property by the City Council. In light of the foregoing recitals, which the Council hereby makes and adopts as determinations and findings, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. The City Council hereby approves the inclusion of the Property, which is legally described as follows, into the boundaries of the Authority, and hereby finds that such inclusion is in the best interests of the City and will not su bstantially modify the Plan of Development: Lot 3, Block 53 of the City of Fort Collins, County of Larimer, State of Colorado. Also known by street and number as 313 North Meldrum Street, Fort Collins, Colorado 80521, and described in the records of the Assessor of Larimer County, Colorado, as Parcel No. 9711121903. Section 2. Section 3 of Ordinance No. 046, 1981 (as amended by the Amending Ordinances) be, and hereby is, further amended by deleting the legal description contained therein, which description establishes the boundaries of the Authority, and by substituting the following therefor: BEGINNING AT THE CENTER OF THE INTERSECTION OF COLLEGE AVENUE AND LAUREL STREET; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF LAUREL STREET TO THE CENTERLINE OF SOUTH MASON STREET; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG THE SAID CENTERLINE OF SOUTH MASON STREET, TO THE WESTERLY EXTENSION OF THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTH 60 FEET OF LOT 13, BLOCK 116; THENCE EASTERLY TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE NORTH 60 FEET OF SAID LOT 13; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG THE EAST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF MASON STREET, 10 FEET; THENCE EASTERLY PARALLEL WITH LAUREL STREET, 50.0 FEET; THENCE SOUTHERLY PARALLEL WITH MASON STREET, 140.0 FEET TO THE NORTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF LAUREL STREET; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG THE SAID RIGHT OF WAY LINE TO THE WEST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF THE NORTH SOUTH ALLEY IN THE SAID BLOCK 116; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG THE SAID RIGHT OF WAY LINE TO THE NORTH LINE OF LOT 12 BLOCK 116; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG THE SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF AN EAST WEST ALLEY IN BLOCK 116 TO THE EAST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF SOUTH MASON STREET; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG THE SAID EAST LINE 60.00 FEET; THENCE WESTERLY TO THE CENTERLINE OF SOUTH MASON STREET; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG THE SAID CENTERLINE TO THE WESTERLY EXTENSION OF THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTH 37.50 FEET OF LOT 11 BLOCK 116; THENCE EASTERLY TO THE SAID EAST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF SOUTH MASON STREET; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG THE SAID EAST LINE TO THE NORTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF THE SAID EAST WEST ALLEY IN BLOCK 116; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG THE SAID NORTH LINE, TO THE SAID WEST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF THE NORTH SOUTH ALLEY; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG THE SAID WEST LINE TO THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTH 37.50 FEET OF THE SOUTH 50 FEET OF LOT 10 BLOCK 116; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG THE SAID SOUTH LINE AND ITS WESTERLY EXTENSION TO THE WEST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF SOUTH MASON STREET; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG THE SAID WEST LINE TO THE SOUTH LINE OF LOT 5 BLOCK 106 HARRISON’S ADDITION; THENCE W ESTERLY ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF LOT 5 AND ITS EXTENSION TO THE EAST LINE OF THE WEST 60 FEET OF LOT 6 BLOCK 106; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG THE SAID EAST LINE TO THE SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF WEST MYRTLE STREET; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG THE SAID SOUTH LINE TO THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST 65 FEET OF THE Page 215 Item 13. -3- SAID LOT 5 BLOCK 106; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG THE SAID WEST LINE TO THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTH 90 FEET OF THE SAID LOT 5 BLOCK 106; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG THE SAID SOUTH LINE TO THE SAID WEST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF SOUTH MASON STREET; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG THE SAID WEST LINE TO THE SAID SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF WEST MYRTLE STREET; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG THE SAID SOUTH LINE TO A LINE WHICH IS 58 FEET EAST OF AND PARALLEL WITH THE WEST LINE OF LOT 9 BLOCK 116 HARRISON’S ADDITION; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG THE SAID PARALLEL LINE TO THE SOUTH LINE OF THE SAID LOT 9; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG THE NORTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF AN EAST WEST ALLEY IN BLOCK 116 TO THE SAID WEST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF THE NORTH SOUTH ALLEY IN BLOCK 116; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG THE SAID WEST LINE TO THE SAID SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF WEST MYRTLE STREET; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG THE SAID SOUTH LINE TO THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST 74.00 FEET OF LOT 8 BLOCK 116; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG THE EXTENDED LINE OF THE SAID EAST 74.00 FEET OF LOT 8 TO THE CENTERLINE OF THE SAID WEST MYRTLE STREET; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG THE SAID CENTERLINE TO THE NORTHERLY EXTENSION OF THE CENTERLINE OF THE SAID NORTH SOUTH ALLEY IN BLOCK 116; THENCE ALONG THE NORTHERLY EXTENSION OF THE SAID CENTERLINE OF THE ALLEY IN BLOCK 116 AND ITS NORTHERLY EXTENSION THROUGH BLOCK 115 HARRISON’S ADDITION, TO THE CENTER 0F MULBERRY STREET; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID CENTERLINE TO THE EAST RIGHT OF WAY OF MASON STREET; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID EAST RIGHT OF WAY TO A POINT ON THE EASTERLY EXTENSION OF THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTH HALF OF LOT 1, BLOCK 105, HARRISON’S ADDITION; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID EASTERLY EXTENSION AND ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE NORTH HALF OF SAID LOT 1; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID LOT 1, AND ITS EXTENSION, AND ALONG THE WEST LINE OF LOT 3, BLOCK 105 HARRISON’S ADDITION AND ITS EXTENSION TO THE CENTER LINE OF MULBERRY STREET; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID CENTERLINE TO THE INTERSECTION OF MULBERRY STREET AND HOWES STREET; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF HOWES STREET TO THE CENTERLINE OF LAUREL STREET; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF LAUREL STREET TO THE SOUTHERLY EXTENSION OF THE CENTERLINE OF THE NORTH SOUTH ALLEY IN BLOCKS 96 AND 95 HARRISON’S ADDITION; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG THE SAID EXTENSION AND ALONG THE SAID CENTERLINE TO THE EASTERLY EXTENSION OF THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTH HALF OF LOT 10 BLOCK 96 HARRISON’S ADDITION; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG THE SAID EXTENDED LINE AND ALONG THE SAID SOUTH LINE TO THE EAST LINE OF MELDRUM STREET; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG THE SAID EAST LINE, TO THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTH HALF OF LOT 9 BLOCK 96 HARRISON’S ADDITION; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG THE SAID NORTH LINE AND ITS EXTENSION TO THE SAID CENTERLINE OF THE NORTH SOUTH ALLEY IN BLOCKS 96 AND 95 HARRISON’S ADDITION; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG THE SAID CENTERLINE, TO THE EASTERLY EXTENSION OF THE SOUTH LINE OF LOT 6 BLOCK 95 HARRISON’S ADDITION; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG THE SAID EXTENDED LINE AND ALONG THE SAID SOUTH LINE TO THE EAST LINE OF MELDRUM STREET; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG THE SAID EAST LINE TO THE NORTH LINE OF THE SAID LOT 6 BLOCK 95; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG THE SAID NORTH LINE AND ITS EXTENSION TO THE SAID CENTERLINE OF THE NORTH SOUTH ALLEY; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG THE SAID CENTERLINE TO THE CENTERLINE OF MULBERRY STREET; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF MULBERRY STREET TO THE CENTERLINE OF HOWES STREET; THENCE NORTHERLY TO THE INTERSECTION OF HOWES STREET AND MAGNOLIA STREET; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID CENTERLINE TO THE INTERSECTION OF MAGNOLIA STREET AND MELDRUM STREET; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID CENTERLINE TO THE INTERSECTION OF MELDRUM STREET AND MULBERRY STREET; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID CENTERLINE TO THE INTERSECTION OF MULBERRY STREET AND WHITCOMB STREET; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG SAID CENTERLINE TO THE INTERSECTION OF WHITCOMB STREET AND MAGNOLIA STREET; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG SAID CENTERLINE TO THE INTERSECTION OF MAGNOLIA STREET, SHERWOOD STREET, AND CANYON AVENUE; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF CANYON AVENUE TO THE INTERSECTION OF SAID CENTERLINE AND THE LOT LINE BETWEEN LOT 5 AND LOT 6 OF BLOCK 83 EXTENDED; THENCE Page 216 Item 13. -4- NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID LOT LINE 123.1 FEET; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY 86 FEET TO A POINT 50 FEET EASTERLY FROM THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF BLOCK 83; THENCE NORTHERLY 50 FEET TO THE CENTERLINE OF OLIVE STREET; THENCE EASTERLY TO THE INTERSECTION OF THE CENTERLINE OF OLIVE STREET, AND THE EXTENSION OF CENTERLINE OF ALLEY IN BLOCK 82; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG ALLEY CENTERLINES THROUGH BLOCKS 82, 81, TO THE CENTERLINE OF MOUNTAIN AVENUE; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID CENTERLINE TO THE INTERSECTION OF SAID CENTERLINE AND CENTERLINE OF SHERWOOD STREET; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG SAID CENTERLINE TO THE INTERSECTION OF A LINE 1-1/2 FEET NORTH OF THE NORTH LINE OF LOT 14, BLOCK 51 AND THE CENTERLINE OF SHERWOOD STREET; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG THE SAID LINE 1-1/2 FEET NORTH OF SAID LOT 14 TO THE CENTERLINE OF THE NORTH-SOUTH ALLEY IN BLOCK 51; THENCE SOUTHERLY TO THE INTERSECTION OF ALLEY CENTERLINE AND NORTH LOT LINE OF LOT 5, BLOCK 51 EXTENDED; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG SAID LOT LINE TO THE CENTERLINE OF MELDRUM STREET; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG SAID CENTERLINE TO THE INTERSECTION WITH THE EASTERLY EXTENSION OF THE SOUTH LINE OF LOT 3, BLOCK 53 OF THE TOWN OF FORT COLLINS; THENCE WESTERLY TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 3, BLOCK 53; THENCE NORTHERLY TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 3, BLOCK 53: THENCE EASTERLY ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT 3, BLOCK 53, AND ITS EASTERLY EXTENSION, TO THE CENTERLINE OF MELDRUM STREET; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG SAID CENTERLINE TO THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT -OF-WAY LINE OF THE COLORADO AND SOUTHERN RAILROAD; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY, ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, TO THE CENTERLINE OF SHERWOOD STREET; THENCE NORTHERLY ON SAID CENTERLINE TO THE INTERSECTION OF ELM STREET AND SHERWOOD STREET; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF BLOCKS 55, 45, AND 35 TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF BLOCK 35; THENCE NORTHERLY TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF BLOCK 26; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF BLOCK 26, TO THE CENTERLINE OF COLLEGE AVENUE; THENCE CONTINUING EASTERLY ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF VINE DRIVE TO A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF THE WEST 1/2 OF SECTION 12; THENCE NORTHERLY TO THE NORTH 1/4 CORNER OF SECTION 12, T7N, R69W OF THE SIXTH P.M.; THENCE (CONSIDERING THE SOUTH LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 1 TOWNSHIP 7 NORTH RANGE 69 WEST AS BEARING S8958'19"E AND WITH THE FOLLOWING BEARINGS CONTAINED HEREIN RELATIVE THERETO) SOUTHERLY ALONG THE EAST LINE OF THE WEST 1/2 OF SAID SECTION 12, S0007'56"W 46.77 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EXISTING NORTH RIGHT -OF-WAY LINE OF EAST VINE DRIVE; THENCE ALONG SAID EXISTING NORTH RIGHT -OF-WAY LINE, N8818'14"E 602.54 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 1, LARIMER COUNTY SHOPS MINOR SUBDIVISION; THENCE ALONG THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID LARIMER COUNTY SHOPS MINOR SUBDIVISION, N0116'55"W 208.11 FEET, AND AGAIN S8523'42"W 65.98 FEET, AND AGAIN N5534'00"W 253.90 FEET, AND AGAIN N1851'00"E 34.17 FEET, AND AGAIN N7333'44"E 105.85 FEET, AND AGAIN N1250'18"E 71.56 FEET, AND AGAIN N1020'00"W 42.66 FEET, AND AGAIN N4150'00"W 84.01 FEET, AND AGAIN N5115'00"W 193.28 FEET, AND AGAIN N6726'23"W 74.87 FEET; THENCE N1850'30"E 108.60 FEET; THENCE N8959'13"E 1484.20 FEET TO A POINT ON THE WEST LINE OF ALTA VISTA SUBDIVISION; THENCE ALONG SAID WEST LINE, S0000'00"E 533.86 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID ALTA VISTA SUBDIVISION; THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID ALTA VISTA SUBDIVISION, N8647'41"E 140.22 FEET, AND AGAIN N8004'26"E 40.61 FEET, AND AGAIN N8742'34"E 125.10 FEET, AND AGAIN N7002'35"E 120.45 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EXISTING WESTERLY RIGHT -OF-WAY OF ALTA VISTA STREET AS RECORDED IN THE LARIMER COUNTY RECORDS IN BOOK 2024 AT PAGE 845; THENCE ALONG SAID EXISTING WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, S6739'55"E 180.15 FEET, AND AGAIN S0001'55"E 244.97 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EXISTING NORTH RIGHT -OF-WAY LINE OF EAST VINE DRIVE; THENCE ALONG SAID EXISTING NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, N8818'14"E 341.16 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EXISTING WEST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF NORTH LEMAY AVENUE; THENCE ALONG SAID EXISTING WEST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, S0001'59"E 581.65 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF TRACT A, EAST VINE STREETS FACILITY P.U.D.; THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID EAST VINE STREETS FACILITY P.U.D., S8818'24"W 20.03 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 2, NEW BELGIUM BREWERY THIRD FILING; Page 217 Item 13. -5- THENCE ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT 2 AND ITS SOUTHERLY EXTENSION, S0001'59"E 805.42 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EXISTING SOUTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF BUCKINGHAM STREET; THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY TO THE EAST LINE OF LOT 2 OF THE SECOND REPLAT OF NORTH LEMAY SUBDIVISION SECOND FILING; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG THE SAID EAST LINE, TO THE SOUTH LINE OF THE SAID LOT 2; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE SAID LOT 2 TO THE WEST LINE OF THE SAID LOT 2; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG THE SAID WEST LINE TO THE SAID SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY OF BUCKINGHAM STREET; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG THE SAID SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY TO THE EAST LINE OF THE PLAT OF VANWORKS SUBDIVISION SECOND FILING; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG THE SAID EAST LINE TO THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF THAT CERTAIN TRACT OF LAND AS DESCRIBED IN A WARRANTY DEED RECORDED AT RECEPTION NO. 20080043084 LARIMER COUNTY RECORDS; THENCE ALONG THE SAID SOUTHERLY LINE, WESTERLY TO THE WEST LINE OF THE SAID VANWORKS SUBDIVISION SECOND FILING; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG THE SAID WEST LINE AND ITS SOUTHERLY EXTENSION, TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 2, PATRICK SUBDIVISION FIRST FILING; THENCE ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF THE SAID LOT 2 AND ITS WESTERLY EXTENSION, TO A POINT ON THE EXISTING EAST RIGHT -OF-WAY LINE OF THIRD STREET; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG SAID EXISTING EAST RIGHT -OF-WAY LINE, TO A POINT ON THE EXISTING SOUTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF BUCKINGHAM STREET; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG THE SAID EXISTING SOUTH RIGHT -OF-WAY LINE TO A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF THE WEST 1/2 OF SAID SECTION 12; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG THE EAST LINE OF THE WEST 1/2 OF SAID SECTION 12 TO THE WESTERLY PROL ONGATION OF THE NORTH RIGHT OF WAY OF EAST LINCOLN AVENUE; THENCE ALONG THE SAID NORTH RIGHT OF WAY OF EAST LINCOLN AVENUE, EASTERLY TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 2, ODELL BREWING COMPANY SUBDIVISION; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID LOT 2, TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE SAID LOT 2; THENCE ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF THE SAID LOT 2 AND ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF LOT 1, ODELL BREWING COMPANY SUBDIVISION, EASTERLY TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE SAID LOT 1; THENCE ALONG THE EAST LINE OF THE SAID LOT 1, SOUTHERLY TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE SAID LOT 1 AND TO THE SAID NORTH RIGHT OF WAY OF EAST LINCOLN AVENUE; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG THE SAID NORTH RIGHT OF WAY OF EAST LINCOLN AVENUE, EASTERLY TO THE WEST LINE OF LOT 2 OF THE REPLAT OF NORTH LEMAY SUBDIVISION SECOND FILING; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG THE SAID WEST LINE TO THE NORTH LINE OF THE SAID LOT 2; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF LOT 2 AND ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF LOT 3 OF THE REPLAT OF NORTH LEMAY SUBDIVISION TO THE WESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF LEMAY AVENUE; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG THE SAID WESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY TO THE SAID NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF EAST LINCOLN AVENUE; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG THE SAID NORTH RIGHT OF WAY TO THE NORTHERLY PROLONGATION OF THE EASTERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF SOUTH LEMAY AVENUE; THENCE ALONG THE SAID EASTERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF SOUTH LEMAY AVENUE, SOUTHERLY TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE BUFFALO RUN APARTMENTS P.U.D.; THENCE (CONSIDERING THE WEST LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 7 TOWNSHIP 7 NORTH RANGE 69 WEST, AS BEARING NORTH 00 DEGREES 34 MINUTES 55 SECONDS EAST AND WITH THE FOLLOWING BEARINGS CONTAINED HEREIN RELATIVE THERETO), RUNNING ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID BUFFALO RUN APARTMENTS P.U.D. THE NEXT FIVE (5) COURSES: 1) NORTH 72 DEGREES 53 MINUTES 48 SECONDS EAST, A DISTANCE OF 93.02 FEET; 2) ALONG THE ARC OF A 465.50 FOOT RADIUS CURVE TO THE RIGHT THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 38 DEGREES 32 MINUTES 55 SECONDS, AN ARC DISTANCE OF 313.19 FEET HAVING A CHORD BEARING OF SOUTH 87 DEGREES 49 MINUTES 44 SECONDS EAST, A DISTANCE OF 307.32 FEET; 3) SOUTH 68 DEGREES 33 MINUTES 17 SECONDS EAST, A DISTANCE OF 498.09 FEET; 4) ALONG THE ARC OF A 134.50 FOOT RADIUS CURVE TO THE LEFT THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 34 DEGREES, 58 MINUTES 05 SECONDS; AN ARC DISTANCE OF 82.09 FEET, HAVING A CHORD BEARING OF SOUTH 86 DEGREES 02 MINUTES 19 SECONDS EAST, A DISTANCE OF 80.82 FEET; 5) NORTH 80 DEGREES 27 MINUTES 41 SECONDS EAST, ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE AND ITS EASTERLY EXTENSION, A DISTANCE OF 114.77 FEET TO THE WEST LINE OF THAT TRACT OF LAND DESC RIBED AT RECEPTION NO. 89022270; THENCE SOUTH 00 DEGREES 38 MINUTES OO SECONDS WEST ALONG SAID WEST Page 218 Item 13. -6- LINE A DISTANCE OF 679.49 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 89 DEGREES 23 MINUTES 00 SECONDS WEST A DISTANCE OF 120.53 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 00 DEGREES 24 MINUTES 00 SECONDS WEST A DISTANCE OF 921.52 FEET; THENCE NORTH 89 DEGREES 38 MINUTES 00 SECONDS WEST A DISTANCE OF 205.59 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 00 DEGREES 22 MINUTES 00 SECONDS WEST A DISTANCE OF 136.39 FEET; THENCE NORTH 89 DEGREES 38 MINUTES 00 SECONDS WEST A DISTANCE OF 60.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 00 DEGREES 22 MINUTES 00 SECONDS WEST, A DISTANCE OF 208.73 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF COLORADO HIGHWAY 14, AND A POINT ON A NON- TANGENT CURVE TO THE LEFT, THENCE RUNNING ALONG SAID NORTH LINE THE NEXT TWO (2) COURSES; 1) ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 00 DEGREES 04 MINUTES 18 SECONDS HAVING A RADIUS OF 11,585 FEET, AN ARC DISTANCE OF 14.48 FEET, A CHORD BEARING OF NORTH 89 DEGREES 33 MINUTES 00 SECONDS WEST, A DISTANCE OF 14.48 FEET; 2) NORT H 89 DEGREES 38 MINUTES 00 SECONDS WEST A DISTANCE OF 645.85 FEET TO THE INTERSECTION OF SAID NORTH LINE AND THE EAST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF SOUTH LEMAY AVENUE; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG THE SAID NORTH RIGHT OF WAY OF EAST MULBERRY STREET, WESTERLY TO THE WESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF THE SAID SOUTH LEMAY AVENUE; THENCE ALONG THE SAID WESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF SOUTH LEMAY AVENUE, NORTHERLY TO THE SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY OF THE SAID EAST LINCOLN AVENUE; THENCE ALONG THE SAID SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY OF EAST LINCOLN AVENUE TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THAT TRACT OF LAND DESCRIBED AT RECEPTION NO. 94091198; THENCE (CONSIDERING THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 12 AS BEARING NORTH 89°29'04" WEST AND WITH ALL BEARINGS CONTAINED HEREIN RELATIVE THERETO) ALONG THE W EST AND SOUTHERLY LINES OF SAID RECEPTION NO. 94091198 THE FOLLOWING 3 COURSES AND DISTANCES: 1) SOUTH 10° 44' 56" WEST, 314.08 FEET; 2) SOUTH 71° 25' 09" EAST, 198.03 FEET; 3) NORTH 87° 59' 46" EAST, 138.53 FEET TO THE WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF NORTH LEMAY AVENUE; THENCE ALONG SAID WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE THE FOLLOWING 6 COURSES AND DISTANCES: 1) BEGINNING WITH A CURVE CONCAVE TO THE WEST HAVING A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 25° 27' 37", A RADIUS OF 930.93 FEET, AN ARC LENGTH OF 413.68 FEET, AND THE CHORD OF W HICH BEARS SOUTH 10° 56' 48" EAST, 410.28 FEET; 2) SOUTH 01° 47' 03" WEST, 1519.07 FEET TO A POINT ON THE WEST LINE OF THAT TRACT OF LAND DESCRIBED AT RECEPTION NO. 20050097395; 3) ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID TRACT, SOUTH 05° 25' 37" WEST, 59.94 FEET; 4) CONTINUING ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID TRACT, SOUTH 02° 03' 31" WEST, 64.95 FEET; 5) CONTINUING ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID TRACT, ALONG A CURVE CONCAVE TO THE WEST HAVING A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 17° 18' 36", A RADIUS OF 299.50 FEET, AN ARC LENGTH OF 90.48 FEET, AND THE CHORD OF WHICH BEARS SOUTH 10° 42' 48" WEST, 90.14 FEET; 6) CONTINUING ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID TRACT, SOUTH 19° 22' 04" WEST, 13.69 FEET TO THE NORTH LINE OF EAST MULBERRY STREET; THENCE ALONG SAID NORTH LINE THE FOLLOWING 2 COURSES AND DISTANCES: 1) NORTH 89° 47' 09" WEST, 205.09 FEET; 2) NORTH 89° 38' 44" WEST, 127.10 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 2, SPRINGER THIRD SUBDIVISION; THENCE ALONG THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 2 THE FOLLOWING 4 COURSES AND DISTANCES: 1) BEGINNING WITH A CURVE CONCAVE TO THE WEST HAVING A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 30° 50' 23", A RADIUS OF 1013.60 FEET, AN ARC LENGTH OF 545.58 FEET, AND THE CHORD OF WHICH BEARS NORTH 19° 18' 37" WEST, 539.01 FEET; 2) ALONG A CURVE CONCAVE TO THE NORTHEAST HAVING A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 04° 42' 22", A RADIUS OF 487.50 FEET, AN ARC LENGTH OF 40.04 FEET, AND THE CHORD OF WHICH BEARS NORTH 32° 23' 02" WEST, 40.03 FEET; 3) ALONG A CURVE CONCAVE TO THE SOUTHWEST HAVING A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 13° 56' 38", A RADIUS OF 512.50 FEET, AN ARC LENGTH OF 124.73 FEET, AND THE CHORD OF WHICH BEARS NORTH 36° 59' 47" WEST, 124.42 FEET; 4) ALONG A CURVE CONCAVE TO THE SOUTHWEST HAVING A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 00° 36' 28", A RADIUS OF 1023.60 FEET, AN ARC LENGTH OF 10.86 FEET, AND THE CHORD OF WHICH BEARS NORTH 44° 16' 20" W EST, 10.86 FEET TO THE NORTH CORNER OF SAID LOT 2; THENCE ALONG THE NORTHWESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 2, SOUTH 22° 29' 42" WEST, 24.98 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTHEASTERLY LINE OF THAT TRACT OF LAND DESCRIBED IN BOOK 883, PAGE 318; THENCE ALONG SAID NORTHEASTERLY LINE THE FOLLOWING 2 COURSES AND DISTANCES: 1) BEGINNING WITH A CURVE CONCAVE TO THE SOUTHWEST HAVING A CENTRAL ANGLE OF Page 219 Item 13. -7- 14° 52' 11", A RADIUS OF 998.60 FEET, AN ARC LENGTH OF 259.16 FEET, AND THE CHORD OF WHICH BEARS NORTH 51° 43' 42" WEST, 258.43 FEET; 2) NORTH 59° 09' 48" WEST, 276.50 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID TRACT OF LAND DESCRIBED IN BOOK 883, PAGE 318; THENCE ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID TRACT OF LAND, SOUTH 00° 20' 12" WEST, 239.20 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF THE WASTEWATER T REATMENT PLANT NO.1 SUBDIVISION; THENCE ALONG SAID NORTH LINE THE FOLLOWING 4 COURSES AND DISTANCES: 1) NORTH 53° 16' 04" WEST, 5.70 FEET; 2) NORTH 79° 09' 04" WEST, 251.50 FEET; 3) NORTH 88° 17' 04" WEST, 452.30 FEET; 4) SOUTH 41° 12' 56" WEST, 89.29 FEET ; THENCE, NORTH 79° 27' 04" WEST, 590.41 FEET; THENCE, NORTH 09° 34' 10" EAST, 985.84 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF BALDWIN MINOR SUBDIVISION; THENCE ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID BALDWIN MINOR SUBDIVISION, NORTH 09° 34' 10" EAST, 773.39 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY OF EAST LINCOLN AVENUE; THENCE ALONG THE SAID SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY OF EAST LINCOLN AVENUE, WESTERLY TO THE EAST LINE OF THE PLAT OF IN-SITU SUBDIVISION AS RECORDED FEBRUARY 6, 2004 AT RECEPTION NO. 20040011665 RECORDS OF THE CLERK AND RECORDER OF LARIMER COUNTY; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID EAST LINE OF THE IN-SITU SUBDIVISION TO THE SOUTH LINE OF THE SAID IN- SITU SUBDIVISION; THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE SAID IN-SITU SUBDIVISION TO THE WEST LINE OF THE SAID IN-SITU SUBDIVISION; THENCE ALONG THE SAID WEST LINE OF THE IN-SITU SUBDIVISION, NORTHERLY TO THE SAID SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY OF EAST LINCOLN AVENUE; THENCE ALONG THE SAID SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY, WESTERLY TO THE SOUTHWESTERLY BANK OF THE CACHE LA POUDRE RIVER; THENCE ALONG THE SAID SOUTHWESTERLY BANK OF THE RIVER, SOUTHEASTERLY TO THE INTERSECTION WITH THE SAID EAST LINE OF WEST 1/2 OF SECTION 12; THENCE ALONG THE SAID EAST LINE OF THE WEST 1/2 OF SECTION 12, SOUTHERLY TO THE NORTHERLY RIGHT -OF-WAY OF RIVERSIDE AVENUE AS ORIGINALLY PLATTED; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY, TO THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT -OF-WAY OF MULBERRY STREET; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY TO THE WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY OF RIVERSIDE AVENUE; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY TO THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY OF MOUNTAIN AVENUE; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY TO THE PROPERTY LINE BETWEEN LOTS 3 AND 4 OF BLOCK 141; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID LOT LINE TO THE CENTER OF THE ALLEY IN BLOCK 141; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG CENTER OF SAID ALLEY TO A POINT 20 FEET WEST OF THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 17, BLOCK 141; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG A LINE PARALLEL TO AND 20 FEET WESTERLY FROM THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT 17, AND ITS SOUTHERLY EXTENSION, TO THE SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY OF EAST OAK STREET; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG THE SAID SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY TO THE WEST RIGHT OF WAY OF PETERSON STREET; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG THE SAID WEST RIGHT OF WAY TO THE NORTH RIGHT OF WAY OF EAST OLIVE STREET; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG THE SAID NORTH RIGHT OF WAY TO THE CENTERLINE OF MATHEWS STREET; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG THE SAID CENTERLINE OF MATHEWS STREET TO THE POINT OF INTERSECTION WITH THE EASTERLY EXTENSION OF THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTH 10 FEET OF LOT 2, BLOCK 132; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID EASTERLY EXTENSION TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTH 10 FEET OF SAID LOT 2 AND THE WEST RIGHT -OF-WAY LINE OF MATHEWS STREET; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG SAID WEST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 8, BLOCK 132; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT 8 TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE EAST 92.16 FEET OF LOT 8; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST 92.16 FEET OF SAID LOT 8 TO A POINT ON THE SOUTH RIGHT-OF- WAY LINE OF EAST OAK STREET; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID SOUTH RIGHT -OF-WAY LINE TO THE POINT OF INTERSECTION WITH THE CENTERLINEOF AN ALLEY IN BLOCK 132; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF SAID ALLEY TO THE WESTERLY EXTENSION OF THE NORTH LINE OF TRACT TWO OAKPARK PUD; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG THE SAID EXTENDED LINE AND ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF THE SAID TRACT TWO TO THE WEST RIGHT OF WAY OF MATHEWS STREET; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG THE SAID WEST RIGHT OF WAY TO THE SOUTH LINE OF THE S AID TRACT TWO OAKPARK PUD; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG THE SAID SOUTH LINE AND ITS EXTENSION TO THE SAID CENTERLINE OF THE NORTH SOUTH ALLEY IN BLOCK 132; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID ALLEY T0 A Page 220 Item 13. -8- POINT 10 FEET SOUTH OF THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 2; THENCE EASTERLY AND PARALLEL TO THE NORTH LINE OF LOT 2 TO THE CENTERLINE OF MATHEWS STREET; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF MATHEWS STREET TO THE CENTERLINE OF OLIVE STREET; THENCE EAST ALONG THE CENTERLINE TO A POINT OPPOSITE THE EAST LINE OF LOT 8, BLOCK 143; THENCE SOUTH TO THE CENTERLINE OF THE EAST WEST ALLEY IN BLOCK 143; THENCE WEST TO THE CENTERLINE OF MATHEWS STREET; THENCE SOUTH TO A POINT OPPOSITE THE SOUTH LINE OF LOT 4, BLOCK 133; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF LOT 4 TO THE CENTERLINE OF THE NORTH-SOUTH ALLEY IN BLOCK 133; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG SAID ALLEY TO THE CENTERLINE OF EAST OLIVE STREET; THENCE WESTERLY TO THE INTERSECTION OF EAST OLIVE STREET AND REMINGTON STREET; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID CENTERLINE TO A POINT OPPOSITE THE NORTH LINE OF LOT 15, BLOCK 133; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF LOT 15 TO THE CENTERLINE OF THE NORTH-SOUTH ALLEY IN BLOCK 133; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID ALLEY TO THE CENTERLINE OF EAST MAGNOLIA STREET; THENCE WESTERLY TO THE INTERSECTION OF EAST MAGNOLIA STREET AND REMINGTON STREET; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID CENTERLINE TO THE INTERSECTION OF REMINGTON STREET AND MULBERRY STREET; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF MULBERRY STREET TO THE INTERSECTION OF THE EXTENSION OF THE CENTERLINE OF THE ALLEY IN BLOCK 125; THENCE SOUTHERLY ON THE CENTERLINE OF ALLEYS THROUGH BLOCKS 125 AND 126 TO THE CENTERLINE OF LAUREL STREET; THENCE WESTERLY ON SAID CENTERLINE TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. Section 3. The Plan of Development is hereby amended by the City Council so as to delete the legal description of the boundaries of the Authority, and to substitute therefor the legal description contained in Section 2 of this Ordinance. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading on September 16, 2025, and approved on second reading for final passage on October 7, 2025. ______________________________ Mayor ATTEST: ______________________________ City Clerk Effective Date: October 17, 2025 Approving Attorney: Dianne Criswell Exhibit: Exhibit A - Legal Description and Name of Fee Owner of Property to be Included in the District Page 221 Item 13. EXHIBIT A TO ORDINANCE NO. 154, 2025 DDA BOUNDARIES Legal Description and Fee Owners of Property to Be Included in the District Legal Description: Lot 3, Block 53 of the City of Fort Collins, County of Larimer, State of Colorado. Also known by street and number as 313 North Meldrum Street, Fort Collins, Colorado 80521, and described in the records of the Assessor of Larimer County, Colorado, as Parcel No. 9711121903. Fee Owner: Larimer County Historic Alliance Page 222 Item 13. File Attachments for Item: 14. Items Relating to Platte River Power Authority Organic Contract and Power Supply Contract. A. First Reading of Ordinance No. 155, 2025, Authorizing an Amended and Restated Organic Contract for Platte River Power Authority. B. First Reading of Ordinance No. 156, 2025, Authorizing an Amended and Restated Contract with Platte River Power Authority for the Supply of Electric Power and Energy. The purpose of this item is to extend and amend the Organic Contract between Estes Park, Longmont and Loveland (the member cities) that is the basis for Platte River Power Authority ’s (“Platte River”) existence and purpose and to extend and make modifications to the Power Supply Agreement (“PSA”) with Platte River Page 223 City Council Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 1 of 5 September 16, 2025 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Council STAFF Tyler Marr, Deputy City Manager SUBJECT Items Relating to Platte River Power Authority Organic Contract and Power Supply Contract. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A. First Reading of Ordinance No. 155, 2025, Authorizing an Amended and Restated Organic Contract for Platte River Power Authority. B. First Reading of Ordinance No. 156, 2025, Authorizing an Amended and Restated Contract with Platte River Power Authority for the Supply of Electric Power and Energy. The purpose of this item is to extend and amend the Organic Contract between Estes Park, Longmont and Loveland (the member cities) that is the basis for Platte River Power Authority’s (“Platte River”) existence and purpose and to extend and make modifications to the Power Supply Agreement (“PSA”) with Platte River STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of these Ordinance on First Reading. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION ORGANIC CONTRACT Platte River Board of Directors has recommended the Organic Contract (agreement by which the member cities formed Platte River) be extended for an additional fifteen (15) years beyond the current terms (which expires on December 31, 2060), modernizing the language and increasing flexibility to reflect current and future functionality. The proposed amendment is intended to (1) better accommodate the electric industry’s rapid change, with distributed resources becoming an increasingly prominent component of the typical generation mix, (2) enable outcomes related to the City’s policy goal of 100% renewable electricity by 2030 and (3) a 15 year extension of the Organic Contract and Power Supply Agreement to provide favorable ratings in future Platte River bond issuances for financing to construct new power generation facilities . Background Platte River’s relationship with its four member cities is based on a contract among the communities - and Page 224 Item 14. City Council Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 2 of 5 the Organic Contract with each member city. The Organic Contract is an intergovernmental agreement (IGA) between Estes Park, Fort Collins, Longmont and Loveland that created Platte Rive in 1975. Pursuant to Colorado Revised Statues (”C.R.S”) Section § 29-1-204, Platte River was formed as a political subdivision of the State of Colorado. The current term extends until 2060. The Organic Contract authorizes and establishes the governance structure of Platte River, which was modeled after the Articles of Incorporation and the Bylaws of the predecessor‘s organization, Platte River Power Authority, a Colorado non-profit corporation. During the first year of its existence, the Organic Contract was amended to expand the board of directors from four to eight directors through the addition of mayors from each of the member cities. Amendments have been adopted in 1977, 1978, 1980, 1998, 2010 and 2019, most recently. The Organic Contract sets the governance responsibilities and structure of the organization and defines the roles that Platte River can perform on behalf of its owner communities: primarily the generation and transmission of electricity to the four owner communities’ utilities. The Platte River board of directors adopted a Resource Diversification Policy in 2018 that instructed Platte River to decarbonize rapidly with a goal of 100% non-carbon energy generation by 2030, so long as reliability or cost-effectiveness were not compromised. That work is well underway with substantial progress anticipated toward the goal, especially with the planned closure of the coal-fired Rawhide Unit 1 at the end of 2029. This transition and policy has resulted in the need for Platte River to make a number of changes in how they generate and supply electricity. That, combined with the need to issue hundreds of millions of dollars in new financing to construct new power generation facilities to enable the closure of Rawhide, is prompting the need to once again amend and restate the Organic Contract. Summary of Proposed Changes The changes to the Organic Contract can be summarized in three categories: 1) Extending the term of the Organic Contract  The proposed contract extends the life of Platte River through 2075, an extension of 15 years past the current contract. 2) Modernize Language  The majority of changes to the Organic Contract can be characterized as language modernization and clean-ups to better reflect how the organization is currently structured and operated.  Some changes reflect changes to state law and reflect the realities of joining an organized market for power purchases and sales.  Board member, officer and board chair responsibilities are clarified to reflect the organization’s current structure and how business is conducted by Platte River.  Additionally, a change is being made to clarify that board members should either be members of a City’s elected body or staff. 3) Increasing flexibility  The clean energy transition will require new initiatives and programs to be administered by Platte River and the owner communities, and therefore, having specified lists of exact product offerings makes less sense than in the past. Organic Contract Language has broadened to provide flexibility into the future on what Platte River may work on and provide to owner communities as energy markets, generation resources and power delivery continue to evolve. Page 225 Item 14. City Council Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 3 of 5 POWER SUPPLY CONTRACT Platte River Board of Directors has recommended the Power Supply agreement be extended for an additional fifteen (15) years beyond the current terms (which expires on December 31, 2060), modernizing the language and increasing flexibility to reflect current and future functionality. The proposed amendment is intended to (1) better accommodate the electric industry’s rapid change, with distributed energy resources playing an important role in our clean energy transition, (2) enable outcomes related to the City’s policy goal of 100% renewable electricity by 2030 and (3) a 15 year extension of the Organic Contract and Power Supply Contract to provide favorable ratings in future Platte River bond issuances for financing to construct new power generation facilities. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION In June of 1975, the Town of Estes Park and the Cities of Fort Collins, Longmont and Loveland established Platte River as a separate governmental entity via an Organic Contract (OC) for the primary purpose of generation and transmission of electricity to the four owner community’s utilities. In addition to the Organic Contract forming the basis for Platte River’s governance and existence, each owner community has a (PSA) with Platte River directly that sets the general terms and requirements of both the City and PRPA in the relationship. Since 1975 the PSAs have run concurrently with the Organic Contract. The PSAs are functionally identical across all four member cities and obligate each to purchase substantially all the electricity they distribute within their services areas from Platte River (the “all-requirements” obligation). The PSAs are the revenue-generating security pledged against the bonds issued by Platte River to finance the capital assets that generate and deliver wholesale electricity to the member cities. These multi-year agreements are currently effective through 2060. The Platte River board adopted a Resource Diversification Policy in 2018 that instructed Platte River to decarbonize rapidly with a goal of 100% non-carbon energy by 2030, so long as reliability or fiscal sustainability (“cost-effectiveness”) were not compromised. That work is well underway with substantial progress anticipated toward the goal, especially with the planned closure of the coal-fired Rawhide Unit 1 at the end of 2029. This transition and policy has resulted in the need for Platte River to make a number of changes in how they operate to generate electricity. These changes include:  Joining an organized market in the Southwest Power Pool’s Regional Transmission Organization West market.  Managing more intermittent resources such as wind and solar, that need firming currently provided by having large dispatchable thermal generation on the system. Some of these firming methods, such as batteries, will require deeper integration with the distribution utility than has previously been necessary.  Launching a virtual power plant (VPP) that will use utility and customer owned resources (batteries, electric vehicles, appliances, distributed solar) to provide power in certain circumstances that can also help firm renewable resources.  These are combined with the need to issue hundreds of millions of dollars in new financing to construct new power generation facilities, both renewable and dispatchable aeroderivative turbines, to enable the closure of Rawhide Unit 1. Proposed Changes The evolution in Platte River‘s model has resulted in the desire to update the PSA. In addition to extending the agreement by the same 15 years as the OC, the following summarize the changes in the PSA:  Changed recitals to reflect shared commitment to a reliable, cost-effective and rapidly decarbonized energy portfolio and indicate that a collaborative, flexible approach will be necessary to meet current energy goals. Page 226 Item 14. City Council Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 4 of 5  Simplified carve-out terms, without changing base all-requirements provisions, to align solar and net- metering provisions with current law, increase flexibility in those areas, and enable the VPP to stand up effectively. It also clarifies that a resource’s connection point being on high-voltage or distribution infrastructure is not what is relevant in determining carve-out eligibility.  Removing reference to specific metering requirements pertaining to distributed energy generation and instead use flexible language that encourages and allows for innovation and adaptation.  Numerous changes to support joining an organized market, including ensuring rate provisions are compatible and that market and surplus sales terms are modernized. CITY FINANCIAL IMPACTS The amendments to the Organic Contract and Updated Supply Contract will have no direct impact on wholesale power costs. A 15-year extension of the contracts will provide indirect and favorable financial benefits to ratepayers through Platte River’s ability to gain favorable bond ratings and grant flexibility in future power purchase agreement terms. The extension of the Organic Contract, in conjunction with the Updated Supply Contract (also to be adopted separately by the Electric Utility Enterprise Board), will extend the life of the Platte River organization and commit a portion of ratepayer revenues to Platte River for wholesale power costs for an additional 15 years beyond the current term. The Power Supply Contract obligates the City to purchase its power from Platte River for an additional 15 years, through 2075. The extension of the Organic Contract, in conjunction with the Updated Supply Contract (also to be adopted separately by the Electric Utility Enterprise Board), will extend the life of the Platte River organization and commit a portion of ratepayer revenues to Platte River for wholesale power costs for an additional fifteen years beyond the current term. BOARD / COMMISSION / COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION Platte River hosted a joint work session with all four owner communities on June 20, 2025. Four council members and the Mayors were in attendance. What was presented at that time is substantially the same as what is presented as part of this ordinance. A staff presentation was made at the August 26, 2025, work session, also highlighting these changes. In response Council asked why in the recitals, specific reference to environmental sustainability, was struck. Both the Board and staff from owner communities felt that the struck sentence was redundant to the preceding whereas clause, where all three “pillars” of the resource diversification policy are referenced, including environmental sustainability. Striking this recital does not in any way change Platte River adopted policy or practice in working toward the policy. Other questions raised by Council are addressed in the Power Supply Agreement ’s agenda materials. The other three owner communities are working to approve both the Organic Contract and Power Supply Agreements in September 2025 or early October 2025. On August 12, 2025, staff presented to the Energy Board related to the high-level changes intended for both the Organic Contract and Power Supply Agreement. The Energy Board submitted a memorandum on September 8, 2025, with recommendations for City Council. Page 227 Item 14. City Council Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 5 of 5 PUBLIC OUTREACH No public outreach was identified outside of the Council and Energy Board considerations. ATTACHMENTS 1. Organic Contract (redlined draft) 2. Energy Board Recommendation Memo 3. Staff presentation to the Energy Board 4. Ordinance No. 155, 2025 5. Ordinance No. 156, 2025 Page 228 Item 14. Proposed amendment language in redline Review draft August 1, 2025 O RGANIC C ONTRACT Page 229 Item 14. Proposed amendment language in redline Review draft August 1, 2025 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 EFFECTIVE DATE .......................................................................................................... 2 2.0 ESTABLISHMENT OF PLATTE RIVER POWER AUTHORITY ....................................... 2 2.1 PURPOSES ............................................................................................................... 3 2.2 FUNCTIONS, SERVICES, OR FACILITIES ................................................................ 4 2.3 BOARD OF DIRECTORS ........................................................................................... 5 2.3.1 NUMBER ....................................................................................................66 2.3.2 SELECTION ...............................................................................................66 2.3.3 TERM .......................................................................................................... 6 2.3.4 REMOVAL ..................................................................................................77 2.3.5 VACANCIES ................................................................................................ 7 2.3.6 COMPENSATION.......................................................................................88 2.3.7 ANNUAL MEETINGS .................................................................................88 2.3.8 REGULAR MEETINGS ...............................................................................88 2.3.9 SPECIAL MEETINGS .................................................................................88 2.3.10 NOTICE OF MEETINGS .............................................................................99 2.3.11 WAIVER OF NOTICE .................................................................................99 2.3.12 QUORUM ............................................................................................... 1010 2.3.13 ATTENDANCE BY TELECONFERENCE ............................................... 1010 2.3.14 VOTE IN CASE OF DEADLOCK ............................................................ 1010 2.3.15 DUTIES .................................................................................................. 1111 2.4 OFFICERS ............................................................................................................ 1212 2.4.1 ELECTION OF OFFICERS AND TERMS OF OFFICE ........................... 1213 2.4.2 REMOVAL .............................................................................................. 1313 2.4.3 DUTIES OF OFFICERS.......................................................................... 1313 2.5 INDEMNIFICATION OF OFFICERS AND DIRECTORS ........................................ 1515 2.6 TERM OF CONTRACT .......................................................................................... 1616 2.7 ASSETS AND PROPERTIES ................................................................................ 1616 2.8 DISTRIBUTION OF ASSETS UPON TERMINATION ............................................ 1616 2.9 SEAL ..................................................................................................................... 1717 2.10 CONTRACTS ........................................................................................................ 1717 2.11 CHECKS, DRAFTS, AND OTHER FINANCIAL DOCUMENTS ............................. 1717 2.12 DEPOSITS ............................................................................................................ 1717 2.13 FISCAL YEAR ....................................................................................................... 1717 2.14 PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS ...................................................................... 1817 3.0 GENERAL POWERS ................................................................................................ 1818 4.0 POLITICAL SUBDIVISION ........................................................................................ 2120 5.0 REVENUE BONDS ................................................................................................... 2121 6.0 DEBT NOT THAT OF MUNICIPALITIES ................................................................... 2121 7.0 FILING OF CONTRACT ............................................................................................ 2121 8.0 NOTICES .................................................................................................................. 2121 9.0 SEVERABILITY ......................................................................................................... 2222 10.0 DUPLICATE ORIGINALS .......................................................................................... 2222 Page 230 Item 14. Proposed amendment language in redline Review draft August 1, 2025 Organic Contract Amended and Restated XX/XX/2025 Page 1 of 24 AMENDED AND RESTATED ORGANIC CONTRACT ESTABLISHING PLATTE RIVER POWER AUTHORITY AS A SEPARATE GOVERNMENTAL ENTITY THIS CONTRACT, originally made and entered into as of June 17, 1975, and amended February 14, 1977, and July 27, 1978, and amended and restated the 31st day of March 1980, and the 1st day of July, 1998, and the 1st day of September, 2010, and as further amended on the 30th day of May, 2019, by the parties to this Contract which are: TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO, a municipal corporation of the State of Colorado (“Estes Park”), CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO, a municipal corporation of the State of Colorado (“Fort Collins”), CITY OF LONGMONT, COLORADO, a municipal corporation of the State of Colorado (“Longmont”), and CITY OF LOVELAND, COLORADO, a municipal corporation of the State of Colorado (“Loveland”). When specificity is not required, the municipal corporations which are parties hereto will hereinafter be individually referred to as “Municipality” and collectively as “Municipalities.” WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, Estes Park owns and operates a municipal electric system which supplies electric power and energy at retail to users located within the town limits of Estes Park and the adjacent service area of the Estes Park electric system; and WHEREAS, Fort Collins owns and operates a municipal electric system which supplies electric power and energy at retail to users located within the city limits of Fort Collins and the adjacent service area of the Fort Collins electric system; and WHEREAS, Longmont owns and operates a municipal electric system which supplies electric power and energy at retail to users located within the city limits of Longmont and the adjacent service area of the Longmont electric system; and WHEREAS, Loveland owns and operates a municipal electric system which supplies electric power and energy at retail to users located within the city limits of Loveland and the adjacent service area of the Loveland electric system; and WHEREAS, the Municipalities on June 17, 1975, established, pursuant to the provisions of C.R.S. § 29-1-204, as then enacted, Platte River Power Authority (the “Authority”), as a separate governmental entity and successor to a nonprofit corporation, to be the instrumentality of the Municipalities and as such successor, to continue to supply their wholesale electric power and energy requirements; and Page 231 Item 14. Proposed amendment language in redline Review draft August 1, 2025 Organic Contract Amended and Restated XX/XX/2025 Page 2 of 24 WHEREAS, during 1998 the Municipalities contracted with one another to establish, pursuant to the provisions of C.R.S. § 29-1-203, the Authority as a separate legal entity and multi- purpose intergovernmental authority to provide designated functions, services, or facilities lawfully authorized to any combination of two or more of the Municipalities provided that such function, service, or facility constitutes an “enterprise” as defined in subsection 2(d) of Article X, Section 20 of the Colorado Constitution; and WHEREAS, as increased complexity and risk in the electric utility industry, energy- producing technology, and relevant laws and regulations continue to evolve have created the need to enhance utility image and customer loyalty, the Municipalities wish to clarify that the Organic Contract authorizes the Authority to engage in a broad range of services to provide long- term value which are incidental to or supportive of to the Municipalities’ while maintaining equity and enhancing the flexibility and agility with which the Authority and the Municipalities can adapt over timecontinued ability to provide electric power and energy services to their customers on a competitive basis; and WHEREAS, the Municipalities acting through the Authority wish to ensure a source of electric power and energy that is reliable, cost-effective, and environmentally responsible; and WHEREAS, providing energy in an environmentally responsible manner requires that the Authority incorporate environmental factors as an integral component of planning, design, construction and operational decisions; and WHEREAS, the Municipalities now wish to further amend the Organic Contract, to extend its term and to restate the amended provisions thereof in a single updated document. NOW, THEREFORE, the Municipalities do hereby amend and restate the Organic Contract, originally executed June 17, 1975, and subsequently amended, so that as hereby amended and restated it provides, and the Municipalities do agree, as follows: 1.0 EFFECTIVE DATE This Contract, as hereby amended and restated, shall become effective when it has been duly executed by all of the Municipalities. 2.0 ESTABLISHMENT OF PLATTE RIVER POWER AUTHORITY As of June 17, 1975, the Municipalities established a separate governmental entity, to be known as Platte River Power Authority, to be used by the Municipalities to effect the development of electric energy resources and the production and Page 232 Item 14. Proposed amendment language in redline Review draft August 1, 2025 Organic Contract Amended and Restated XX/XX/2025 Page 3 of 24 transmission of electric energy in whole or in part for the benefit of the inhabitants of the Municipalities. As of July 1, 1998, the Municipalities also established the Authority as a separate governmental entity and multi-purpose intergovernmental authority to provide additional designated functions, services, or facilities lawfully authorized to any combination of two or more of the Municipalities, provided that such function, service, or facilities constitutes an “enterprise” as defined in subsection 2(d) of Article X, Section 20 of the Colorado Constitution. 2.1 PURPOSES The purposes of the Authority are to conduct its business and affairs for the benefit of the Municipalities and their inhabitants: (i) to provide the electric power and energy requirements of the Municipalities and the retail customers within the Municipalities in a reliable, cost-effective, and environmentally responsible manner; (ii) to engage in business activities related to the provision of electric power, and energy, and related services, (including owning and operating assets connected to which may include but are not limited to investment in energy efficiency, renewable energy, demand side management, and associated communication systems, that the Board determines are likely to enhance the competitive position of the Authority or the Municipalities’ distribution systems or that support distribution operations), while adapting over time as necessary to carry out Board-adopted policies and maintain equity among the Municipalities; and (iii) to provide any additional designated function, service, or facility lawfully authorized to any combination of two or more of the Municipalities, provided that these constitute an “enterprise” as defined in subsection 2(d) of Article X, Section 20 of the Colorado Constitution. A particular function, service, or facility shall be treated as designated as a separate purpose under clause (iii) of the previous sentence only upon Page 233 Item 14. Proposed amendment language in redline Review draft August 1, 2025 Organic Contract Amended and Restated XX/XX/2025 Page 4 of 24 receipt by each Municipality which is designating the function, service, or facility to also be performed by the Authority of (a) a resolution adopted by unanimous vote of the Board of Directors of the Authority designating the function, service, or facility as a purpose to also be jointly exercised by the designating Municipalities through the Authority and (b) opinions of counsel to each Municipality which is designating the function, service, or facility to also be performed by the Authority setting forth the extent to which the designated function, service, or facility is lawfully authorized by such designating Municipality; and (c) an opinion of the Authority’s bond counsel to the effect that the designated function, service, or facility constitutes an “enterprise” as defined in subsection 2(d) of Article X, Section 20 of the Colorado Constitution. 2.2 FUNCTIONS, SERVICES, OR FACILITIES The functions, services, or facilities to be provided by the Authority are: The supplying of the electric power and energy requirements of the Municipalities and retail customers within the Municipalities; and, the provision of any additional function, service, or facility, by means of (i) acquiring, constructing, owning, reconstructing, improving, rehabilitating, repairing, operating and maintaining electric generating plants, transmission systems and related facilities, or interests therein, for the purpose of producing, transmitting and delivering to the Municipalities, electric power and energy to the extent of their requirements, including renewable energy requirements; (ii) purchasing electric power and energy from electric utilities and other producers of energy, as required to supply the Municipalities and perform its other obligations; (iii) selling at wholesale to the Municipalities all of the electric power and energy produced or purchased by the Authority which the Municipalities require; Page 234 Item 14. Proposed amendment language in redline Review draft August 1, 2025 Organic Contract Amended and Restated XX/XX/2025 Page 5 of 24 (iv) selling, exchanging and otherwise disposing of, under the most advantageous terms and conditions obtainable, any surplus power and energy or transmission capacity which the Authority owns, produces or purchases; (v) developing and operating a portfolio of electric power and energy resources (including renewable purchased resources) and associated infrastructure and capabilities that provide long-term value to producing and transmitting electric energy in whole or in part for the benefit of the inhabitants of the Municipalities and support reliability, financial sustainability and environmental responsibility ; (vi)(v) developing cost-effective, reliable, and environmentally responsible products and services to improve the efficiency of generation, transmission and use of electrical energy, which may include but are not limited to investment in energy efficiency, renewable energy, demand side management, and associated communication systems; (vii)(vi) acquiring, constructing, owning, purchasing, selling, exchanging or otherwise disposing of, reconstructing, improving, rehabilitating, repairing, operating, and maintaining assets, infrastructure, plants, systems, and related facilities or interests therein; (viii)(vii) developing products, services, infrastructure, and resources related to such function, service, or facility for delivery to appropriate markets in whole or in part for the benefit of the inhabitants of the Municipalities; and (ix)(viii) on termination of this Contract to vest in the Municipalities all right, title and interest of the Authority in or to all of its property and assets. 2.3 BOARD OF DIRECTORS The governing body of the Authority shall be a Board of Directors (“Board”) in which all legislative power of the Authority is vested. Page 235 Item 14. Proposed amendment language in redline Review draft August 1, 2025 Organic Contract Amended and Restated XX/XX/2025 Page 6 of 24 2.3.1 NUMBER The number of Directors shall be eight (8). 2.3.2 SELECTION Each Municipality shall be represented by The Board shall consist of two (2) members on the Board of Directors of the Authority from each Municipality, who shall be designated or appointed as follows: (i) MAYORS The Mayor of each of the Municipalities is hereby designated and shall serve as a member of the Board of Directors of the Authority contemporaneously with service as Mayor; provided, however, that any Mayor may designate some other member of the governing board body of such Municipality to serve as a Director of the Authority in place of the Mayor. (ii) APPOINTED DIRECTORS The governing body of each of the Municipalities shall appoint one (1) additional member to the Board of Directors. Each Appointed Directors, (a) must be a full-time employee of the appointing Municipality or an elected member of its governing body, and (b) shall be selected for judgment, experience, and expertise which make that person particularly qualified to serve on the Board of Directors of the Authority. 2.3.3 TERM The term of office of the Directors of the Authority shall be as follows: (i) MAYORS The Mayor of each Municipality, or the member of the Municipality’s governing board body designated by the Mayor, shall serve as a Director of the Authority for the same period Page 236 Item 14. Proposed amendment language in redline Review draft August 1, 2025 Organic Contract Amended and Restated XX/XX/2025 Page 7 of 24 of time that the Mayor serves as Mayor of that Municipality. (ii) APPOINTED DIRECTORS The term of the each Appointed Director shall be as specified by the appointing Municipality.for Estes Park shall expire on December 31, 2011, tThe Municipalities shall coordinate term of the Appointed Directors’ terms as feasible to stagger the years in which for Fort Collins shall expire on December 31, 2008, the term of the Appointed Director for Longmont shall expire on December 31, 2010, and the term of the Appointed Directors’ terms for Loveland shall expire on December 31, 2009. Each successor shall be appointed for a term of four years from the date of the expiration of the term for which the predecessor was appointed and foster continuity of Board membership over time. 2.3.4 REMOVAL Any Director appointed by the governing board body of a Municipality may be removed at any time by such governing board body, with or without cause. A Mayor will be automatically removed as a Director upon vacating the office of Mayor, and a member of the Municipality’s governing board body designated to serve in place of a Mayor may be removed at any time by the Mayor, with or without cause. 2.3.5 VACANCIES If A vacancy occurring in the directorship of an Appointed Director, leaves office before the end of his or her term for any reason,whether such vacancy be the result of resignation, death, removal or disability, shall be filled by the appointment of a successor Appointed Director by the governing body of the Municipality which that appointed the Director whose office has become vacant. In the case of a vacancy in the directorship of a Page 237 Item 14. Proposed amendment language in redline Review draft August 1, 2025 Organic Contract Amended and Restated XX/XX/2025 Page 8 of 24 Mayor or his designee from any Municipality, the vacancy shall be filled by the vacancy as provided in Section 2.3.2(ii). If a new Mayor or the (Mayor’s designee)ation leaves office before the end of his or her term for any reason, the vacancy shall be filled by the new Mayor or the Mayor’s designation of some other member of the governing board body of that Municipality. 2.3.6 COMPENSATION Directors shall not receive compensation for their services, but Directors may be reimbursed their actual expenses for attendance at meetings of the Board of Directors and for expenses otherwise incurred on behalf of the Authority. 2.3.7 ANNUAL MEETINGS The Board shall hold Aan annual meeting of the Board of Directors shall be held within the first 120 days in of each year, at the Authority’s principal place of business, as designated by the Board (unless the Board specifies another location by resolution). such place in Fort Collins, Colorado, as shall be designated in the notice of the meeting, At each annual meeting, the Board to shall elect officers, to pass upon reports for the preceding fiscal year, and to transact such other business as may come before the meeting. Failure to hold the annual meeting at a designated time, or failure to hold the annual meeting in any year, shall not cause a forfeiture or dissolution or otherwise affect the Authority. 2.3.8 REGULAR MEETINGS The Board of Directors may provide for the time and place for the holding of regular meetings by resolution without notice to Directors other than the resolution adopting the meeting schedule. 2.3.9 SPECIAL MEETINGS Any Director may call a Sspecial meetings of the Board of Directors Page 238 Item 14. Proposed amendment language in redline Review draft August 1, 2025 Organic Contract Amended and Restated XX/XX/2025 Page 9 of 24 may be called by the Chair or any Director and may fix the it shall thereupon be the duty of the Secretary to cause notice of such meeting to be given as hereinafter provided. Special meetings of the Board of Directors shall be held at such time and place (within the Sstate of Colorado) for the special meeting. The Secretary shall deliver to all as shall be fixed by the Chair or the Directors notice of the special calling the meeting as provided in Section 2.3.10. 2.3.10 NOTICE OF MEETINGS The Secretary shall deliver to each Director Wwritten notice of any the annual or of any special meeting of the Board of Directors shall be delivered to each Director not less than seven (7), nor more than thirty-five (35), days before the date fixed for such the meeting,. The Secretary may deliver any meeting notice either personally, or by electronic mail, by with confirming reply requested, or at the direction of the Secretary, or, upon his/her default, by mail. If sent bythe person calling the meeting. If mailed, such electronic mail, notice shall be deemed to be delivered when confirmed by reply from the intended recipient. If mailed, notice shall be deemed delivered when deposited in the United States mail, addressed to the Director at his/her the Director’s address as it appears on the records of the Authority, with postage prepaid. The Municipalities may exchange routine communications concerning this Contract by electronic means or any other method acceptable to the Municipalities sending and receiving the communications. 2.3.11 WAIVER OF NOTICE Whenever any notice is required to be given to any Director of the Authority under the provisions of the law or this Contract, a waiver thereof in writing signed by such Director, whether before or after the time stated therein, shall be equivalent to the giving of such notice. Attendance of a Director at any Board meeting of the Board of Directors shall constitute a waiver by such Director of notice of Page 239 Item 14. Proposed amendment language in redline Review draft August 1, 2025 Organic Contract Amended and Restated XX/XX/2025 Page 10 of 24 such meeting except when such Director attends such meeting for the express purpose of objecting to the transaction of any business because the meeting is not lawfully called or convened. 2.3.12 QUORUM A majority of the number of Directors then in office shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business; provided that, if less than a majority of the Directors then in office is present at a meeting, a majority of the Directors present may adjourn the meeting; and, provided further, that the Secretary shall notify any absent Directors of the time and place of such adjourned meeting. The act of a majority of the Directors present at a meeting at which a quorum is present shall be the act of the Board of Directors. 2.3.13 ATTENDANCE BY TELECONFERENCE Directors may attend and fully participate in any meeting through electronic teleconferencing. 2.3.14 VOTING REQUIREMENTS VOTE IN CASE OF DEADLOCK In the event the Board of Directors, at a meeting at which a quorum is present, is deadlocked and unable to obtain a majority vote of the Directors present concerning a matter being considered for action, any Director may require a “Weighted Vote.” A “Weighted Vote” shall then be taken with each Director’s vote being given one half the proportion which: (i) the dollar amount of electric power and energy purchased from the Authority during the twelve-month period ending with the close of the billing period for the month two months prior to the month of the deadlocked meeting and paid for by the Municipality appointing such Director bears to; (ii) the dollar amount of all electric power and energy purchased Page 240 Item 14. Proposed amendment language in redline Review draft August 1, 2025 Organic Contract Amended and Restated XX/XX/2025 Page 11 of 24 from the Authority and paid for by the Municipalities during said twelve-month period. (i) The act of a majority of the “Weighted Vote” shall be the act of the Board of Directors.Provided a quorum is present, the act of a majority of the Directors present shall be the act of the Board, subject to the Weighted Vote provisions in subsection (ii) below and except as otherwise required by law. (ii) If a Board vote results in a deadlock, any Director may call for a “Weighted Vote.” The weight of each Director’s vote in a Weighted Vote shall be based on the ratio between: (a) the dollar amount the Municipality for which the Director serves paid to the Authority for electric power and energy during the 12-month period ending with a billing date two months before the month in which the Weighted Vote takes place, and (b) the dollar amount all Municipalities paid to the Authority for electric power and energy during the same 12-month period. The act of the majority of the Weighted Vote shall be the act of the Board. 2.3.15 DUTIES The duties of the Board of Directors shall be: (i) To govern the business and affairs of the Authority. (ii) To exercise all powers of the Authority. (iii) To establish policies that guide the priorities and activities of the Authority and the General Manager's duties as stated in Page 241 Item 14. Proposed amendment language in redline Review draft August 1, 2025 Organic Contract Amended and Restated XX/XX/2025 Page 12 of 24 Section 2.4.3(v). (ii)(iv) To periodically review Board-established policies and update, replace, or repeal them as needed. (iii)(v) To comply with the provisions of parts 1, 5, and 6 of Article 1 of Title 29, C.R.S. (iv)(vi) To adopt a fiscal resolution, which complies with statutory and other restrictions imposed by law on the affairs of the Authority, to govern the financial transactions of the Authority, including the receipt, custody, and disbursement of its funds, securities, and other assets, and to provide for the services of a firm of independent certified public accountants to examine, at least annually, the financial records and accounts of the Authority and to report thereupon to the Board of Directors. (v)(vii) To keep minutes of its proceedings. 2.4 OFFICERS The minimum officers of the Authority shall be a Chair, Vice Chair, Secretary, Treasurer, and General Manager. and such other officers and assistant officers as may be authorized by tThe Board of Directors may authorize other officers and assistant officers to perform such duties as may be assigned by the Board of Directors may assign. The General Manager may appoint officers in addition to those authorized by the Board and establish their duties as he or she deems beneficial to carry out the General Manager’s duties as specified in Section 2.4.3(v). The Chair and Vice Chair shall be members of the Board of Directors, but other officers of the Authority need not be members of the Board of Directors. 2.4.1 ELECTION OF OFFICERS AND TERMS OF OFFICE At each annual Board meeting of the Board of Directors, the members of the Board of Directors shall elect Board officers (Chair Page 242 Item 14. Proposed amendment language in redline Review draft August 1, 2025 Organic Contract Amended and Restated XX/XX/2025 Page 13 of 24 and Vice Chair), who shall serve as such officers of the Authority until the end of the next annual Board meeting of the Board of Directors and until their successors are elected and qualified. If the election of officers shall not be held at such meeting, such election shall be held as soon thereafter as may be convenient. Vacancies or new offices may be filled at any meeting of the Board of Directors. The Board shall appoint any other Board-designated officers as necessary to fill vacancies as they arise, and prescribe the terms of those officers as part of the appointing resolution. 2.4.2 REMOVAL Any officer or agent elected or appointed by the Board of Directors may be removed by the Board of Directors, with or without cause, whenever in its judgment the best interests of the Authority will be served thereby. 2.4.3 DUTIES OF OFFICERS In addition to duties assigned by the Board of Directors, the duties of the officers shall include the following: (i) CHAIR The Chair shall preside at all meetings of the Board of Directors and, except as otherwise delegated by the Board of Directors, shall execute all legal instruments of the Authority, and shall perform any such other duties as the Board of Directors may prescribe. (ii) VICE CHAIR The Vice Chair shall, in the absence of the Chair, or in the event of the Chair’s inability or refusal to act, perform the duties of the Chair and when so acting shall have all the powers of and be subject to all the restrictions upon the Chair. The Vice Chair shall also perform such other duties as may Page 243 Item 14. Proposed amendment language in redline Review draft August 1, 2025 Organic Contract Amended and Restated XX/XX/2025 Page 14 of 24 be prescribed by the Board of Directors. (iii) SECRETARY The Secretary shall: (a) maintain the official records of the Authority, including all resolutions and regulations approved by the Board of Directors, the and minutes of Board meetings, of the Board of Directors, and (b) keep a register of the names and addresses of Directors and officers, and shall (c) issue notice of meetings, (d) attest and affix the corporate seal to all official documents of the Authority, as needed, and shall (e) perform such any other duties as the Board of Directors may prescribe. (iv) TREASURER The Treasurer shall serve as financial officer of the Authority and shall, pursuant to the fiscal resolution adopted by the Board of Directors governing the financial transactions of the Authority and the restrictions imposed by law, be responsible for the receipt, custody, investment, and disbursement of the Authority’s funds and securities and for duties incident to the office of Treasurer, and shall perform other duties as the Board of Directors may prescribe. Page 244 Item 14. Proposed amendment language in redline Review draft August 1, 2025 Organic Contract Amended and Restated XX/XX/2025 Page 15 of 24 (v) GENERAL MANAGER The General Manager shall be the principal executive officer of the Authority with full responsibility for the planning, operations, and administrative affairs of the Authority, and the coordination thereof, pursuant to policies and programs approved by the Board of Directors, and shall be the agent for service of process on the Authority. When and while a vacancy exists in the office of General Manager, the Board of Directors shall appoint a qualified interim General Manager to act as the principal executive officer of the Authority. 2.4.4 BONDS OF OFFICERS The Board, in its discretion, may require bonds from or insurance policies to cover any officer, agent, or employee (including those responsible for custody of any Authority funds or property)The Treasurer and any other officer or agent of the Authority charged with responsibility for the custody of any of its funds or property shall give bond in such sum and with such surety as the Board of Directors shall determine. The Board of Directors in its discretion may also require any other officer, agent, or employee of the Authority to give bond in such amount and with such surety as it shall determine. The cost of such bond shall be an expense payable by the Authority. 2.5 INDEMNIFICATION OF OFFICERS AND DIRECTORS Each Director and officer of the Authority, whether or not then in office, and his/her personal representatives, shall be indemnified by the Authority against all costs and expenses actually and necessarily incurred by him/her in connection with the defense of any action, suit, or proceeding in which he/she may be involved or to which he/she may be made a party by reason of his/her being or having been such Director or officer, except in relation to matters as to which he/she shall be finally adjudged in such action, suit, or proceeding to be liable for gross negligence or willful and wanton Page 245 Item 14. Proposed amendment language in redline Review draft August 1, 2025 Organic Contract Amended and Restated XX/XX/2025 Page 16 of 24 misconduct in the performance of duty. Such costs and expenses shall include amounts reasonably paid in settlement for the purpose of curtailing the costs of litigation, but only if the Authority is advised in writing by its counsel that in his/her opinion the person indemnified did not commit gross negligence or willful and wanton misconduct. The foregoing right of indemnification shall not be exclusive of other rights to which he/she may be entitled as a matter of law or by agreement. 2.6 TERM OF CONTRACT This Contract shall continue in force and effect until December 31, 206075, and until thereafter terminated by any Municipality following not less than twelve (12) months’ written notice to the other Municipalities of its intention to terminate; provided, however, that this Contract may be amended, modified, or terminated at any time by a written document approved and executed by each and every Municipality which is a party to this Contract; and, provided further, however, that this Contract may not in any event be terminated so long as the Authority has bonds, notes, or other obligations outstanding, unless provision for full payment of such obligations, by escrow or otherwise, has been made pursuant to the terms of such obligations. 2.7 ASSETS AND PROPERTIES All assets and properties of the Authority shall be held in trust for the purposes herein mentioned, including the payment of the liabilities of the Authority. 2.8 DISTRIBUTION OF ASSETS UPON TERMINATION In the event of the termination of this Contract and the dissolution of the Authority, all of its assets shall immediately vest in the Municipalities. The assets of the Authority conveyed to each Municipality shall be that proportion which (i) the total dollar amount of electric power and energy purchased and paid for by such Municipality, from the Authority and its predecessor during their corporate existence, bears to (ii) the total dollar Page 246 Item 14. Proposed amendment language in redline Review draft August 1, 2025 Organic Contract Amended and Restated XX/XX/2025 Page 17 of 24 amount of all electric power and energy purchased and paid for by all of the Municipalities, from the Authority and its predecessor during their corporate existence. 2.9 SEAL The corporate seal of the Authority shall be in the form of a circle and have inscribed thereon the name of the Authority and the words “Corporate Seal,” together with such insignia, if any, as the Board of Directors may authorize. 2.10 CONTRACTS Except as otherwise provided by law, the Board of Directors may authorize any officer or officers, agent or agents, to enter into any contract, or execute and deliver any instrument in the name and on behalf of the Authority. 2.11 CHECKS, DRAFTS, AND OTHER FINANCIAL DOCUMENTS All checks, drafts, or other orders for payment of money and all notes, bonds, or other evidences of indebtedness issued in the name of the Authority shall be signed by such officer or officers, agent or agents, employee or employees of the Authority and in such manner as shall be determined by the fiscal resolution. 2.12 DEPOSITS All funds of the Authority shall be deposited in a manner set forth by the fiscal resolution. 2.13 FISCAL YEAR Unless the Board specifies otherwise by resolution, the Authority’s The fiscal year of the Authority shall be the calendar year. Page 247 Item 14. Proposed amendment language in redline Review draft August 1, 2025 Organic Contract Amended and Restated XX/XX/2025 Page 18 of 24 2.14 PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS Unless the Board specifies otherwise by resolution, the Authority’s The principal place of business of the Authority shall be in Fort Collins, Colorado. 3.0 GENERAL POWERS The general powers of the Authority shall include the following powers: (i) ELECTRIC ENERGY To develop electric energy resources and related services, and produce, purchase, and transmit electric energy, in whole or in part, for the benefit of the inhabitants of the Municipalities. (ii) CONTRACTS To make and enter contracts of every kind with the Municipalities, the United States, any state or political subdivision thereof, and any individual, firm, association, partnership, corporation or any other organization of any kind. (iii) AGENTS AND EMPLOYEES To employ agents and employees. (iv) FACILITIES To acquire, construct, manage, maintain, and operate electric energy facilities, works, and improvements and any interests therein, including, without limitation, to acquire, construct, reconstruct, improve, and rehabilitate, repair, operate, and maintain (separately or jointly) generating plants, transmission systems and related facilities for the purpose of delivering electrical power and energy generated thereby to the Municipalities, and any mine, well, pipeline, plant, structure, or other facility for the development, production, manufacture, storage, fabrication, or processing of fossil or nuclear fuel of any kind for use, in whole or in major part, in any of such generating plants, and any railroad cars, trackage, pipes, Page 248 Item 14. Proposed amendment language in redline Review draft August 1, 2025 Organic Contract Amended and Restated XX/XX/2025 Page 19 of 24 equipment, and any structures or facilities of any kind used or useful in the transporting of fuel to any of such generating plants, and to sell, deliver, exchange, or otherwise dispose of the power and energy generated by said plants, and any of the waste or by-products therefrom, and to purchase, lease, or otherwise acquire and equip, maintain, operate, sell, assign, convey, lease, mortgage, pledge, and otherwise dispose of electrical generating plants, transmission systems and related facilities, together with all lands, buildings, equipment, and all other real or personal property, tangible or intangible, necessary or incidental thereto. (v) PROPERTY To acquire, hold, lease (as lessor or lessee), sell, or otherwise dispose of any real or personal property, commodity, and service including, without limitation, to buy, lease, construct, appropriate, contract for, invest in, and otherwise acquire, and to own, hold, maintain, equip, operate, manage, improve, develop, mortgage, and deal in and with, and to sell, lease, exchange, transfer, convey and otherwise dispose of and to mortgage, pledge, hypothecate and otherwise encumber real and personal property of every kind, tangible and intangible. (vi) CONDEMNATION To condemn property for public use, if such property is not owned by any public utility and devoted to such public use pursuant to state authority. (vii) DEBT To incur debts, liabilities, or obligations and to borrow money and, from time to time, to make, accept, endorse, execute, issue, and deliver bonds, debentures, promissory notes, bills of exchange, and other obligations of the Authority for monies borrowed or in payment for property acquired or for any of the other purposes of the Authority, and to secure the payment of any such obligations by mortgage, pledge, deed, indenture, agreement, or other collateral instrument, or by other lien upon, assignment of, or agreement in regard to, all or any part of the properties, rights, assets, contracts, Page 249 Item 14. Proposed amendment language in redline Review draft August 1, 2025 Organic Contract Amended and Restated XX/XX/2025 Page 20 of 24 easements, revenues, and privileges of the Authority wherever situated. (viii) LITIGATION To sue and be sued in its own name. (ix) SEAL To have and to use a corporate seal. (x) RATES To fix, maintain, and revise, or otherwise authorize fees, rates, and charges, and other means to recover costs for functions, services, or facilities provided by the Authority. (xi) REGULATIONS To adopt, by resolution, regulations respecting the exercise of its power and the carrying out of its purposes. (xii) AGENTS To do and perform any acts and things authorized by this section under, through, or by means of an agent or by contracts with any person, firm, corporation or governmental entity. (xiii) JOINT OWNERSHIP To own, operate, and maintain real and personal property, and facilities in common with others, as permitted by law, and to conduct joint, partnership, cooperative, or other operations with others and to exercise all of the powers granted in this Contract in joint partnership or cooperative efforts and operations with others. (xiv) OTHER POWERS To exercise any other powers, consistent with law, that enable the Authority to further which are essential, necessary, incidental, convenient, or conducive to providing the wholesale electric power and energy Page 250 Item 14. Proposed amendment language in redline Review draft August 1, 2025 Organic Contract Amended and Restated XX/XX/2025 Page 21 of 24 requirements of the Municipalities, as well as to accomplishing the purposes, functions, services, and facilities set forth in Sections 2.0, 2.1, and 2.2 of this Organic Contract. 4.0 POLITICAL SUBDIVISION The Authority shall be a political subdivision and a public corporation of the State of Colorado separate from the Municipalities. It shall have the duties, privileges, immunities, rights, liabilities, and disabilities of a public body politic and corporate. 5.0 REVENUE BONDS The Authority is authorized to issue bonds, notes, or other obligations secured by its electric revenues pursuant to the terms, conditions, and authorization contained in C.R.S. § 29-1-204(7). 6.0 DEBT NOT THAT OF MUNICIPALITIES The bonds, notes, and other obligations of the Authority shall not be the debts, liabilities, or obligations of the Municipalities. 7.0 FILING OF CONTRACT A copy of this Contract shall be filed with the Division of Local Government of the State of Colorado within ten (10) days after its execution by the Municipalities. 8.0 NOTICES Any formal notice, demand, or request provided for in this Contract shall be in writing and shall be deemed properly served, given, or made if delivered in person or sent by registered or certified mail, postage prepaid, to the persons specified below: Town of Estes Park, Colorado c/o Town Administrator P.O. Box 1200 Estes Park, Colorado 80517 Page 251 Item 14. Proposed amendment language in redline Review draft August 1, 2025 Organic Contract Amended and Restated XX/XX/2025 Page 22 of 24 City of Fort Collins, Colorado c/o Utilities Executive Director P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, Colorado 80522 City of Longmont, Colorado c/o Director of Longmont Power & Communications 1100 South Sherman Longmont, Colorado 80501 City of Loveland, Colorado c/o Water and Power Director 200 North Wilson Loveland, Colorado 80537 Any Municipality may change its contact information for formal notices by delivering written notice to the other Municipalities at least 30 days before the change is to take effect. 9.0 SEVERABILITY In the event that any of the terms, covenants, or conditions of this Contract or their application shall be held invalid as to any person, corporation, or circumstance by any court having jurisdiction, the remainder of this Contract and the application and effect of its terms, covenants, or conditions to such persons, corporation, or circumstances shall not be affected thereby. 10.0 DUPLICATE ORIGINALS This Contract may be executed in several counterparts, each of which will be an original but all of which together shall constitute one and the same instrument. Page 252 Item 14. Proposed amendment language in redline Review draft August 1, 2025 Organic Contract Amended and Restated XX/XX/2025 Page 23 of 24 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Municipalities have caused this Contract, as amended, to be executed as of the day of , 2025. TOWN OF ESTES PARK, COLORADO ATTEST: By: By: Mayor Town Clerk CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO ATTEST: By: By: Mayor City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: Assistant City Attorney CITY OF LOVELAND, COLORADO ATTEST: By: By: Mayor City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: Assistant City Attorney CITY OF LONGMONT, COLORADO ATTEST: By: By: Mayor City Clerk Page 253 Item 14. Proposed amendment language in redline Review draft August 1, 2025 Organic Contract Amended and Restated XX/XX/2025 Page 24 of 24 APPROVED AS TO FORM AND SUBSTANCE: Director of Longmont Power & Communications APPROVED AS TO FORM: Assistant City Attorney PROOFREAD: Page 254 Item 14. Utilities – Energy Board 700 Wood St. Fort Collins, CO 80522 970.221.6702 970.416.2208 - fax fcgov.com M E M O R A N D U M DATE: September 8, 2025 TO: Mayor Arndt and City Councilmembers FROM: Brian Smith, Energy Board Chairperson RE: Extension of Platte River’s Organic Contract & Power Supply Agreement BACKGROUND During our regular meeting on July 10, 2025, the Fort Collins Energy Board received an update from Fort Collins Light & Power Director Travis Walker regarding the proposed extension of the Organic Contract and Power Supply Agreement, which would move the current end dates from 2060 to 2075. ENERGY BOARD DUTIES AND FUNCTIONS The Energy Board has considered the proposed extension of the Organic Contract and Power Supply Agreement as presented by staff in accordance with our chartered duties and functions, specifically: (2) To advise the City Council and staff in developing City policies that encourage the incorporation of energy conservation and efficiency, carbon emissions reduction and renewable energy into the development and provision of City utility services, the design and construction of City transportation projects, and the way in which the City impacts the overall built environment within the community; (3) To advise the City Council and staff regarding the alignment of energy programs and policies with City, ratepayer and community values and service delivery expectations. OBSERVATIONS • Enhanced Flexibility for Renewable Integration: The proposed extension provides PRPA with the long-term stability necessary to invest in renewable energy infrastructure, including so- lar and battery storage systems, which are essential for meeting the city's renewable energy targets. • Governance and Operational Modernization: Updates to the Organic Contract and Power Supply Agreement include modernizing governance structures and incorporating language that accommodates emerging technologies such as distributed energy resources and vir- tual power plants, ensuring the agreements remain relevant in a rapidly evolving energy landscape. • Financial Planning and Bonding Capacity: Extending the agreements supports PRPA's fi- nancial planning, including the ability to issue bonds for infrastructure investments, there- Docusign Envelope ID: 8BCDE0AB-CDF7-41F9-BAEE-604A82FFCD22 Page 255 Item 14. by facilitating the necessary capital expenditures to modernize the energy grid and integrate renewable energy sources. • Regional Collaboration and Policy Alignment: The extension reflects ongoing collaboration among owner communities, ensuring consistency in energy policy and joint efforts to achieve shared sustainability and renewable energy goals. • Limits on Fort Collins Utilities and Residential Generation: The Power Supply Agreement places limits on Fort Collins Utilities electricity generation to 1% of peak load and purchase from retail customers of off-premises generation limited to “the customer’s annual average electricity consumption,” except by PRPA consent. These provisions invite examination and have brought some stakeholder concerns, especially in view of the nearly 50-year term of the agreement. We note that while the energy landscape will certainly change over the term of the agreement, we do not envision circumstances where it would benefit the community to directly compete with PRPA by generating a significant proportion of consumed electrici- ty from new City-owned infrastructure. Likewise, the explicit support in the agreement of on-premises electricity generation and storage by retail customers, as well as VPP partici- pation, help address these concerns. Finally, we note the following language committing PRPA to engage in good faith discussions regarding unforeseen increases in Fort Collins’ electricity generation: “Platte River commits that it will meet with Fort Collins to discuss in good faith an increase in the total rated capacity limit. RECOMMENDATIONS Given the benefits and advantages of extending the end dates and considering the mutually beneficial and well-established partnership between the City of Fort Collins, the Platte River Power Authority, and our fellow owner communities, the Energy Board recommends supporting the proposed extension. In doing so, the Board emphasizes the importance of ensuring that PRPA continues to prioritize system reliability, accelerate the transition to renewable energy resources, and maintain its commitment to reducing carbon emissions in line with Fort Collins’ Our Climate Future goals. The Board believes that advancing the contract extension in tandem with these priorities will reaffirm the community’s values and long-term energy and climate goals. As always, the Energy Board is grateful for the opportunity to provide comment and appreciates City Council’s consideration. Respectfully submitted on behalf of the Energy Board, __________________________ Brian Preston Smith, Energy Board Chairperson Energy Board cc: Brian Tholl, Energy Services Director Travis Walker, Light & Power Director Christie Fredrickson, Energy Board Support Docusign Envelope ID: 8BCDE0AB-CDF7-41F9-BAEE-604A82FFCD22 Page 256 Item 14. Headline Copy Goes Here Deputy City Manager Tyler Marr 8/26/2025 Organic Contract and Power Supply Agreement Update and Timeline Page 257 Item 14. Headline Copy Goes Here 3 Organic Contract & Power Supply Agreement Relationship Page 258 Item 14. Headline Copy Goes Here 4 What is the Organic Contract? Four-way agreement among Platte River’s member owner cities Serves as Platte River’s “constitution” —establishes the governance structure Colorado law empowers governmental units to contract with each other to jointly provide any function, service, or facility (C.R.S. §§29-1-203) including a governmental power authority (C.R.S. §§, 29-1-204)) Grants Platte River enumerated powers, including bonding authority, similar to a power authority under state statute With proper authorization, Platte River may also provide additional services for its owner communities The current agreement runs through December 31, 2060 Page 259 Item 14. Headline Copy Goes Here 5 Organic Contract Updates •Support long-term planning and stability Extend Agreement Terms •Align with current law; recognize industry and model shifts •Clarifies board and staff roles Modernize Language •Remove references to specific product offerings Increase Flexibility Page 260 Item 14. Headline Copy Goes Here 6 What is the Power Supply Agreement? Separate bilateral agreements between Platte River and each owner community Terms are essentially identical across all agreements Reflects each owner community’s mutual commitment to follow shared rules Secures all revenue bonds issued by Platte River Revenues from energy purchases by owner communities Fund Platte River’s operations, capital investments, and debt service Page 261 Item 14. Headline Copy Goes Here 8 Power Supply Agreement (PSA)–“All Requirements” What “All Requirements” Means: •Platte River supplies nearly all electricity to each owner community •Owner communities must purchase nearly all of their electricity exclusively from Platte River Three Key Exceptions: •Legacy generation •Pre-1974 generation resources owned by the community •New small-scale generation •Up to 1 MW or 1% of the owner community’s peak load (whichever is greater) •Net-metered energy •Includes distributed energy such as solar, battery storage, and other customer-owned DERs Page 262 Item 14. Headline Copy Goes Here 10 PSA: Modernizing Carve-Out Language to Support Shared Goals •Ongoing, shared efforts toward a reliable, affordable, and rapidly decarbonized energy portfolio Replace detailed carve-out terms with a broad commitment to: •Current clean energy goals •A more collaborative and adaptive approach Update recitals to reflect: •Use flexible, enabling language that supports innovation and adaptation Shift away from prescriptive meeting requirements around distributed generation •Should not determine how a resource is treated in terms of carve- outs or eligibility Clarify that interconnection point (high voltage vs. distribution) Page 263 Item 14. Headline Copy Goes Here 11 PSA: Contract Term and Market Compatibility Updates •Support long-term planning and stability Extend Agreement Terms •Align with current law; increase flexibility for solar Modernize Net Metering Language •Ensure compatibility with organized market rules •Enable transmission cost recovery via formula rates Update Rate Provisions •Support efficient participation in organized markets Revise Market & Surplus Sales Terms Page 264 Item 14. Headline Copy Goes Here Dec 12, 2024 Jan – Feb 2025 March 2025 April 2025 May- June 2025 July 2025 Aug 2025 Mid-Sept 2025 Sept 25th October 2025 12 Timeline and Next Steps Kickoff discussion with Platte River Board Present key concepts to Platte River Board Owner community outreach Present initial redlined drafts to owner communities Gather feedback and refine proposed amendments Final check-in with owner community attorneys Board council Review Platte River Board Confirmation “Pens down” – circulate final documents for approval processes City councils and town board approve Organic Contract & PSA amendments Platte River board approves PSA amendments All parties sign Page 265 Item 14. Headline Copy Goes Here Questions? 13 Page 266 Item 14. -1- ORDINANCE NO. 155, 2025 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AUTHORIZING AN AMENDED AND RESTATED ORGANIC CONTRACT FOR PLATTE RIVER POWER AUTHORITY A. The City is one of four member municipalities that entered into an organic contract establishing the Platte River Power Authority (“Platte River”). B. The first such contract was entered into in 1975, and the contract was last amended by the execution of an agreement entitled “Amended and Restated Organic Contract Establishing Platte River Power Authority As A Separate Governmental Entity” dated May 30, 2019 (the “Existing Organic Contract”), as approved by City Council on April 16, 2019, by Ordinance No. 053, 2019. C. The Existing Organic Contract extended the operation of Platte River on behalf of its member owner cities though the date of December 31, 20 60. D. The four member municipalities recently negotiated a proposed, updated agreement entitled “Amended and Restated Organic Contract Establishing Platte River Power Authority as a Separate Governmental Entity” (the “Updated Organic Contract”), a copy of which is on file with the City Clerk, dated September 8, 2025, the purpose of which is to replace and supersede the Existing Organic Contract. E. The Updated Organic Contract, if approved by the parties, would extend amendments to the Existing Organic Contract made in 2019, so as to: 1) Extend the term of the agreement,  The proposed contract extends the life of Platte River Power Authority through 2075, an extension of 15 years past the current contract; 2) Modernize and update the language of the agreement,  The majority of changes to the Organic Contract can be characterized as language modernization and clarify existing language to better reflect how the organization is currently structured and operated.  Some changes reflect changes to state law and reflect the realities of joining an organized market for power purchases and sales.  Board member, officer and board chair responsibilities are clarified to reflect the organization’s current structure and how business is conducted by Platte River Power Authority.  Additionally, a change is being made to clarify that board members should either be members of a city’s elected body or staff ; and, Page 267 Item 14. -2- 3) Increasing flexibility,  The clean energy transition will require new initiatives and programs to be administered by Platte River and the owner communities, and therefore, having specified lists of exact product offerings makes less sense than in the past. The Organic Contract language has been broadened to provide flexibility into the future on what Platte River may work on and provide to owner communities as energy markets, generation resources and power delivery continue to evolve. F. It is the understanding of City Utility Services staff that respective staff members of the electric utilities operated by the City of Loveland, the City of Longmont and the Town of Estes Park will be recommending approval of the Updated Organic Contract to their respective governing bodies as well. In light of the foregoing recitals, which the Council hereby makes and adopts as determinations and findings, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. The City Council hereby finds that it is in the best interests of the City to replace and supersede the Existing Organic Contract with the Updat ed Organic Contract. Section 2. The Updated Organic Contract is hereby approved, and the Mayor is hereby authorized and directed to execute the same on behalf of the City in substantially the form on file in the office of the City Clerk and as attached hereto as Exhibit A. Section 3. The City Council hereby directs the Energy Board to annually review the terms and conditions of the Updated Organic Contract and suggest any revisions to the City Council by formal board action. Page 268 Item 14. -3- Introduced, considered favorably on first reading on September 16, 2025, and approved on second reading for final passage on October 7, 2025 . __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk Effective Date: October 17, 2025 Approving Attorney: Yvette Lewis-Molock Exhibit: Exhibit A – 2025 Organic Contract Page 269 Item 14. EXHIBIT A TO ORDINANCE NO. 155, 2025 Page 270 Item 14. EXHIBIT A TO ORDINANCE NO. 155, 2025 Page 271 Item 14. EXHIBIT A TO ORDINANCE NO. 155, 2025 Page 272 Item 14. EXHIBIT A TO ORDINANCE NO. 155, 2025 Page 273 Item 14. EXHIBIT A TO ORDINANCE NO. 155, 2025 Page 274 Item 14. EXHIBIT A TO ORDINANCE NO. 155, 2025 Page 275 Item 14. EXHIBIT A TO ORDINANCE NO. 155, 2025 Page 276 Item 14. EXHIBIT A TO ORDINANCE NO. 155, 2025 Page 277 Item 14. EXHIBIT A TO ORDINANCE NO. 155, 2025 Page 278 Item 14. EXHIBIT A TO ORDINANCE NO. 155, 2025 Page 279 Item 14. EXHIBIT A TO ORDINANCE NO. 155, 2025 Page 280 Item 14. EXHIBIT A TO ORDINANCE NO. 155, 2025 Page 281 Item 14. EXHIBIT A TO ORDINANCE NO. 155, 2025 Page 282 Item 14. EXHIBIT A TO ORDINANCE NO. 155, 2025 Page 283 Item 14. EXHIBIT A TO ORDINANCE NO. 155, 2025 Page 284 Item 14. EXHIBIT A TO ORDINANCE NO. 155, 2025 Page 285 Item 14. EXHIBIT A TO ORDINANCE NO. 155, 2025 Page 286 Item 14. EXHIBIT A TO ORDINANCE NO. 155, 2025 Page 287 Item 14. EXHIBIT A TO ORDINANCE NO. 155, 2025 Page 288 Item 14. EXHIBIT A TO ORDINANCE NO. 155, 2025 Page 289 Item 14. EXHIBIT A TO ORDINANCE NO. 155, 2025 Page 290 Item 14. EXHIBIT A TO ORDINANCE NO. 155, 2025 Page 291 Item 14. EXHIBIT A TO ORDINANCE NO. 155, 2025 Page 292 Item 14. EXHIBIT A TO ORDINANCE NO. 155, 2025 Page 293 Item 14. -1- ORDINANCE NO. 156, 2025 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AUTHORIZING AN AMENDED AND RESTATED CONTRACT WITH PLATTE RIVER POWER AUTHORITY FOR THE SUPPLY OF ELECTRIC POWER AND ENERGY A. The City is one of four member municipalities that entered into an organic contract establishing the Platte River Power Authority (“Platte River”). B. The first such contract was entered into in 1975, and the contract was last amended by the execution of an Amended and Restated Organic Contract Establishing Platte River Power Authority as a Separate Governmental Entity dated May 30, 2019 (the “Existing Organic Contract”), as approved by City Council on April 16, 2019, by Ordinance No. 054, 2019. C. The four member municipalities recently negotiated a proposed, updated agreement entitled “Amended and Restated Organic Contract Establishing Platte River Power Authority as a Separate Governmental Entity” (the “Updated Organic Contract”), the purpose of which is to replace and supersede the Existing Organic Contract. D. The City Council, by separate ordinance, has approved the Updated Organic Contract. E. On February 22, 1980, the City and Platte River entered into a Transmission Facilities Agreement (the “Facilities Agreement”) to establish the parties’ rights a nd obligations related to their respective electric system facilities and to provide for shared use or lease of certain specified facilities. F. On March 31, 1980, the City also entered into a Contract for the Supply of Electric Power and Energy (the “Original Supply Contract”) with Platte River which established the terms and conditions of the City’s purchase of electric power and energy from Platte River. G. On July 21, 1998, the City Council approved an amendment to the Original Supply Contract extending its termination date from December 31, 2020, to December 31, 2040 (the “1998 Supply Contract Amendment”). H. On June 1, 2010, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 062, 2010, approving an updated “Amended and Restated Contract for the Supply of Ele ctric Power and Energy” (the “Existing Supply Contract”) with Platte River, which replaced and superseded the Facilities Agreement and the 1998 Supply Contract, and extended the expiration date to December 31, 2050. I. On April 16, 2019, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 054, 2019, and the Fort Collins Electric Utility Enterprise Board (the “Enterprise”) adopted Ordinance No. 005, 2019, approving an updated “Amended and Restated Contract for the Supply of Page 294 Item 14. -2- Electric Power and Energy” (the “Updated Supply Contract”), and extended the expiration date to December 31, 2060. J. The City and Platte River recently negotiated a further updated “Amended and Restated Contract for the Supply of Electric Power and Energy” (the “Updated Supply Contract”), a copy of which is on file with the City Clerk, dated September 8, 2025, the purpose of which is to replace and supersede the Existing Supply Contract. K. The Updated Power Supply agreement, if approved by the parties, would extend amendments to the Existing Power Supply agreement made in 2019, so as to:  Extend the term of the agreement to 2075;  Change the recitals to reflect shared commitment to a reliable, cost-effective and rapidly decarbonized energy portfolio and indicate that a collaborative, flexible approach will be necessary to meet current energy goals;  Simplify carve-out terms, without changing base all-requirements provisions, to align solar and net-metering provisions with current law, increase flexibility in those areas, and enable the Virtual Power Plant to stand up effectively;  Clarify that a resource’s connection point being on high-voltage or distribution infrastructure is not what is relevant in determining carve-out eligibility;  Remove reference to specific metering requirements pertaining to distributed energy generation and instead use flexible language that encourages and allows for innovation and adaptation; and,  Make numerous changes to support joining an organized market, including ensuring rate provisions are compatible and that market and surplus sales terms are modernized. L. The Updated Supply Contract is also being considered by the Enterprise by separate ordinance adopted in the same manner as this Ordinance, including but not limited to execution by the Mayor as president and the City Clerk as secretary of the Enterprise. In light of the foregoing recitals, which the Council hereby makes and adopts as determinations and findings, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. The City Council hereby finds that it is in the best interests of the City to replace and supersede the Existing Supply Contract with the Updated Supply Contract. Section 2. The Updated Supply Contract is hereby approved, and the Mayor is hereby authorized and directed to execute the same on behalf of the City in substantiall y the form on file in the office of the City Clerk and as attached hereto as Exhibit A, provided that the Electric Utility Enterprise is added as a party to the same prior to signing. Page 295 Item 14. -3- Introduced, considered favorably on first reading on September 16, 20 25, and approved on second reading for final passage on October 7, 2025. ______________________________ Mayor ATTEST: ______________________________ City Clerk Effective Date: October 17, 2025 Approving Attorney: Yvette Lewis-Molock Exhibit: Exhibit A - 2025 Power Supply Agreement Page 296 Item 14. Proposed signature-ready document Fort Collins Power Supply Agreement Amended and Restated XX/XX/2025 Page 1 of 11 AMENDED CONTRACT FOR THE SUPPLY OF ELECTRIC POWER AND ENERGY This contract, made this day of 2025, between PLATTE RIVER POWER AUTHORITY, a political subdivision organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Colorado (hereinafter called “Platte River”) and the CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORADO, a municipal corporation of the State of Colorado, by and through its City Council and Electric Enterprise Board (hereinafter called “Fort Collins.”) WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, Platte River was formed by Estes Park, Fort Collins, Longmont, and Loveland (hereinafter collectively called “Municipalities”) in order to provide the wholesale power and energy requirements of the Municipalities in a reliable, cost-effective, and environmentally responsible manner; and WHEREAS, Platte River owns, operates, and maintains electric generating facilities, transmission lines, substations, and related facilities for the purpose of supplying electric power and energy to the electric systems owned and operated by the Municipalities for resale; and WHEREAS, Platte River has heretofore entered into or will enter into agreements for the sale of electric power and energy similar in form to this Agreement with the cities of Estes Park, Longmont, and Loveland; and WHEREAS, Fort Collins desires to purchase electric power and energy from Platte River on the terms and conditions herein set forth; and WHEREAS, the Municipalities and Platte River share common decarbonization goals they can most efficiently and equitably achieve through ongoing, forward-looking collaboration as the electric utility industry, energy-producing technologies, and relevant laws and regulations continue to evolve; and WHEREAS, acting through the Platte River, the Municipalities wish to ensure an ongoing source of electric power and energy that is reliable, cost-effective, and environmentally responsible. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual undertakings herein contained, the Parties hereto agree as follows: EXHIBIT A TO ORDINANCE NO. 156, 2025 Page 297 Item 14. Proposed signature-ready document Fort Collins Power Supply Agreement Amended and Restated XX/XX/2025 Page 2 of 11 Article 1: Sale and Purchase of Electric Power and Energy (a) Platte River shall sell and deliver to Fort Collins and Fort Collins shall purchase and receive from Platte River all electric power and energy which Fort Collins shall require for the operation of its municipal electric system to the extent that Platte River shall have such power and energy available; provided, however, that (1) Fort Collins shall have the right to continue to generate its own power and energy to the extent of the capacity of its generating facilities in service on September 5, 1974, and may also generate power and energy for its own use from any new generation resource(s) owned and operated by Fort Collins provided that the total rated capacity of all such new generation is no greater than 1,000 kW or one percent of the peak load of Fort Collins, whichever is greater, provided further that if Fort Collins develops new generation resources of a total rated capacity as set forth above Platte River commits that it will meet with Fort Collins to discuss in good faith an increase in the total rated capacity limit, and (2) Fort Collins may purchase energy from retail customers with on-premises energy production facilities or energy storage and from retail customers participating in Fort Collins-sponsored grid support programs (such as a virtual power plant), consistent with applicable law, Fort Collins’ policies governing customer-owned resources, and provisions in Platte River’s General Power Bond Resolution requiring protection of the rights and security of Platte River’s bondholders. Any retail customer-owned energy production or storage facilities not on the customer’s premises that exceed the customer’s annual average electricity consumption require Platte River’s separate written consent. (b) Subject to the provisions of Article 2(a), Fort Collins hereby binds itself to take and pay for all power and energy that is generated, purchased, or otherwise obtained by Platte River, and is furnished to Fort Collins for resale pursuant to Article 1(a) hereof, said payment to be made at the rates set forth in the Tariff Schedules of Platte River in effect at the time the power and energy is furnished to Fort Collins. Article 2: Rate for Power and Energy (a) Fort Collins shall pay Platte River for all electric power and energy furnished hereunder at the rates and on the terms and conditions as provided in the Platte River Tariff Schedules; provided, however, that notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, the obligation of Fort Collins to pay Platte River for all electric power and energy furnished EXHIBIT A TO ORDINANCE NO. 156, 2025 Page 298 Item 14. Proposed signature-ready document Fort Collins Power Supply Agreement Amended and Restated XX/XX/2025 Page 3 of 11 hereunder shall be, and is, a special obligation of Fort Collins payable solely from revenues to be received by Fort Collins from the sale of electric power and energy to its electric utility customers during the term hereof and is not a lien, charge, or liability against Fort Collins or against any property or funds of Fort Collins other than revenues to be received by Fort Collins from the sale of electric power and energy to its electric utility customers during the term hereof, and the obligation to pay Platte River for all electric power and energy furnished hereunder does not constitute a debt, liability, or obligation of Fort Collins other than from its revenues to be received from the sale of electric power and energy to its electric utility customers during the term hereof, and Fort Collins is not otherwise obligated to pay such obligation. (b) The Board of Directors of Platte River, at such intervals as it shall deem appropriate, but in any event not less frequently than once in each calendar year, shall review the rates for electric power and energy furnished hereunder and under similar agreements with the other Municipalities and, if necessary, shall revise such rates to produce revenues which shall be sufficient, but only sufficient, with the revenues of Platte River from all other sources, (i) to meet the cost of operation and maintenance (including, without limitation, fuel, replacements, insurance, taxes, fees, and administrative and general overhead expense) of the electric generating plants, transmission system, and related facilities of Platte River; (ii) to enable Platte River to operate effectively through bilateral trading, organized energy markets, and use of third-party transmission facilities to protect the reliability and value of Platte River assets; (iii) to make payments of principal and interest on all indebtedness and revenue bonds of Platte River and provide an earnings margin adequate to enable Platte River to obtain revenue bond financing on favorable terms; and (iv) to provide for the establishment and maintenance of reasonable reserves. (c) Platte River shall cause a notice in writing to be given to each Municipality to which it furnishes electric power and energy, which notice shall set out each revision of the rates with the effective date thereof, which shall be not less than 30 days after the date of the notice. All rate adjustments shall apply equally to all Municipalities to which Platte River EXHIBIT A TO ORDINANCE NO. 156, 2025 Page 299 Item 14. Proposed signature-ready document Fort Collins Power Supply Agreement Amended and Restated XX/XX/2025 Page 4 of 11 furnishes electric power and energy, unless otherwise agreed upon, and shall not be discriminatory. Fort Collins agrees that the rates from time to time established by the Board of Directors of Platte River shall be deemed to be substituted for the rates presently contained in the Tariff Schedules and agrees to pay for electric power and energy furnished to it hereunder after the effective date of any revisions to the Tariff Schedules at such revised rates. Article 3: Covenants of Platte River (a) Platte River shall use reasonable diligence to furnish a constant and uninterrupted supply of electric power and energy hereunder. If the supply of electric power and energy shall fail, or be interrupted, or become defective through uncontrollable forces, as defined herein, Platte River shall not be liable for any claim or damages caused thereby. (b) To satisfy the Municipalities’ electric power and energy requirements Platte River may purchase and sell capacity, energy, and related services through bilateral sales, organized energy markets, or other means to balance the Municipalities’ projected near-, mid-, and long-term needs with Platte River’s available resources. (c) Platte River shall plan, design, construct, and operate electric power facilities as necessary to fulfill its obligations under this Agreement, consistent with policies established by its Board of Directors. The Parties shall meet periodically, in conjunction with the other Municipalities, to coordinate policies, plans, and programs to support their shared goals and accommodate changing industry conditions, technologies, and business models. Article 4: Covenants of Fort Collins (a) Fort Collins agrees to maintain rates for electric power and energy furnished to its electric utility customers which will, after payment of all of Fort Collins’ costs of operation and maintenance (including, without limitation, replacements, insurance, administrative and general overhead expense), return to Fort Collins sufficient revenue to meet its obligations to Platte River hereunder. EXHIBIT A TO ORDINANCE NO. 156, 2025 Page 300 Item 14. Proposed signature-ready document Fort Collins Power Supply Agreement Amended and Restated XX/XX/2025 Page 5 of 11 (b) Fort Collins shall not sell at wholesale any of the electric energy delivered to it hereunder to any of its customers for resale by that customer, unless such resale is specifically approved in writing by Platte River. (c) Fort Collins acknowledges that it is familiar with the provision of Platte River’s contract with the Western Area Power Administration, which requires, as a condition of the purchase of federally generated power, that the Municipalities comply with certain provisions of the “General Power Contract Provisions,” which is attached hereto as Attachment A. Fort Collins acknowledges its compliance obligations under the General Power Contract Provisions, as that document presently exists and as it may be modified in the future. Article 5: Conditions of Delivery of Power and Energy (a) The electric power and energy to be furnished by Platte River shall be alternating current, 60 hertz, three-phase, subject to conditions of delivery and measurement as hereinafter provided and in the Tariff Schedules. (b) Responsibilities for the facilities through which electric power and energy is delivered are set forth in Attachment B of this Agreement, attached hereto and made a part hereof. (c) Fort Collins shall make and pay for all final connections between its system and the system owned by, or available to, Platte River at the points of delivery agreed upon. (d) Unless otherwise agreed, Fort Collins shall install, own, and maintain the necessary substation equipment at the points of delivery from the system of, or available to, Platte River and shall install, own, and maintain switching and protective equipment of adequate design and sufficient capacity beyond such points of delivery to enable Fort Collins to take and use the electric power and energy supplied hereunder without hazard to such system. (e) To provide adequate service to Fort Collins, Platte River agrees to increase the capacity of an existing transmission point of delivery, or to establish a new transmission point of delivery at a mutually agreeable location, of a design capacity of not less than 20,000 kVa maximum nameplate rating at 55° C. rise, and in accordance with this Agreement. (f) Fort Collins shall give Platte River as much advance written notice as possible, but no less than two years’ prior written notice of the need to increase the capacity of an existing EXHIBIT A TO ORDINANCE NO. 156, 2025 Page 301 Item 14. Proposed signature-ready document Fort Collins Power Supply Agreement Amended and Restated XX/XX/2025 Page 6 of 11 transmission point of delivery or the need for a new transmission point of delivery. If new transmission is required, Fort Collins shall give Platte River as much advance written notice as possible, but no less than four years’ prior written notice. The notice shall specify the amount of additional or new capacity, the new transmission required, and the desired initial date of its operation. Platte River shall, within 60 days after receipt of such notice, and on the basis of the best information available to Platte River from system plans and load projections for Fort Collins, inform Fort Collins in writing of Platte River’s plans and schedules with respect to the supply of the additional capacity requested by Fort Collins, and shall thereafter keep Fort Collins informed of Platte River’s progress in supplying such additional capacity. Platte River and Fort Collins shall collaborate throughout the planning and construction process as needed to manage any unanticipated delays or other problems caused by uncontrollable forces. Any written notice requesting additional capacity at an existing point of delivery or the establishment of a new point of delivery shall provide to Platte River any and all authority necessary for its facilities to occupy the property of Fort Collins during the period in which that point of delivery is used by Platte River for the delivery of power and energy. (g) If Fort Collins requires the construction of a 115 kV or 230 kV transmission line for additional service where such line is a tap or radial line over which energy can flow in only one direction, as distinguished from a system line over which energy can flow in either direction, then ownership, operation, and maintenance of such 115 kV or 230 kV transmission line will be undertaken by Platte River pursuant to a separate agreement with Fort Collins which provides for an appropriate sharing of the annual costs of ownership and operations of such line for as long as such energy flow and delivery conditions prevail. Article 6: Consultation on System Planning (a) At least once each year, on or before July 1, Platte River shall consult Fort Collins concerning its requirements for transmission facilities to effect delivery of power and energy by Platte River. The date for such annual consultation shall be set by agreement of the Parties. (b) At least 30 days prior to the date of such annual consultation, Fort Collins shall provide Platte River with two copies of its latest estimate of requirements for delivery of power and energy covering a future period of 10 years. Platte River shall review Fort Collins’ annual EXHIBIT A TO ORDINANCE NO. 156, 2025 Page 302 Item 14. Proposed signature-ready document Fort Collins Power Supply Agreement Amended and Restated XX/XX/2025 Page 7 of 11 estimates and shall consider them in preparing Platte River’s annual system plan. Following Platte River’s annual consultations on delivery requirements with all Municipalities, Platte River shall prepare an annual system plan for the delivery of power and energy to all Municipalities covering a future period of 10 years. Decisions regarding the construction of any transmission and delivery facilities by Platte River primarily to supply Fort Collins, will take into account Fort Collins’ long-range distribution requirements and costs and the long-range costs and benefits of alternative service plans. Platte River’s annual system plan shall include appropriate load flow and stability studies and a copy thereof shall be furnished to Fort Collins if requested. Article 7: Measurement of Power and Energy (a) Metering equipment shall be furnished, installed, and maintained by Platte River at each point of delivery to Fort Collins at the high voltage side of the transforming equipment or at such other points as agreed upon by the Parties. (b) Loss adjustments for high voltage side or remote metering shall be as specified in the Tariff Schedule or as otherwise agreed by the Parties. Article 8: Meter Readings and Payment of Bills (a) Platte River shall read meters and invoice Fort Collins for power and energy furnished hereunder at approximately monthly intervals. Such invoices shall be due and payable to Platte River within 15 days from date of issuance and shall become delinquent thereafter. (b) If Fort Collins’ monthly bill becomes delinquent, late charges at the rate of 1½ % per month of the unpaid balance shall be added, and if such bill is delinquent for a period of 15 days or longer, Platte River may discontinue delivery of electric power and energy not less than15 days following written notice to Fort Collins. Article 9: Meter Testing and Billing Adjustment (a) Platte River shall test and calibrate meters by comparison with accurate standards at intervals of 12 months, and shall also make special meter tests at any time at Fort Collins’ request. The cost of all tests shall be borne by Platte River; provided, however, that if any special meter test made at Fort Collins’ request shall disclose that the meters are recording EXHIBIT A TO ORDINANCE NO. 156, 2025 Page 303 Item 14. Proposed signature-ready document Fort Collins Power Supply Agreement Amended and Restated XX/XX/2025 Page 8 of 11 accurately, Fort Collins shall reimburse Platte River for the cost of such test. Meters registering within 2% above or below normal shall be deemed to be accurate. (b) The readings of any meter which are disclosed by test to be inaccurate shall be corrected from the beginning of the monthly billing period immediately preceding the billing period during which the test was made; provided, that no correction shall be made for a longer period than such inaccuracy is determined by Platte River to have existed. If a meter fails to register, the electric power and energy delivered during such period of failure shall, for billing purposes, be estimated by Platte River from the best information available. (c) Platte River shall notify Fort Collins in advance of any meter reading or test so that Fort Collins’ representative may be present at such meter reading or test. Article 10: Right of Occupancy and Access Both Parties shall have a revocable license to occupy the property of the other Party necessary to deliver and receive power and energy under this Agreement as described in Attachment B. Duly authorized representatives of either Party shall be permitted to enter the premises of the other Party at all reasonable times in order to carry out the provisions of this Agreement and those described in Attachment B. Article 11: Uncontrollable Forces Neither Party to this Agreement shall be considered to be in default in performance of any of its obligations, except the agreement to make payment, when a failure of performance shall be due to an uncontrollable force. The term “uncontrollable force” means any cause beyond the control of the Party affected, including but not restricted to, failure of or threat of failure of facilities, flood, earthquake, storm, fire, lightning, epidemic, war, riot, civil disturbance or disobedience, labor dispute, labor or material shortage, sabotage, restraint by court order or public authority and action or inaction by, or failure to obtain the necessary authorization or approvals from, any governmental agency or authority, which by the exercise of due diligence such Party could not reasonably have been expected to avoid and which by exercise of due diligence it shall be unable to overcome. Nothing contained herein shall require a Party to settle any strike or labor dispute in which it may be involved. Either Party rendered unable to fulfill any of its obligations under this Agreement by reason of an uncontrollable force shall give prompt written notice of such fact, if EXHIBIT A TO ORDINANCE NO. 156, 2025 Page 304 Item 14. Proposed signature-ready document Fort Collins Power Supply Agreement Amended and Restated XX/XX/2025 Page 9 of 11 reasonable to do so, to the other Party and shall exercise due diligence to remove such inability with all reasonable dispatch. Article 12: Enforceability The Parties hereto recognize that there are legal constraints imposed upon them by the constitution, statutes, and rules and regulations of the State of Colorado and of the United States, and imposed upon them by their respective governing statutes, charters, ordinances, rules and regulations, and that, subject to such constraints, the Parties intend to carry out the terms and conditions of this Agreement. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement to the contrary, in no event shall either of the Parties exercise any power or take any action which shall be prohibited by applicable law. Whenever possible, each provision of this Agreement shall be interpreted in such a manner so as to be effective and valid under applicable law. Article 13: Term of Agreement This Agreement shall become effective when signed by both Parties, and shall amend and supersede the existing Contract for the Supply of Electric Power and Energy between Platte River and Fort Collins, dated May 30, 2019. This Agreement shall remain in effect until December 31, 2075, and thereafter until terminated by either Party giving the other at least 12 months’ prior written notice of termination. Article 14: Notices Any formal notice provided for in this Agreement, and the payment of monies due, shall be deemed properly served, given or made, if delivered in person or sent by regular mail to the persons specified below: For Platte River: For Fort Collins: General Manager Utilities General Manager Platte River Power Authority City of Fort Collins 2000 East Horsetooth Road P. O. Box 580 Fort Collins, Colorado 80525 Fort Collins, Colorado 80522 The Parties may exchange routine communications concerning this Agreement by electronic means or any other method acceptable to both Parties. Either Party may change its contact EXHIBIT A TO ORDINANCE NO. 156, 2025 Page 305 Item 14. Proposed signature-ready document Fort Collins Power Supply Agreement Amended and Restated XX/XX/2025 Page 10 of 11 information for formal notices by delivering written notice to the other Party at least 30 days before the change is to take effect. Article 15: Severability In the event that any of the terms, covenants, or conditions of this Agreement or their application shall be held invalid as to any person or circumstance by any Court having jurisdiction, the remainder of this Agreement and the application of its terms, covenants, or conditions to such persons or circumstances shall not be affected thereby. EXHIBIT A TO ORDINANCE NO. 156, 2025 Page 306 Item 14. Proposed signature-ready document Fort Collins Power Supply Agreement Amended and Restated XX/XX/2025 Page 11 of 11 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written. General Manager Secretary Mayor City Clerk Assistant City Attorney FORT COLLINS ELECTRIC UTILITY ENTERPRISE: ATTEST: By: By: Enterprise Board President Enterprise Board Secretary EXHIBIT A TO ORDINANCE NO. 156, 2025 Page 307 Item 14. Effective July 17, 2025 Page 1 of 13 WESTERN AREA POWER ADMINISTRATION GENERAL POWER CONTRACT PROVISIONS Page I.APPLICABILITY. 1.Applicability ............................................................................................................................................. 2 II.DELIVERY OF SERVICE PROVISIONS. 2.Character of Service ...................................................................................................................................... 2 3.Use of Capacity or Energy in Excess of Contract Obligation ....................................................................... 2 4.Continuity of Service .................................................................................................................................... 2 5.Multiple Points of Delivery........................................................................................................................ 2-3 6.Metering ........................................................................................................................................................ 3 7.Existence of Transmission Service Contract ................................................................................................. 3 8.Conditions of Transmission Service ............................................................................................................. 4 9.Multiple Points of Delivery Involving Direct and Indirect Deliveries .......................................................... 4 10.Construction, Operation, and Maintenance of Contractor’s Power System .................................................. 4 III.RATES, BILLING, AND PAYMENT PROVISIONS. 11.Change of Rates ............................................................................................................................................ 5 12.Minimum Seasonal or Annual Capacity Charge ........................................................................................... 5 13.Billing and Payment ...................................................................................................................................... 5 14.Nonpayment of Bills in Full When Due .................................................................................................... 5-6 15.Adjustments for Fractional Billing Period .................................................................................................... 6 16.Adjustments for Curtailments to Firm Service ............................................................................................. 6 IV.POWER SALES PROVISIONS. *17. Resale of Firm Electric Service (Wholesale Sales for Resale)...................................................................... 7 18.Distribution Principles .................................................................................................................................. 7 19.Contract Subject to Colorado River Compact ............................................................................................... 7 V.FACILITIES PROVISIONS. 20.Design Approval ........................................................................................................................................... 7 21.Inspection and Acceptance............................................................................................................................ 8 22.As-Built Drawings ........................................................................................................................................ 8 23.Equipment Ownership Markers .................................................................................................................... 8 24.Third-Party Use of Facilities ......................................................................................................................... 8 25.Changes to Western Control Facilities .......................................................................................................... 8 26.Modification of Western Facilities................................................................................................................ 9 27.Transmission Rights...................................................................................................................................... 9 28.Construction and Safety Procedures ........................................................................................................ 9-10 29.Environmental Compliance......................................................................................................................... 10 30.Responsibility for Regulated Materials ....................................................................................................... 10 VI.OTHER PROVISIONS. 31.Authorized Representatives of the Parties .................................................................................................. 10 32.Effect of Section Headings ......................................................................................................................... 10 33.Operating Guidelines and Procedures ......................................................................................................... 10 34.Uncontrollable Forces ................................................................................................................................. 11 35.Liability ....................................................................................................................................................... 11 36.Cooperation of Contracting Parties ............................................................................................................. 11 37.Transfer of Interest in the Contract or Change in Preference Status ...................................................... 11-12 38.Choice of Law and Forum .......................................................................................................................... 12 39.Waivers ...................................................................................................................................................... 12 40.Notices ........................................................................................................................................................ 12 41.Contingent Upon Appropriations and Authorization .................................................................................. 13 42.Covenant Against Contingent Fees ............................................................................................................. 13 43.Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards ............................................................................................... 13 *44. Compliance with Federal Anti-Discrimination Laws ................................................................................. 13 45.Use of Convict Labor .................................................................................................................................. 13 *Revised July 17, 2025 Attachment A EXHIBIT A TO ORDINANCE NO. 156, 2025 Page 308 Item 14. Effective July 17, 2025 Page 2 of 13 WESTERN AREA POWER ADMINISTRATION GENERAL POWER CONTRACT PROVISIONS I.APPLICABILITY. 1. Applicability. 1.1 These General Power Contract Provisions (Provisions) shall be a part of the contract to which they are attached. In the event these Provisions differ from requirements of the contract, specific terms set forth in the contract shall prevail. 1.2 If the Contractor has member utilities which are either directly or indirectly receiving benefits from the contract, then the Contractor shall require such members to comply with Provisions 10, 17, 18, 19, 29, 30, 36, 43, 44, and 45 of these General Power Contract Provisions. II.DELIVERY OF SERVICE PROVISIONS. 2.Character of Service. Electric energy supplied or transmitted under the contract will be three-phase, alternating current, at a nominal frequency of sixty (60) hertz (cycles per second). 3. Use of Capacity or Energy in Excess of Contract Obligation. The Contractor is not entitled to use Federal power, energy, or capacity in amounts greater than the Western contract delivery obligation in effect for each type of service provided for in the contract except with the approval of Western. Unauthorized overruns of contract delivery obligations shall be subject to charges specified in the contract or the applicable rate schedules. Overruns shall not establish any continuing right thereto and the Contractor shall cease any overruns when requested by Western, or in the case of authorized overruns, when the approval expires, whichever occurs first. Nothing in the contract shall obligate Western to increase any delivery obligation. If additional power, energy, or capacity is not available from Western, the responsibility for securing additional power, energy, or capacity shall rest wholly with the Contractor. 4. Continuity of Service. Electric service will be supplied or transmitted continuously except for: (1) fluctuations, interruptions, or reductions due to uncontrollable forces, as defined in Provision 34 (Uncontrollable Forces) herein, (2) fluctuations, interruptions, or reductions due to operation of devices installed for power system protection; and (3) temporary fluctuations, interruptions, or reductions, which, in the opinion of the party supplying the service, are necessary or desirable for the purposes of maintenance, repairs, replacements, installation of equipment, or investigation and inspection. The party supplying service, except in case of emergency, will give the party to whom service is being provided reasonable advance notice of such temporary interruptions or reductions and will remove the cause thereof with diligence. 5.Multiple Points of Delivery. When electric service is supplied at or transmitted to two or more points of delivery under the same rate schedule, said rate schedule shall apply separately to the service supplied at or transmitted to each point of EXHIBIT A TO ORDINANCE NO. 156, 2025 Page 309 Item 14. Effective July 17, 2025 Page 3 of 13 delivery; Provided, That where the meter readings are considered separately, and during abnormal conditions, the Contractor’s system is interconnected between points of delivery such that duplication of metered power is possible, the meter readings at each affected point of delivery will be adjusted to compensate for duplication of power demand recorded by meters at alternate points of delivery due to abnormal conditions which are beyond the Contractor’s control or temporary conditions caused by scheduled outages. 6.Metering. 6.1 The total electric power and energy supplied or transmitted under the contract will be measured by metering equipment to be furnished and maintained by Western, a designated representative of Western, or where situations deem it appropriate as determined by Western, by the Contractor or its agent(s). In the event metering equipment is furnished and maintained by the Contractor or its agent(s) and the equipment is used for billing and other accounting purposes by Western, the Contractor shall ensure that the metering equipment complies with applicable metering policies established by Western. 6.2 Meters shall be secured by appropriate security measures and meters shall not be accessed except when the meters are to be inspected, tested, adjusted, or repaired. Representatives of affected parties shall be afforded reasonable opportunity to be present upon such occasions. Metering equipment shall be inspected and tested each year by the party responsible for meter maintenance, unless a different test interval is determined in accordance with good utility practices by an applicable regional metering policy, or as agreed upon by the parties. Meters shall also be tested at any reasonable time upon request by a party hereto, or by an affected supplemental power supplier, transmission agent, or control area operator. Any metering equipment found to be damaged, defective, or inaccurate shall be repaired and readjusted or replaced by the party responsible for meter maintenance as soon as practicable. Meters found with security breaches shall be tested for tampering and, if appropriate, meter readings shall be adjusted by Western pursuant to Provision 6.3 below. 6.3 Except as otherwise provided in Provision 6.4 hereof, should any meter that is used by Western for billing or other accounting purposes fail to register accurately, the electric power and energy supplied or transmitted during the period of failure to register accurately, shall, for billing purposes, be estimated by Western from the best available information. 6.4 If inspections and tests of a meter used by Western for billing or other accounting purposes disclose an error exceeding 2 percent, or a lesser range in error as agreed upon by the parties, then a correction based upon the inaccuracy found shall be made to the service records for the period of inaccuracy as determined by Western. If the period of inaccuracy cannot be determined, the inaccuracy shall be assumed to have existed during the entire monthly billing period immediately preceding the billing period in which the inspection or test was made and the resulting correction shall be made accordingly. 6.5 Any correction in billing or other accounting information that results from a correction in meter records shall be made in a subsequent monthly bill rendered by Western to the Contractor. Payment of such bill shall constitute full adjustment of any claim between the parties arising out of inaccurate metering equipment. 7.Existence of Transmission Service Contract. If the contract provides for Western to furnish services using the facilities of a third party, the obligation of Western shall be subject to and contingent upon the existence of a transmission service contract granting Western rights to use such facilities. If Western acquires or constructs facilities which would enable it to furnish direct service to the Contractor, Western, at its option, may furnish service over its own facilities. EXHIBIT A TO ORDINANCE NO. 156, 2025 Page 310 Item 14. Effective July 17, 2025 Page 4 of 13 8. Conditions of Transmission Service. 8.1 When the electric service under the contract is furnished by Western over the facilities of others by virtue of a transmission service arrangement, the power and energy will be furnished at the voltage available and under the conditions which exist from time to time on the transmission system over which the service is supplied. 8.2 Unless otherwise provided in the contract or applicable rate schedule, the Contractor shall maintain a power factor at each point of delivery from Western’s transmission agent as required by the transmission agent. 8.3 Western will endeavor to inform the Contractor from time to time of any changes planned or proposed on the system over which the service is supplied, but the costs of any changes made necessary in the Contractor’s system, because of changes or conditions on the system over which the service is supplied, shall not be a charge against or a liability of Western. 8.4 If the Contractor, because of changes or conditions on the system over which service under the contract is supplied, is required to make changes on its system at its own expense in order to continue receiving service under the contract, then the Contractor may terminate service under the contract upon not less than sixty (60) days written notice given to Western prior to making such changes, but not thereafter. 8.5 If Western notifies the Contractor that electric service provided for under the contract cannot be delivered to the Contractor because of an insufficiency of capacity available to Western in the facilities of others over which service under the contract is supplied, then the Contractor may terminate service under the contract upon not less than sixty (60) days written notice given to Western prior to the date on which said capacity ceases to be available to Western, but not thereafter. 9. Multiple Points of Delivery Involving Direct and Indirect Deliveries. When Western has provided line and substation capacity under the contract for the purpose of delivering electric service directly to the Contractor at specified direct points of delivery and also has agreed to absorb transmission service allowance or discounts for deliveries of energy over other system(s) to indirect points of delivery and the Contractor shifts any of its load served under the contract from direct delivery to indirect delivery, Western will not absorb the transmission service costs on such shifted load until the unused capacity, as determined solely by Western, available at the direct delivery points affected is fully utilized. 10. Construction, Operation, and Maintenance of Contractor’s Power System. The Contractor shall, and, if applicable, shall require each of its members or transmission agents to construct, operate, and maintain its power system in a manner which, as determined by Western, will not interfere with the operation of the system of Western or its transmission agents over which electric services are furnished to the Contractor under the contract, and in a manner which will coordinate with the protective relaying and other protective arrangements of the system(s) of Western or Western’s transmission agents. Western may reduce or discontinue furnishing services to the Contractor if, after notice by Western, the Contractor fails or refuses to make such changes as may be necessary to eliminate an unsatisfactory condition on the Contractor’s power system which is determined by Western to interfere significantly under current or probable conditions with any service supplied from the power system of Western or from the power system of a transmission agent of Western. Such a reduction or discontinuance of service will not relieve the Contractor of liability for any minimum charges provided for in the contract during the time said services are reduced or discontinued. Nothing in this Provision shall be construed to render Western liable in any manner for any claims, demands, costs, losses, causes of action, damages, or liability of any kind or nature arising out of or resulting from the construction, operation, or maintenance of the Contractor’s power system. EXHIBIT A TO ORDINANCE NO. 156, 2025 Page 311 Item 14. Effective July 17, 2025 Page 5 of 13 III. RATES, BILLING, AND PAYMENT PROVISIONS. 11. Change of Rates. Rates applicable under the contract shall be subject to change by Western in accordance with appropriate rate adjustment procedures. If at any time the United States promulgates a rate changing a rate then in effect under the contract, it will promptly notify the Contractor thereof. Rates shall become effective as to the contract as of the effective date of such rate. The Contractor, by written notice to Western within ninety (90) days after the effective date of a rate change, may elect to terminate the service billed by Western under the new rate. Said termination shall be effective on the last day of the billing period requested by the Contractor not later than two (2) years after the effective date of the new rate. Service provided by Western shall be paid for at the new rate regardless of whether the Contractor exercises the option to terminate service. 12. Minimum Seasonal or Annual Capacity Charge. When the rate in effect under the contract provides for a minimum seasonal or annual capacity charge, a statement of the minimum capacity charge due, if any, shall be included in the bill rendered for service for the last billing period of the service season or contract year as appropriate, adjusted for increases or decreases in the contract rate of delivery and for the number of billing periods during the year or season in which service is not provided. Where multiple points of delivery are involved and the contract rate of delivery is stated to be a maximum aggregate rate of delivery for all points, in determining the minimum seasonal or annual capacity charge due, if any, the monthly capacity charges at the individual points of delivery shall be added together. 13. Billing and Payment. 13.1 Western will normally issue bills to the Contractor for services furnished during the preceding month within ten (10) days after the end of the billing period. 13.2 If Western is unable to issue timely monthly bill(s), Western may elect to render estimated bill(s). Such estimated bill(s) shall be subject to the same payment provisions as final bill(s), and any applicable adjustments will be shown on a subsequent monthly bill. 13.3 Payments of bills issued by Western are due and payable by the Contractor before the close of business on the twentieth (20th) calendar day after the date of issuance of each bill or the next business day thereafter if said day is a Saturday, Sunday, or Federal holiday. Bills shall be considered paid when payment is received by Western. Bills will be paid electronically or via the Automated Clearing House method of payment unless a written request to make payments by mail is submitted by the Contractor and approved by Western. Should Western agree to accept payments by mail, these payments will be accepted as timely and without assessment of the charge provided for in Provision 14 (Nonpayment of Bills in Full When Due) if a United States Post Office first class mail postmark indicates the payment was mailed at least three (3) calendar days before the due date. 13.4 The parties agree that net billing procedures will be used for payments due Western by the Contractor and for payments due the Contractor by Western for the sale or exchange of electric power and energy, use of transmission facilities, operation and maintenance of electric facilities, and other services. Payments due one party in any month shall be offset against payments due the other party in such month, and the resulting net balance shall be paid to the party in whose favor such balance exists. The parties shall exchange such reports and information that either party requires for billing purposes. Net billing shall not be used for any amounts due which are in dispute. 14. Nonpayment of Bills in Full When Due. 14.1 Bills not paid in full by the Contractor by the due date specified in Provision 13 (Billing and EXHIBIT A TO ORDINANCE NO. 156, 2025 Page 312 Item 14. Effective July 17, 2025 Page 6 of 13 Payment) hereof shall bear a charge of five hundredths percent (0.05%) of the principal sum unpaid for each day payment is delinquent, to be added until the amount due is paid in full. Western will also assess a fee of twenty-five dollars ($25.00) for processing a late payment. Payments received will first be applied to the charges for late payment assessed on the principal and then to payment of the principal. 14.2 Western shall have the right, upon not less than fifteen (15) days advance written notice, to discontinue furnishing the services specified in the contract for nonpayment of bills in full when due, and to refuse to resume such services so long as any part of the amount due remains unpaid. Such a discontinuance of service will not relieve the Contractor of liability for minimum charges during the time service is so discontinued. The rights reserved to Western herein shall be in addition to all other remedies available to Western either by law or in equity, for the breach of any of the terms hereof. 15. Adjustments for Fractional Billing Period. The demand or capacity charge and minimum charges shall each be proportionately adjusted when fractional billing periods are applicable under this contract. A fractional billing period can occur: 1) at the beginning or end of electric service; 2) at the beginning or end of irrigation pumping service each year; 3) for a fractional billing period under a new rate schedule; or 4) for fractional periods due to withdrawals of electric services. The adjustment will be made based on the ratio of the number of hours that electric service is available to the Contractor in such fractional billing period, to the total number of hours in the billing period involved. Energy billing shall not be affected by fractional billing periods. 16. Adjustments for Curtailments to Firm Service. 16.1 Billing adjustments will be made if firm electric service is interrupted or reduced because of conditions on the power system of the United States for periods of one (1) hour or longer in duration each. Billing adjustments will not be made when such curtailment of electric service is due to a request by the Contractor or a discontinuance of electric service by Western pursuant to Provision 14 (Nonpayment of Bills In Full When Due). For purposes of billing adjustments under this Provision, the term power system of the United States shall include transmission facilities used under contract but not owned by the United States. 16.2 The total number of hours of curtailed firm electric service in any billing period shall be determined by adding: (1) the sum of the number of hours of interrupted electric service to (2) the product, of each reduction, of: the number of hours reduced electric service and the percentage by which electric service was reduced below the delivery obligation of Western at the time of each said reduction of electric service. The demand or capacity charge and applicable minimum charges shall each be proportionately adjusted in the ratio that the total number of hours of electric service determined to have been curtailed bears to the total number of hours in the billing period involved. 16.3 The Contractor shall make written claim within thirty (30) days after receiving the monthly bill, for adjustment on account of any curtailment of firm electric service, for periods of one (1) hour or longer in duration each, alleged to have occurred that is not reflected in said bill. Failure to make such written claim, within said thirty-day (30-day) period, shall constitute a waiver of said claim. All curtailments of electric service, which are due to conditions on the power system of the United States, shall be subject to the terms of this Provision; Provided, That withdrawal of power and energy under the contract shall not be considered a curtailment of electric service. EXHIBIT A TO ORDINANCE NO. 156, 2025 Page 313 Item 14. Effective July 17, 2025 Page 7 of 13 IV. POWER SALES PROVISIONS. 17. Resale of Firm Electric Service (Wholesale Sales for Resale). 17.1 The Contractor shall not sell any firm electric power or energy supplied under the contract to any electric utility customer of the Contractor for resale by that utility customer; Provided, That the Contractor may sell the electric power and energy supplied under the contract to its members on condition that said members not sell any of said power and energy to any customer of the member for resale by that customer. 17.2 Contractors receiving environmental attributes associated with any firm electric power or energy allocated under the contract may use, dispose of, transfer, or resell such environmental attributes in accordance with good utility practice. 18. Distribution Principles. The Contractor agrees that the benefits of firm electric power or energy supplied under the contract shall be made available to its consumers at rates that are established at the lowest possible level consistent with sound business principles, and that these rates will be established in an open and public manner. The Contractor further agrees that it will identify the costs of firm electric power or energy supplied under the contract and power from other sources to its consumers upon request. The Contractor will demonstrate compliance with the requirements of this Provision to Western upon request. 19. Contract Subject to Colorado River Compact. Where the energy sold under the contract is generated from waters of the Colorado River system, the contract is made upon the express condition and with the express covenant that all rights under the contract shall be subject to and controlled by the Colorado River Compact approved by Section 13 (a) of the Boulder Canyon Project Act of December 21, 1928, 43 U.S.C. §§ 617a-e, and the parties to the contract shall observe and be subject to and controlled by said Colorado River Compact in the construction, management, and operation of the dams, reservoirs, and powerplants from which electrical energy is to be furnished by Western to the Contractor under the contract, and in the storage, diversion, delivery, and use of water for the generation of electrical energy to be delivered by Western to the Contractor under the contract. V. FACILITIES PROVISIONS. 20. Design Approval. All facilities, construction, and installation by the Contractor pursuant to the contract shall be subject to the approval of Western. Facilities interconnections shall normally conform to Western’s current “General Requirements for Interconnection,” in effect upon the signing of the contract document providing for each interconnection, copies of which are available from Western. At least ninety (90) days, unless otherwise agreed, prior to the date the Contractor proposes to commence construction or to incur an obligation to purchase facilities to be installed pursuant to the contract, whichever date is the earlier, the Contractor shall submit, for the approval of Western, detailed designs, drawings, and specifications of the facilities the Contractor proposes to purchase, construct, and install. The Contractor assumes all risks for construction commenced or obligations to purchase facilities incurred prior to receipt of approval from Western. Western review and approval of designs and construction work in no way implies that Western is certifying that the designs meet the Contractor’s needs. EXHIBIT A TO ORDINANCE NO. 156, 2025 Page 314 Item 14. Effective July 17, 2025 Page 8 of 13 21. Inspection and Acceptance. Western shall have the right to inspect the materials and work furnished by the Contractor, its agents, employees, and subcontractors pursuant to the contract. Such inspections shall be at reasonable times at the work site. Any materials or work that Western determines is defective or not in accordance with designs, drawings, and specifications, as approved by Western, shall be replaced or modified, as directed by Western, at the sole expense of the Contractor before the new facilities are energized. 22. As-Built Drawings. Within a reasonable time, as determined by Western, after the completion of construction and installation of facilities pursuant to the contract, the Contractor shall submit to Western marked as-built prints of all Western drawings affected by changes made pursuant to the contract and reproducible drawings the Contractor has prepared showing facilities of Western. The Contractor’s drawings of Western facilities shall use drawing title blocks, drawing numbers, and shall be prepared in accordance with drafting standards all as approved by Western. Western may prepare, revise, or complete said drawings and bill the Contractor if the Contractor fails to provide such drawings to Western within a reasonable time as determined by Western. 23. Equipment Ownership Markers. 23.1 The Contractor shall identify all movable equipment and, to the extent agreed upon by the parties, all other salvageable facilities constructed or installed on the United States right-of-way or in Western substations pursuant to the contract which are owned by the Contractor, by permanently affixing thereto suitable markers clearly identifying the Contractor as the owner of said equipment and facilities. 23.2 If requested by the Contractor, Western shall identify all movable equipment and, to the extent agreed upon by the parties, all other salvageable facilities constructed or installed on the Contractor’s right-of-way or in the Contractor’s substations pursuant to the contract which are owned by the United States, by permanently affixing thereto suitable markers clearly identifying the United States as the owner of said equipment and facilities. 24. Third-Party Use of Facilities. The Contractor shall notify Western of any proposed system change relating to the facilities governed by the contract or allowing third-party use of the facilities governed by the contract. If Western notifies the Contractor that said system change will, as solely determined by Western, adversely affect the operation of Western’s system the Contractor shall, at no cost to Western, provide a solution to said adverse effect acceptable to Western. 25. Changes to Western Control Facilities. If at any time during the term of the contract, Western determines that changes or additions to control, relay, or communications facilities are necessary to maintain the reliability or control of Western’s transmission system, and said changes or additions are entirely or partially required because of the Contractor’s equipment installed under the contract, such changes or additions shall, after consultation with the Contractor, be made by Western with all costs or a proportionate share of all costs, as determined by Western, to the be paid by the Contractor. Western shall notify the Contractor in writing of the necessary changes or additions and the estimated costs to be paid by the Contractor. If the Contractor fails to pay its share of said estimated costs, Western shall have the right, after giving sixty (60) days’ written notice to the Contractor, to terminate the applicable facility installation provisions to the contract and require the removal of the Contractor’s facilities. EXHIBIT A TO ORDINANCE NO. 156, 2025 Page 315 Item 14. Effective July 17, 2025 Page 9 of 13 26. Modification of Western Facilities. Western reserves the right, at any time, to modify its facilities. Western shall keep the Contractor informed of all planned modifications to Western facilities which impact the facilities installation pursuant to the contract. Western shall permit the Contractor to change or modify its facilities, in a manner satisfactory to and at no cost or expense to Western, to retain the facilities interconnection pursuant to the contract. At the Contractor’s option, Western shall cooperate with the Contractor in planning alternate arrangements for service which shall be implemented at no cost or expense to Western. The Contractor and Western shall modify the contract, as necessary, to conform to the new facilities arrangements. 27. Transmission Rights. If the contract involves an installation which sectionalizes a Western transmission line, the Contractor hereby agrees to provide a transmission path to Western across such sectionalizing facilities at no cost or expense to Western. Said transmission path shall be at least equal, in terms of capacity and reliability, to the path in the Western transmission line prior to the installation pursuant to the contract. 28. Construction and Safety Procedures. 28.1 The Contractor hereby acknowledges that it is aware of the hazards inherent in high-voltage electric lines and substations, and hereby assumes full responsibility at all times for the adoption and use of necessary safety measures required to prevent accidental harm to personnel engaged in the construction, inspection, testing, operation, maintenance, replacement, or removal activities of the Contractor pursuant to the contract. The Contractor and the authorized employees, agents, and subcontractors of the Contractor shall comply with all applicable safety laws and building and construction codes, including the provisions of Chapter 1 of the Power System Operations Manual, entitled Power System Switching Procedure, and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration regulations, Title 29 C.F.R. §§ 1910 and 1926, as amended or supplemented. In addition to the safety program required herein, upon request of the United States, the Contractor shall provide sufficient information to demonstrate that the Contractor’s safety program is satisfactory to the United States. 28.2 The Contractor and its authorized employees, agents, and subcontractors shall familiarize themselves with the location and character of all the transmission facilities of Western and interconnections of others relating to the work performed by the Contractor under the contract. Prior to starting any construction, installation, or removal work, the Contractor shall submit a plan of procedure to Western which shall indicate the sequence and method of performing the work in a safe manner. No work shall be performed by the Contractor, its employees, agents, or subcontractors until written authorization to proceed is obtained from Western. 28.3 At all times when the Contractor, its employees, agents, or subcontractors are performing activities of any type pursuant to the contract, such activities shall be under supervision of a qualified employee, agent, or subcontractor of the Contractor who shall be authorized to represent the Contractor in all matters pertaining to the activity being performed. The Contractor and Western will keep each other informed of the names of their designated representatives at the site. 28.4 Upon completion of its work, the Contractor shall remove from the vicinity of the right-of-way of the United States all buildings, rubbish, used materials, concrete forms, and other like material belonging to the Contractor or used under the Contractor’s direction, and in the event of failure to do so the same may be removed by Western at the expense of the Contractor. 28.5 In the event the Contractor, its employees, agents, or subcontractors fail to comply with any requirement of this Provision, or Provision 21 (Inspection and Acceptance) herein, Western or an authorized representative may issue an order to stop all or any part of the work until such time as the Contractor demonstrates EXHIBIT A TO ORDINANCE NO. 156, 2025 Page 316 Item 14. Effective July 17, 2025 Page 10 of 13 compliance with the provision at issue. The Contractor, its employees, agents, or subcontractors shall make no claim for compensation or damages resulting from such work stoppage. 29. Environmental Compliance. Facilities installed under the contract by any party shall be constructed, operated, maintained, replaced, transported, and removed subject to compliance with all applicable laws, including but not limited to the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, 16 U.S.C. §§ 470x-6, the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, 42 U.S.C. §§ 4321-4347, the Endangered Species Act of 1973, 16 U.S.C. §§ 1531-1544, and the Archaeological Resources Protection Act of 1979, 16 U.S.C. §§ 470aa-470mm, and the regulations and executive orders implementing these laws, as they may be amended or supplemented, as well as any other existing or subsequent applicable laws, regulations, and executive orders. 30. Responsibility for Regulated Materials. When either party owns equipment containing regulated material located on the other party’s substation, switchyard, right-of-way, or other property, the equipment owner shall be responsible for all activities related to regulated materials in such equipment that are necessary to meet the requirements of the Toxic Substances Control Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 2601-2692, the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 6901-6992k, the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980, 42 U.S.C. §§ 9601-9675, the Oil Pollution Act of 1990, 33 U.S.C. §§ 2702-2761, the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. §§ 1251-1387, the Safe Drinking Water Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 300f-j26, and the regulations and executive orders implementing these laws, as they may be amended or supplemented, and any other existing or subsequent applicable laws, regulations, and executive orders. Each party shall label its equipment containing regulated material in accordance with appropriate laws and regulations. If the party owning the equipment does not perform activities required under appropriate laws and regulations within the time frame specified therein, the other party may perform or cause to be performed the required activities after notice to and at the sole expense of the party owning the equipment. VI. OTHER PROVISIONS. 31. Authorized Representatives of the Parties. Each party to the contract, by written notice to the other, shall designate the representative(s) who is (are) authorized to act in its behalf with respect to those matters contained in the contract which are the functions and responsibilities of the authorized representatives of the parties. Each party may change the designation of its authorized representative(s) upon oral notice given to the other, confirmed promptly by written notice. 32. Effect of Section Headings. Section headings or Provision titles appearing in the contract or these General Power Contract Provisions are inserted for convenience only and shall not be construed as interpretations of text. 33. Operating Guidelines and Procedures. The parties to the contract may agree upon and put into effect from time to time, such other written guidelines and procedures as may be required in order to establish the methods of operation of the power system to be followed in the performance of the contract. EXHIBIT A TO ORDINANCE NO. 156, 2025 Page 317 Item 14. Effective July 17, 2025 Page 11 of 13 34. Uncontrollable Forces. Neither party to the contract shall be considered to be in default in performance of any of its obligations under the contract, except to make payment as specified in Provision 13 (Billing and Payment) herein, when a failure of performance shall be due to an uncontrollable force. The term “uncontrollable force” means any cause beyond the control of the party affected, including but not restricted to, failure of or threat of failure of facilities, flood, earthquake, storm, fire, lightning, epidemic, war, riot, civil disturbance or disobedience, labor dispute, labor or material shortage, sabotage, restraint by court order or public authority and action or nonaction by, or failure to obtain the necessary authorizations or approvals from, any governmental agency or authority, which by exercise of due diligence such party could not reasonably have been expected to avoid and which by exercise of due diligence it shall be unable to overcome. Nothing contained herein shall be construed to require a party to settle any strike or labor dispute in which it may be involved. Either party rendered unable to fulfill any of its obligations under the contract by reason of an uncontrollable force shall give prompt written notice of such fact to the other party and shall exercise due diligence to remove such inability with all reasonable dispatch. 35. Liability. 35.1 The Contractor hereby agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the United States, its employees, agents, or contractors from any loss or damage and from any liability on account of personal injury, death, or property damage, or claims for personal injury, death, or property damage of any nature whatsoever and by whomsoever made arising out of the Contractors’, its employees’, agents’, or subcontractors’ construction, operation, maintenance, or replacement activities under the contract. 35.2 The United States is liable only for negligence on the part of its officers and employees in accordance with the Federal Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. §§ 1346(b), 1346(c), 2401(b), 2402, 2671, 2672, 2674- 2680, as amended or supplemented. 36. Cooperation of Contracting Parties. If, in the operation and maintenance of their respective power systems or electrical equipment and the utilization thereof for the purposes of the contract, it becomes necessary by reason of any emergency or extraordinary condition for either party to request the other to furnish personnel, materials, tools, and equipment for the accomplishment thereof, the party so requested shall cooperate with the other and render such assistance as the party so requested may determine to be available. The party making such request, upon receipt of properly itemized bills from the other party, shall reimburse the party rendering such assistance for all costs properly and reasonably incurred by it in such performance, including administrative and general expenses, such costs to be determined on the basis of current charges or rates used in its own operations by the party rendering assistance. Issuance and payment of bills for services provided by Western shall be in accordance with Provisions 13 (Billing and Payment) and 14 (Nonpayment of Bills in Full When Due) herein. Western shall pay bills issued by the Contractor for services provided as soon as the necessary vouchers can be prepared which shall normally be within twenty (20) days. 37. Transfer of Interest in Contract or Change in Preference Status. 37.1 No voluntary transfer of the contract or of the rights of the Contractor under the contract shall be made without the prior written approval of the Administrator of Western. Any voluntary transfer of the contract or of the rights of the Contractor under the contract made without the prior written approval of the Administrator of Western may result in the termination of the contract; Provided, That the written approval of the Administrator shall not be unreasonably withheld; Provided further, That if the Contractor operates a project financed in whole or in part by the Rural Utilities Service, the Contractor may transfer or assign its interest in the contract to the Rural Utilities Service or any other department or agency of the Federal Government without such prior written approval; Provided further, That any successor to or assignee of the rights of the Contractor, whether by voluntary transfer, judicial sale, EXHIBIT A TO ORDINANCE NO. 156, 2025 Page 318 Item 14. Effective July 17, 2025 Page 12 of 13 foreclosure sale, or otherwise, shall be subject to all the provisions and conditions of the contract to the same extent as though such successor or assignee were the original Contractor under the contract; and, Provided further, That the execution of a mortgage or trust deed, or judicial or foreclosure sales made thereunder, shall not be deemed voluntary transfers within the meaning of this Provision. 37.2 The Contractor shall maintain its status as an entity eligible for preference in Western’s sale of Federal power pursuant to Reclamation law, as amended and supplemented. 37.3 Western shall give the Contractor written notice of Western’s proposed determination that the Contractor has violated Provision 37.1 and Western’s proposed action in response to the violation. 37.4 The Contractor shall have 120 days after receipt of Western’s notice provided under Provision 37.3 to submit a written response to Western. The Contractor may also make an oral presentation to the Administrator during this 120-day period. 37.5 At any time during this process, the Contractor and Western may agree upon corrective action to resolve Western’s proposed determination that the Contractor is in violation of Provision 37.1. 37.6 Within 30 days of receipt of the Contractor’s written response provided under Provision 37.4, Western will notify the Contractor in writing of its final decision. The Administrator’s written notice will include the intended action, the effective date thereof, and the reasons for taking the intended action. Implementation of the Administrator’s action shall take place no earlier than 60 days from the Contractor’s receipt of such notice. 37.7 Any successor to Western shall be subject to all the provisions and conditions of the contract to the same extent as though such successor were an original signatory to the contract. 37.8 Nothing in this Provision shall preclude any right to judicial review available to the Contractor under Federal law. 38. Choice of Law and Forum. Federal law shall control the obligations and procedures established by this contract and the performance and enforcement thereof. The forum for litigation arising from this contract shall exclusively be a Federal court of the United States, unless the parties agree to pursue alternative dispute resolution. 39. Waivers. Any waivers at any time by either party to the contract of its rights with respect to a default or any other matter arising under or in connection with the contract shall not be deemed a waiver with respect to any subsequent default or matter. 40. Notices. Any notice, demand, or request specifically required by the contract or these Provisions to be in writing shall be considered properly given when delivered in person or sent by postage prepaid registered or certified mail, commercial delivery service, facsimile, electronic, prepaid telegram, or by other means with prior agreement of the parties, to each party’s authorized representative at the principal offices of the party. The designation of the person to be notified may be changed at any time by similar notice. Where facsimile or electronic means are utilized for any communication covered by this Provision, the sending party shall keep a contemporaneous record of such communications and shall verify receipt by the other party. EXHIBIT A TO ORDINANCE NO. 156, 2025 Page 319 Item 14. Effective July 17, 2025 Page 13 of 13 41. Contingent Upon Appropriations and Authorization. 41.1 Where activities provided for in the contract extend beyond the current fiscal year, continued expenditures by the United States are contingent upon Congress making the necessary appropriations required for the continued performance of the United States’ obligations under the contract. In case such appropriation is not made, the Contractor hereby releases the United States from its contractual obligations and from all liability due to the failure of Congress to make such appropriation. 41.2 In order to receive and expend funds advanced from the Contractor necessary for the continued performance of the obligations of the United States under the contract, additional authorization may be required. In case such authorization is not received, the Contractor hereby releases the United States from those contractual obligations and from all liability due to the lack of such authorization. 42.Covenant Against Contingent Fees. The Contractor warrants that no person or selling agency has been employed or retained to solicit or secure the contract upon an agreement or understanding for a commission, percentage, brokerage, or contingent fee, excepting bona fide employees or bona fide established commercial or selling agencies maintained by the Contractor for the purpose of securing business. For breach or violation of this warranty, Western shall have the right to annul the contract without liability or in its discretion to deduct from the contract price or consideration the full amount of such commission, percentage, brokerage, or contingent fee. 43. Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards. The contract, to the extent that it is of a character specified in Section 103 of the Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act (Act), 40 U.S.C. § 3701, as amended or supplemented, is subject to the provisions of the Act, 40 U.S.C. §§ 3701-3708, as amended or supplemented, and to regulations promulgated by the Secretary of Labor pursuant to the Act. 44.Compliance with Federal Anti-Discrimination Laws. 44.1 The Contractor shall comply with all applicable Federal anti-discrimination laws. Compliance with applicable Federal anti-discrimination laws is material to eligibility for and payment under this contract for purposes of 31 U.S.C. 3729(b)(4). 44.2 By executing this agreement, the Contractor certifies that, to the best of its knowledge and belief, it does not operate programs promoting diversity, equity, and inclusion that violate any applicable Federal anti-discrimination laws. “Program promoting diversity, equity, and inclusion” means a program whose purpose is to promote preferences based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origins, such as in training or hiring. 44.3 Indian Tribes and tribal organizations may apply Indian preference to the extent permitted by Federal law. 45. Use of Convict Labor. The Contractor agrees not to employ any person undergoing sentence of imprisonment in performing the contract except as provided by 18 U.S.C. § 3622(c), as amended or supplemented, and Executive Order No. 11755, 39 Fed. Reg. 779 (1973), as amended or supplemented. EXHIBIT A TO ORDINANCE NO. 156, 2025 Page 320 Item 14. Fort Collins PSA – Attachment B First Amendment to the Amended PSA Page 1 of 3 Attachment B Substation Cost and Maintenance Responsibility And Lease of 115kV Facilities The following describes the cost and maintenance responsibilities for Fort Collins and Platte River at the existing Harmony, Linden Tech, Richard Lake, Portner, and Drake Substations. This description will also apply to any future substations that may be constructed by Fort Collins. If any special arrangements are required for a new substation different from the understanding described below, it will be documented in a separate letter agreement between the Fort Collins and Platte River and attached hereto. Fort Collins will furnish, own, and maintain at its expense the following items in each substation owned by Fort Collins: The substation site with sufficient space for both the Fort Collins and Platte River equipment Grading and surfacing within the fenced or walled area Access right-of-way and roads Perimeter substation fence or wall Landscaping and maintenance of any grounds outside the fenced or walled area The 230 or 115kV/13.8kV transformers, switchgear, feeder circuits, associated foundations and oil containment structures, duct banks, conduits, and all cabling, relays, and controls required to operate such equipment The Fort Collins switchgear room in a common Fort Collins/Platte River switchgear/control building or separate building, whichever is appropriate A remote terminal unit (RTU), for use to transmit substation information to Fort Collins The DC power supply system and associated equipment or ½ the cost of a DC system shared with Platte River. Substation site electric service (equipment, power and energy) Substation yard lighting Substation yard below grade grounding system Platte River will furnish, own, and maintain at its expense the following items in each substation owned by Fort Collins: All transmission equipment required at the appropriate voltage class to deliver electric capacity and energy to Fort Collins’ facilities including the transmission line transition structures, breakers, switches, bus system, relays, meters and associated controls All foundations required for the Platte River equipment listed above The Platte River control room in a combined Fort Collins/Platte River switchgear/control building, or the cost of a separate control building, whichever is appropriate Communication connections for Power System Operations use by both Fort Collins and Platte River A remote terminal unit (RTU), for use to transmit substation information to and Platte River EXHIBIT A TO ORDINANCE NO. 156, 2025 Page 321 Item 14. Fort Collins PSA – Attachment B First Amendment to the Amended PSA Page 2 of 3  Weed control Fort Collins and Platte River will share equally the cost of any substation security deemed by both parties to be appropriate for the location of the substation. Lease of 115kV Facilities: Background: In the Transmission Facilities Agreement dated February 22, 1980, Fort Collins leased multiple transmission and substation facilities to Platte River. With that lease Platte River assumed responsibility for 115kV substation facilities at the Timberline Park, Drake, Overland Trail, and Power Plant Substations and the 115kV transmission lines from Poudre Tap to Power Plant, WAPA Line to Drake Substation, and the 115kV line south of Timberline Park Substation to Drake Road. Since 1980 the Overland Trail and Power Plant Substations and the Poudre Tap to Power Plant transmission line have been decommissioned are no longer in service and the WAPA line connection along Overland Trail is now connected at Dixon Creek Substation. Since 1980 new substations have been added to the Fort Collins system whose names are Harmony, Linden Tech, Richard Lake, and Fort Collins has added distribution facilities at Platte River’s Dixon Creek Substation and Fort Collins’ Timberline Substation. Continuation of Lease: Fort Collins agrees to continue the lease of the facilities (“Leased Facilities”) on the following list to Platte River through the term of this Agreement or until such facility is permanently removed from service or replaced. Platte River shall continue to have the right to use the Leased Facility in whatever manner it shall determine to be the most effective to meet its obligations under this Agreement and the local needs of Fort Collins and to make whatever modifications, improvements, repairs and replacements it shall determine to be necessary to provide reliable service. Platte River shall not permit any lien or encumbrance to attach to the Leased Facility and shall deliver them up to Fort Collins at the termination of this Agreement. The following items comprise the Leased Facilities: Land and Land Rights All land, land rights, and easements on which the following facilities are located:  Dixon Creek Substation to Drake Substation 115kV transmission line.  Timberline Park-Drake 115kV transmission line.  Timberline Park Substation.  Fort Collins will continue to provide the access road to the Timberline Park Substation as well as landscaping and maintenance of the grounds outside the substation fence.  The land and land rights leased at Timberline Park Substation are shown on Exhibit 1 attached hereto. The City of Fort Collins distribution facilities are located in the cross- hatched area shown on the diagram. Substation Equipment 115kV breakers, busses, switches, insulators, meters, relays, control panels, structural steel, foundations, and miscellaneous 115kV support equipment at the following substations, which have not been replaced since February 22, 1980: EXHIBIT A TO ORDINANCE NO. 156, 2025 Page 322 Item 14. Fort Collins PSA – Attachment B First Amendment to the Amended PSA Page 3 of 3  Timberline Park Substation  Drake Substation Transmission Lines All poles, conductors, and support equipment required for operation of the following transmission lines:  Dixon Creek-Drake 115kV transmission line  Timberline Park-Drake 115kV transmission line EXHIBIT A TO ORDINANCE NO. 156, 2025 Page 323 Item 14. File Attachments for Item: 15. Resolution 2025-083 Authorizing the City Manager to Execute an Agreement with the Colorado Water Conservation Board for Protected Mitigation Releases from the Halligan Water Supply Project. This purpose of this item is to seek authorization for the City Manager to execute an agreement with the Colorado Water Conservation Board. Pursuant to the Halligan Water Supply Project: Fish and Wildlife Mitigation and Enhancement Plan, the City will seek a Water Court decree to protect the City’s reservoir releases from diversion by others. These are called “protected mitigation releases” under the applicable statute. Once completed and operational, this will create legally protected stream flows in the approximately 22 miles of the North Fork of the Cache la Poudre River between Halligan Dam and Milton Seaman Reservoir. An agreement with the Colorado Water Conservation Board is required to begin this effort. Page 324 City Council Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 1 of 4 September 16, 2025 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Council STAFF Darren Parkin, Halligan Project Manager Donnie Dustin, Senior Water Resources Engineer SUBJECT Resolution 2025-083 Authorizing the City Manager to Execute an Agreement with the Colorado Water Conservation Board for Protected Mitigation Releases from the Halligan Water Supply Project. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This purpose of this item is to seek authorization for the City Manager to execute an agreement with the Colorado Water Conservation Board. Pursuant to the Halligan Water Supply Project: Fish and Wildlife Mitigation and Enhancement Plan, the City will seek a Water Court decree to protect the City’s reservoir releases from diversion by others. These are called “protected mitigation releases” under the applicable statute. Once completed and operational, this will create legally protected stream flows in the approximately 22 miles of the North Fork of the Cache la Poudre River between Halligan Dam and Milton Seaman Reservoir. An agreement with the Colorado Water Conservation Board is required to begin this effort. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Resolution. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION Halligan Water Supply Project Generally. The City is pursuing the Halligan Water Supply Project (“Halligan Project”). This project primarily entails the enlargement of Halligan Reservoir on the North Fork of the Cache la Poudre River (“North Fork”). The existing Halligan Reservoir has a capacity of 6,408 acre- feet, which is owned and used by the North Poudre Irrigation Company (“Ditch Company”) for the irrigation of lands north of Fort Collins. Through the Halligan Project, the City will replace the aging, over 115 year- old existing Halligan Dam with a new dam. The new dam will increase the reservoir’s capacity by 8,200 acre-feet. After completion, the Ditch Company will continue to use its 6,408 acre-feet of capacity in the enlarged reservoir for irrigation, and the City will use the new 8,200 acre-feet of capacity for the City Water Utility’s needs. Additional information and background are available on the City’s website: fcgov.com/halligan. Historical and Current Reservoir Operations. The Ditch Company has owned and operated the existing Halligan Reservoir for over 115 years, since its construction in the early 1900s. The Ditch Company Page 325 Item 15. City Council Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 2 of 4 typically fills Halligan Reservoir in the fall and winter by completely closing the reservoir’s gates. This dries up a significant stretch of the North Fork below Halligan Dam throughout the winter. In the summer, the Ditch Company releases its stored water from the reservoir into the North Fork below Halligan Dam. This water flows about six miles downstream to the Ditch Company’s diversion for its North Poudre Canal. The Ditch Company typically “sweeps” the river throughout most of the summer and fall by diverting all available flows into the canal. This dries up a significant stretch of the North Fork below this diversion throughout the late summer and fall. These dry up locations are shown on the figure below. City’s Reservoir Releases in the Halligan Project. When the Halligan Project is operational, the City will operate the enlarged Halligan Reservoir to meet the City Water Utility’s needs in a way that also addresses the dry up locations that occur from the historical and current reservoir operations. While the Ditch Company will continue to use its water as it has historically, the City’s new capacity in the enlarged reservoir will allow the City to use its water to greatly improve flows on the North Fork. The City will first store its water in its 8,200 acre-feet of capacity of the enlarged Halligan Reservoir. For the City to deliver this water into the Water Utility’s system, the City will release its water into the North Fork below Halligan Dam. The City’s water will float down about 22 miles of the North Fork to the City of Greeley’s Milton Seaman Reservoir on the North Fork. The City’s water will pass through that reservoir to and continue to the confluence with the main stem of the Cache la Poudre River at Gateway Natural Area. The City will then generally divert a like amount of water into its pipelines located just upstream. The City’s reservoir releases include:  Winter Release Plan, where 3 cubic feet per second (“cfs”) of the City’s water will be released from October 1 through April 30 every year, which will prevent the historical and current dry up below Halligan Dam;  Summer Low-Flow Plan, where the City will make releases to ensure that at least 5 cfs is in the North Fork between Halligan Dam and Miton Seaman Reservoir from May 1 through September 30, which will prevent the historical and current dry up below the North Poudre Canal; and  Temporary Environmental Pool, where the City’s water that is not yet needed for municipal supply will be released for various environmental benefits, which will address both dry up locations and other needs. Page 326 Item 15. City Council Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 3 of 4 The City’s reservoir releases and plans, other flow-related operational measures, and various other mitigation and enhancement items are discussed in detail in the Halligan Project’s Final Environmental Impact Statement, which can be accessed here: nwo.usace.army.mil/Missions/Regulatory- Program/Colorado/EIS-Halligan/. The other flow-related operation measures include: ramping rate limitations on how the City begins and stops diversions into the enlarged Halligan Reservoir; a Peak Flow Bypass Program to help maintain flushing flows during runoff; and an end of summer flushing event below Halligan Dam. They are also discussed in the Halligan Water Supply Project: Fish and Wildlife Mitigation and Enhancement Plan, dated June 7, 2023 (“Mitigation Plan”), which can be accessed here: fcgov.com/halligan/files/halliganwsp_fwmep.pdf?1734035654. (Note that, in addition to the Mitigation Plan discussed in this Agenda Item Summary, there are various other mitigation-related plans for the Halligan Project. The term “Mitigation Plan” is used in this Agenda Item Summary for simplicity.) Mitigation Plan. In the summer of 2023, the State of Colorado approved the City’s Mitigation Plan. Namely, the Mitigation Plan was approved, pursuant to (C.R.S) Section 37-60-122.2, by the Colorado Parks and Wildlife (“CPW”) Commission and the Colorado Water Conservation Board (“CWCB”). The Mitigation Plan is now the official state position on the mitigation actions required of the City for the Halligan Project. Protected Mitigation Releases. In the development of the Mitigation Plan, CPW staff expressed concern that the City’s releases from the enlarged Halligan Reservoir down to Milton Seaman Reservoir could be diverted from the North Fork by other entities. Specifically, under water operations known as “augmentation plans” and “exchanges,” CPW staff postulated that another entity could divert the City’s reservoir releases from the North Fork below Halligan Dam, and make the City whole by delivering other water to the City at its pipelines. If this were to occur, benefits from the Halligan Project would be reduced. CPW staff thus desired that the City seek a Water Court decree under C.R.S § 37-92-102(8) (Senate Bill 18-170) to legally protect the City’s reservoir releases as “protected mitigation releases” from Halligan Dam to Milton Seaman Reservoir. Staff believes that scenarios where other entities would actually divert the City’s reservoir releases are extremely unlikely for various reasons, including the remoteness of the North Fork. Nevertheless, the key operations for the reservoir releases are already integrated into the Halligan Project and would not be altered by seeking a Water Court decree. Nor would such a Water Court decree adversely affect the City’s operations and yield from the project. The Mitigation Plan thus includes a commitment for the City to seek such a Water Court decree. See Mitigation Plan at pages 4-7 (pdf 77), 4-10 (pdf 80), and 5-2 (pdf 111). Water Court Decree and Agreement. C.R.S §. 37-92-102(8) (Senate Bill 18-170) is a relatively new mechanism in Colorado water law. It authorizes the owners of new storage capacity to seek a Water Court decree to protect reservoir releases as “protected mitigation releases,” if their mitigation plan calls for it. Such a decree effectively prevents others from diverting the reservoir releases from the stream and thus creates legally-protected stream flows. It does not reduce the amount of water available for use by the owner of the storage capacity. To begin this effort, the owner of the new storage capacity must enter into an agreement with the CWCB to dedicate the reservoir releases to the CWCB. This requirement, in large part, is because rights to instream flows and similar uses can generally only be held by the State of Colorado. An agreement to dedicate the reservoir releases to the CWCB will give it the necessary legal interest to protect these reservoir releases from diversion. Such dedication will not otherwise affect the City’s ownership and use of its water and water rights. Draft Agreement with the CWCB. City staff have been working with CWCB staff on a draft Water Dedication and Delivery Agreement. A copy is attached as Exhibit A to the Resolution. The draft Page 327 Item 15. City Council Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 4 of 4 agreement would be brought before the CWCB for approval at their board meetings in July and September 2025. It would allow the City to proceed with initiating the Water Court case later this year. CITY FINANCIAL IMPACTS Minimal. The Water Court case will require outside legal and engineering support. These anticipated costs are already included in the budget for the Halligan Project. BOARD / COMMISSION / COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION City staff has previously discussed the Mitigation Plan with the Water Commission. PUBLIC OUTREACH The City, CPW, and the CWCB all did public notices and outreach related to the Mitigation Plan. The CWCB will do public notices and outreach for its board meetings. Notice of the Water Court application will also be made. ATTACHMENTS 1. Presentation 2. Resolution 2025-083 Page 328 Item 15. Headline Copy Goes Here Senior Assistant City Attorney Eric Potyondy Protected Mitigation Releases 9-16-2025 Page 329 Item 15. Headline Copy Goes HereOverview 2 •Halligan Reservoir can currently hold about 6,400 acre-feet of water •North Poudre Irrigation Company uses and manages the water now •The Halligan Water Supply Project will: •Increase the reservoir’s capacity by 8,200 acre-feet •Provide the City water storage •Replace the aging dam •After completion, the North Poudre Irrigation Company will continue to use its 6,400 acre-feet •The City will use the added 8,200 acre- feet Page 330 Item 15. Headline Copy Goes HereProtected Mitigation Releases Process •Staff seeks City Council authorization to execute an agreement with the Colorado Water Conservation Board •Staff will then pursue a Water Court decree to protect City releases •Protected mitigation releases align with the project’s Fish and Wildlife Mitigation and Enhancement Plan and its environmental objectives •If successful, the City’s water would be legally-protected for about 22 miles on the North Fork of the Cache la Poudre River •Protecting this water provides certainty for meeting state requirements Page 331 Item 15. Headline Copy Goes Here Slight decrease in flows during spring runoff. Slight decrease in flows during spring runoff. Most months, operations would increase flows. Current winter dry-up Current late summer dry-up Current Operations Page 332 Item 15. Headline Copy Goes HereRiver Below the North Poudre Canal Diversion Zero-Flow River Conditions River Conditions (5 CFS) Page 333 Item 15. Headline Copy Goes HereAfter the Halligan Project is Complete •The City will operate the new dam to serve Utilities water customers and store up to 8,200 acre-feet •The City will release amounts of water from the reservoir based on the time of year and need •There are release requirements for the winter and summer in addition to releases that will provide other environmental benefits •A Water Court decree does not impact the City’s ownership and use of its water or water rights Page 334 Item 15. Headline Copy Goes Here Questions? Page 335 Item 15. -1- RESOLUTION 2025-083 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH THE COLORADO WATER CONSERVATION BOARD FOR PROTECTED MITIGATION RELEASES FROM THE HALLIGAN WATER SUPPLY PROJECT A. The City owns and operates a water utility that provides water service to customers in its service area. Through the water utility, the City is pursuing the Halligan Water Supply Project (“Halligan Project”). The Halligan Project will provide additional firm yield for the City’s water utility, in addition to various other benefits. B. The Halligan Project primarily entails enlarging the existing Halligan Reservoir by 8,200 acre-feet. Once operational, the City will store water under its water rights (“City Water”) in the enlarged Halligan Reservoir and make releases into the North Fork of the Cache la Poudre River (“North Fork”) below Halligan Dam. The City Water will float these releases down about 22 miles of the North Fork to the confluence with the main stem of the Cache la Poudre River at Gateway Natural Area. The City will then generally divert a like amount of water into its pipelines located just upstream. C. Pursuant to Colorado Revised Statute (“C.R.S.”) Section 37-60-122.2, the State of Colorado, through the Colorado Parks and Wildlife Commission and the Colorado Water Conservation Board (“CWCB”), has adopted the Halligan Water Supply Project: Fish and Wildlife Mitigation and Enhancement Plan , dated June 7, 2023 (“Mitigation Plan”), as the official state position on the mitigation actions required of the City for the Halligan Project. D. Pursuant to the Mitigation Plan, the City will attempt to protect its releases of the City Water from the enlarged Halligan Reservoir (“Halligan Releases”) under C.R.S. § 37-92-102(8) by seeking a decree from the Water Court. Such a decree would generally not allow others to divert, exchange upon, or use the Halligan Releases between the enlarged Halligan Reservoir Dam and Milton Seaman Reservoir if that were to cause a reduction in the Halligan Releases. See C.R.S. § 37-92-102(8)(c)(II). To proceed seeking such a decree, the City must enter into an agreement with the CWCB to dedicate the reservoir releases to the CWCB. See C.R.S. § 37-92-102(8)(d)(I). E. The City and the CWCB have negotiated a Water Dedication and Delivery Agreement ("Agreement") for the dedication of such reservoir releases of City Water from the enlarged Halligan Reservoir to the CWCB, a copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated by reference, as Exhibit A. F. Under the Agreement, the City would retain ownership of all of the City Water associated with the reservoir releases from the enlarged Halligan Reservoir. The Agreement would not alter the City’s planned operations of the enlarged Halligan Reservoir, including with respect to the City’s yield from the Halligan Project or the environmental benefits of the project. Page 336 Item 15. -2- G. Entering into the Agreement is in the best interests of, and will benefit the City and its citizens because it will further the Halligan Project and its various benefits, it will further the goal of preserving and improving the ecological, environmental, recreational, sociological, and other resources benefitted by Poudre River flows, and while imposing few, if any, costs on the City as discussed herein . H. The City Water associated with the reservoir releases from the enlarged Halligan Reservoir is part of the City’s water utility system, but its use under the Agreement will not materially impair the viability of the water utility system as a whole and will be for the benefit of the citizens of the City. I. No compensation is to be paid to the City under the Agreement, but the Agreement would serve a bona fide public purpose because: (1) The use to which the City Water will be put under the Agreement promotes health, and general welfare and benefits a significant segment of the citizens of Fort Collins; (2) The use to which the City Water will be put supports one or more of the City Council's goals, adopted policies, projects or plans; (3) The financial support provided by the City through the below-market disposition of the rights in the City Water will be leveraged with other funding or assistance associated with the Halligan Project; (4) The Agreement will not result in any direct financial benefit to any private person or entity, except to the extent such benefit is only an incidental consequence and is not substantial relative to the public purpose being served; and (5) The Agreement will not interfere with current City projects or work programs, hinder workload schedules or divert resources needed for primary City functions or responsibilities. In light of the foregoing recitals, which the Council hereby makes and adopts as determinations and findings, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. City Council finds, pursuant to Section 23-111(a) of the City Code, that the disposition of certain rights associated with the City Water pursuant to the Agreement is in the best interests of the City. Section 2. City Council finds, pursuant to Section 23-111(b) of the City Code, that the disposition of certain rights associated with the City Water pursuant to an agreement that is substantially similar to the Agreement will not materially impair the viability of the water utility system as a whole and that it will be for the benefit of the citizens of the City. Page 337 Item 15. -3- Section 3. City Council finds, pursuant to Section 23-114, that the disposition of certain rights associated with the City Water pursuant to the Agreement may be for an amount less than market value, but that it would serve a bona fide public purpose for the reasons set forth above. Section 4. The City Manager is hereby authorized to execute the Agreement in the form of Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated by this reference, with such modifications and additional terms and conditions as the City Manager, in consultation with the City Attorney, determines to be necessary and appropriate to protect the interests of the City or effectuate the purposes of this Resolution. Passed and adopted on September 16, 2025. ______________________________ Mayor ATTEST: ______________________________ Sr. Deputy City Clerk Effective Date: September 16, 2025 Approving Attorney: Eric Potyondy Exhibit: Exhibit A –Water Dedication and Delivery Agreement Page 338 Item 15. Page 1 of 12 WATER DEDICATION AND DELIVERY AGREEMENT (Halligan Water Supply Project – Protected Mitigation Releases) The Colorado Water Conservation Board (“CWCB”), an agency of the State of Colorado, and the City of Fort Collins, a municipal corporation of the State of Colorado with home-rule authority (“Fort Collins”), each a “party” and collectively the “parties,” in consideration of the mutual promises contained herein, agree as follows: RECITALS A.The CWCB is an agency of the State of Colorado created to aid in the protection and development of the waters of the state for the benefit of its present and future inhabitants. In 1973, the Colorado General Assembly vested the CWCB with the exclusive authority to appropriate waters of the natural stream for minimum stream flows between specific points on a stream to preserve the natural environment to a reasonable degree. B.Pursuant to Section 37-92-102(3), C.R.S., the Colorado General Assembly has also vested the CWCB with the ability to acquire water, water rights, or interests in water that are not on the Division Engineer’s abandonment list in such amounts as the CWCB determines are appropriate for stream flows to preserve or improve the natural environment to a reasonable degree. C.Pursuant to Section 37-92-102(8), C.R.S., the owner of a water storage right that allows water from the right to be stored in New Reservoir Capacity0F 1 may acquire the decreed right to make, and obtain protection for, Protected Mitigation Releases of water from that New Reservoir Capacity into a Qualifying Stream Reach, up to the amount of water that is appropriate for stream flows to preserve or improve the natural environment to a reasonable degree within the Qualifying Stream Reach, and to reasonably avoid, minimize, or mitigate the impacts of the New Reservoir Capacity on fish and wildlife resources within the Qualifying Stream Reach, to comply with a fish and wildlife mitigation plan approved under Section 37-60-122.2, C.R.S. To make such Protected Mitigation Releases, the owner of the water storage right is required to: i.dedicate the proposed Protected Mitigation Releases to the CWCB; ii.agree to make the proposed Protected Mitigation Releases available for use by the 1 This Agreement uses certain capitalized terms as those terms are defined in Section 37-92-102(8)(b), C.R.S. If not defined in Section 37-92-102(8)(b), other capitalized terms have been specifically defined in this Agreement. EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 339 Item 15. Page 2 of 12 CWCB within the Qualifying Stream Reach; iii. file an application in water court, with the CWCB as a co-applicant, seeking approval of the proposed Protected Mitigation Releases; and iv. obtain a decree approving the Protected Mitigation Releases. Except as provided in Section 37-92-102(8)(e), C.R.S., the dedication to the CWCB is subject to Section 37-92-102(3), C.R.S., including the requirement that the CWCB find that the proposed Protected Mitigation Releases are appropriate to preserve and improve the natural environment to a reasonable degree within the Qualifying Stream Reach. D. Fort Collins is currently pursuing the permitting, design, and construction of an enlargement for the existing Halligan Reservoir located on the North Fork of the Cache la Poudre River (“North Fork”). This enlargement project is referred to in this Agreement as the “Halligan Project.” The Halligan Project is a water supply project that primarily entails the enlargement of Halligan Reservoir by means of the construction of a replacement dam for the existing Halligan Reservoir dam.1F 2 Fort Collins will use the additional New Reservoir Capacity created by the enlargement of Halligan Reservoir (“Halligan New Reservoir Capacity”) for storage of the Halligan Mitigation Release Rights (as defined in Recital E). Once released from storage in the Halligan New Reservoir Capacity and rediverted below the Halligan Qualifying Stream Reach (as defined in Recital H), water attributed to the Halligan Mitigation Release Rights will be used by Fort Collins for a variety of municipal and other decreed uses to provide additional water supplies to Fort Collins’ water customers and to satisfy Fort Collins’ projected municipal and other water demands. As part of the Halligan Project, Fort Collins will also replace and/or rebuild the existing North Poudre Canal diversion structure located on the North Fork between Halligan Reservoir and Milton-Seaman Reservoir to allow for the bypass of Halligan Protected Mitigation Releases that are released from Halligan New Reservoir Capacity past the North Poudre Canal diversion structure to the Halligan Qualifying Stream Reach. This replacement/rebuild will create a mechanism for keeping water in the North Fork at times when the North Poudre Irrigation Company is diverting water into the North Poudre Canal. E. Fort Collins is the owner of several water rights that have been decreed for storage in Halligan New Reservoir Capacity, either directly or by operation of exchanges. These rights, which are collectively referred to in this Agreement as the “Halligan Mitigation 2 The additional capacity created by the enlargement of Halligan Reservoir qualifies as “New Reservoir Capacity” as defined in section 37-92-102(8)(b)(III), C.R.S. EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 340 Item 15. Page 3 of 12 Release Rights,” are described as follows: i. Pursuant to the decree entered in Case No. 2013CW3185, Water Division 1, Fort Collins is the owner of a water storage right for the enlarged Halligan Reservoir. ii. Fort Collins is the owner of shares in several ditch companies that have decreed water rights that divert from the Cache la Poudre River (the “Southside Ditches”). Pursuant to the decrees entered in Case Nos. 1992CW129 and 2005CW323, Water Division 1, these Southside Ditches shares have been changed to allow for storage of water available to the shares in the enlarged Halligan Reservoir. The 92CW129 and 05CW323 decrees also include decreed appropriative rights of exchange that, when operated, can provide for storage of water in the enlarged Halligan Reservoir. The Southside Ditches shares are decreed as the sources of substitute supply for these exchanges. iii. Pursuant to the decree entered in Case No. 2014CW3158, Water Division 1, Fort Collins is the owner of a water storage right for Rigden Reservoir. The 14CW3158 decree also includes decreed appropriative rights of exchange. Water released from storage in Rigden Reservoir, including the 2014CW3158 water storage right and other water sources that are decreed for storage in Rigden Reservoir, can be used as the source of substitute supply to allow diversion of water by exchange for storage in the enlarged Halligan Reservoir. iv. Fort Collins is the owner of shares in the Water Supply and Storage Company (“WSSC”). Pursuant to the decree entered in Case No. 2011CW265, Water Division 1, these WSSC shares have been changed to allow for storage of water available to the shares in the enlarged Halligan Reservoir. The 2011CW265 decree also includes decreed appropriative rights of exchange. Water available to the WSSC shares that is released from storage at several decreed locations is used as the source of substitute supply to allow diversion of water by exchange for storage in the enlarged Halligan Reservoir. v. Fort Collins has been in discussions with the Cache La Poudre Water Users Association (“CLPWUA”) concerning the possibility of Fort Collins’ use of CLPWUA’s 1/8 interest in the Grey Mountain Reservoir Right that was originally decreed in Case No. 80CW355, Water Division 1. If an agreement is reached, Fort Collins expects that water available under the 1/8 interest would be stored in the enlarged Halligan Reservoir and could be a source for Protected Mitigation Releases. EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 341 Item 15. Page 4 of 12 F. Fort Collins was required under Section 37-60-122.2, C.R.S., to submit a Fish and Wildlife Mitigation and Enhancement Plan for the Halligan Project (“Halligan FWMEP”) and obtain recommendations from the Colorado Parks and Wildlife Commission and the Division of Parks and Wildlife (collectively “CPW”), and the CWCB concerning, and adoption by the Governor of, the Halligan FWMEP as the official state position on mitigation actions required for the Halligan Project. G. The Halligan FWMEP was adopted by the CWCB as the official state position on mitigation actions required for the Halligan Project’s impacts on fish and wildlife resources at its regular meeting held July 19-20, 2023. A copy of the Halligan FWMEP is attached to this Agreement as Exhibit A. The Halligan FWMEP describes Fort Collins’ commitments to making releases from Halligan New Reservoir Capacity for delivery to and through a Qualifying Stream Reach located on the North Fork, and, in accordance with Section 37-92-102(8), to attempt to protect those releases from diversion, exchange, or use by holders of conditional or vested water rights or other persons that would cause reductions to those releases at any location within the Halligan Qualifying Stream Reach that would result in stream flows below the target rates identified in the Halligan FWMEP and this Agreement. The Halligan FWMEP describes Fort Collins’ plan to make mitigation releases from Halligan Reservoir under the Winter Release Plan and Summer Low-Flow Program described in Recital I, below. The Halligan FWMEP also describes making enhancement releases from the Temporary Environmental Pool (“TEP”) in the enlarged Halligan Reservoir, as also described in Recital I. The CWCB and Fort Collins intend in entering this Agreement that the mitigation and enhancement releases described in the Halligan FWMEP and this Agreement (collectively the “Halligan Mitigation Releases”) will be dedicated to the CWCB for use as Protected Mitigation Releases within the Halligan Qualifying Stream Reach to avoid,minimize, and mitigate impacts to water quality and the aquatic and riparian environments within the Halligan Qualifying Stream Reach and to preserve and improve the natural environment to a reasonable degree. H. The Qualifying Stream Reach for the Halligan FWMEP and proposed Halligan Mitigation Releases shall be an approximately 22-mile river reach on the North Fork extending downstream from the replacement dam for the enlarged Halligan Reservoir to the upstream end of Milton-Seaman Reservoir as described in this paragraph, below (“Halligan Qualifying Stream Reach”). The approximate locations of the upstream and downstream termination points of the Halligan Qualifying Stream Reach are as follows, and are depicted on the map attached as Exhibit B: i. Enlarged Halligan Reservoir Dam: The current approximate proposed location for the replacement dam for the enlarged Halligan Reservoir is: NE1/4 SW1/4 of EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 342 Item 15. Page 5 of 12 Section 34, Township 11 North, Range 71 West, with the center point of the dam being located on the North Fork at the following UTM coordinates: (Zone 13, NAD83) 471510 N, 4525323 E. ii. Milton-Seaman Reservoir: The proposed downstream termination point for the Halligan Qualifying Stream Reach will be at the upper end of the operational highwater line for Milton-Seaman Reservoir, described as: a point on the North Fork located in the SW1/4 NE1/4 of Section 28, Township 9 North, Range 70 West, at UTM coordinates (Zone 13, NAD83) 4507738 N, 480094 E. I. Fort Collins wishes to dedicate to the CWCB, at no cost and for instream flow use in the Halligan Qualifying Stream Reach as Protected Mitigation Releases, the Halligan Mitigation Releases using the Halligan Mitigation Release Rights. At its regularly scheduled public meeting held _________, the CWCB considered Fort Collins’ proposed dedication of the Halligan Mitigation Releases to the CWCB in accordance with Sections 37-92-102(3) and (8), C.R.S., and Rules 6 and 11 of the Rules Concerning the Colorado Instream Flow and Natural Lake Level Program, 2 C.C.R. 408-2, and determined that the proposed Halligan Mitigation Releases would be best utilized as Protected Mitigation Releases in the amounts described below in Table 2, for instream flow use to assist in preserving and improving the water flows through the Halligan Qualifying Stream Reach up to the winter, spring, and summer flow rates recommended by CPW described in Table 1: Table 1: CPW Recommended Flow Rates to preserve and improve the natural environment Preserve ISF Target Rates Improve ISF Target Rates Up to 12 cfs Between 12 and 13 cfs Up to 30 cfs Between 30 and 53 cfs Up to 30 cfs Between 30 and 53 cfs The CWCB found that deliveries of the Halligan Mitigation Releases under this Agreement as Protected Mitigation Releases are appropriate to preserve and improve the natural environment to a reasonable degree within the Halligan Qualifying Stream Reach at rates up to the identified flow rates found appropriate by the CWCB, and thus authorized the CWCB Director to execute this Agreement. Table 2: Halligan Mitigation Releases Winter Release Plan (October 1 – April 30)Continuous release of Max.: 1,267 AF/year Summer Low-Flow Program (May 1 – Sept. 30)Releases to maintain at least Max.: 1,517 AF/year Temporary Environmental Pool Releases* Releases up to the improve ISF target 500-1,000 AF/year EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 343 Item 15. Page 6 of 12 *The TEP Releases can be made at any time of the year and will be used as additional flows to preserve and improve the natural environment up to the “improve” flow rates described in Table 1. Fort Collins dedicates the TEP releases to the CWCB up to the flow rates and volumes described in Table 2. In addition, although not dedicated to the CWCB by this Agreement as Halligan Mitigation Releases for potential Protected Mitigation Releases, consistent with section 5.1.1.1 of the Halligan FWMEP, TEP releases may be made at rates higher than the CWCB’s preserve and improve target rates shown in Table 1. The Winter Release Plan, including its applicable terms and conditions, is described in detail in section 4.2.1.1 of the Halligan FWMEP and includes the continuous release of a minimum of 3 cfs from October 1 through April 30 from the enlarged Halligan Reservoir to the North Fork and the Halligan Qualifying Stream Reach each year using water stored in the Halligan New Reservoir Capacity. The Summer Low-flow Plan, including its applicable terms and conditions, is described in detail in section 4.2.1.2 of the Halligan FWMEP and includes adjustment of Halligan Reservoir storage operations or release of water stored in the Halligan New Reservoir Capacity to maintain a minimum target flow of 5 cfs from May 1 through September 30 in the Halligan Qualifying Stream Reach (as measured at three gaging stations along the North Fork, as described in the Halligan FWMEP). Fort Collins will also operate the TEP that is described in detail in section 5.1.1.1 of the Halligan FWMEP, which includes the applicable terms and conditions. In accordance with section 5.1.1.1, under this operation, during the period between completion of construction of the enlarged Halligan Reservoir and the future date when Fort Collins reaches the full water demand levels associated with storage of its water resources in the Halligan New Reservoir Capacity, Fort Collins will dedicate and release on an annual basis a variable volume of water to the North Fork to provide downstream environmental benefits. J. The CWCB and Fort Collins wish to cooperate as contemplated by Section 37-92-102(8), C.R.S., to protect the Halligan Mitigation Releases identified in the Halligan FWMEP and in this Agreement as Protected Mitigation Releases and to preserve and improve stream flows in the Halligan Qualifying Stream Reach of the North Fork in a manner consistent with the terms of the Halligan FWMEP and any decree obtained by Fort Collins and the CWCB. EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 344 Item 15. Page 7 of 12 NOW, THEREFORE, the CWCB and Fort Collins agree as follows: DEDICATION AND DELIVERY 1. Subject to the terms of this Agreement and the water court decree to be entered adjudicating the Halligan Mitigation Releases as Protected Mitigation Releases that the CWCB intends to acquire from Fort Collins pursuant to Section 37-92-102(8), C.R.S., Fort Collins will release and deliver water stored in the Halligan New Reservoir Capacity using its Halligan Mitigation Release Rights. Such releases will be done in the manner and at the volumes, rates of flow, and times to be determined at the sole discretion of Fort Collins to be necessary to satisfy the Halligan Mitigation Releases identified in the Halligan FWMEP and this Agreement, for exclusive use by the CWCB as Protected Mitigation Releases as authorized by Section 37-92-102(8), C.R.S. 2. No delivery of water is required when water from the Halligan Mitigation Release Rights is not available for delivery. 3. As described in §§ 4.2.1.1, 4.2.1.2, 4.2.1.7, and 5.1.1.1 of the Halligan FWMEP, there may be circumstances when the Halligan Mitigation Releases cannot be made to the full amounts described in the Halligan FWMEP and this Agreement. 4. Once Fort Collins notifies the CWCB that the enlarged Halligan Reservoir is operational and the Halligan Mitigation Releases are being made, pursuant to its decreed ability, the CWCB shall protect the Halligan Mitigation Releases delivered to and through the Halligan Qualifying Stream Reach as Protected Mitigation Releases from diversion or use by exchange by other water users by, when necessary, requesting administration by the Colorado State Engineer and the Division One Engineer to prevent diversion of or use by exchange of the Halligan Mitigation Releases within the Halligan Qualifying Stream Reach by other water users. If the CWCB does not or cannot protect the full amount of the Halligan Mitigation Releases in accordance with the terms of this Agreement, nothing in this Agreement shall prevent Fort Collins from exercising the Halligan Mitigation Release Rights in accordance with their respective decrees but without protection by the CWCB within the Halligan Qualifying Stream Reach. CONDITIONS OF THE CWCB’S USE OF THE HALLIGAN MITIGATION RELEASES 5. Subject to water court approval pursuant to Section 37-92-102(8), C.R.S., the CWCB shall use the Halligan Mitigation Releases in the amounts identified in Table 2, above, to help maintain stream flows in the North Fork within the described Halligan Qualifying Stream Reach to preserve and improve the natural environment to a reasonable degree in EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 345 Item 15. Page 8 of 12 amounts up to the target rates identified in Table 1, including releases from the TEP up to the target rates that the CWCB determined are necessary to preserve or improve the natural environment. Water made available for Protected Mitigation Releases under the Halligan Mitigation Release Rights will be stored by Fort Collins in the Halligan New Reservoir Capacity and released to the North Fork at the upstream point of the Halligan Qualifying Stream Reach for instream flow use by the CWCB within that reach. Subject to Paragraphs 2 and 3 above and the other terms of this Agreement, Halligan Mitigation Releases to be Protected Mitigation Releases from the Halligan New Reservoir Capacity under this Agreement to and through the Halligan Qualifying Stream Reach would be: i. under the Winter Release Plan, continuous release of 3 cfs during October 1 through April 30; and ii. under the Summer Low-flow Plan, releases to maintain at least 5 cfs (which may include additional amounts to offset transit losses) during May 1 through September 30; and iii. under the TEP, releases up to the maximum CPW Recommended “improve” rates identified in Table 1, which may occur at any time during the year. The replacement dam for the enlarged Halligan Reservoir would be constructed to deliver for decreed beneficial use the water used to make the Halligan Mitigation Releases. In accordance with the Halligan FWMEP, Halligan Mitigation Releases will be made to and through the Halligan Qualifying Stream Reach throughout the year at the flow rates described in this Agreement and the Halligan FWMEP and subsequently rediverted by Fort Collins in accordance with the decrees for the Halligan Mitigation Release Rights, including the decree to be entered that approves the Halligan Mitigation Releases as Protected Mitigation Releases. 6. Fort Collins’ delivery of water for the CWCB’s use for instream flows within the Halligan Qualifying Stream Reach in accordance with this Agreement in no way provides the CWCB an operating or ownership interest in any of Fort Collins’ Halligan Project facilities, its other facilities, or any of its water rights, as they exist now or may exist in the future. 7. The CWCB’s right to use the Halligan Mitigation Releases delivered to and through the Halligan Qualifying Stream Reach under this Agreement extends to and terminates at the downstream termination point of the Halligan Qualifying Stream Reach as described in Recital H. EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 346 Item 15. Page 9 of 12 USE OF THE HALLIGAN MITIGATION RELEASES DOWNSTREAM OF THE QUALIFYING STREAM REACH 8. In accordance with Sections 37-92-102(3) and (8), and Section 37-87-102(4), C.R.S., the water court decree that Fort Collins and the CWCB intend to acquire pursuant to Section 37-92-102(8), C.R.S., that adjudicates the Halligan Mitigation Releases as Protected Mitigation Releases, and the decrees for the Halligan Mitigation Release Rights, Fort Collins intends to and shall redivert the Halligan Mitigation Releases at or downstream of the downstream termination point of the Halligan Qualifying Stream Reach, either directly at a Surface Point of Diversion or by using the Halligan Mitigation Releases as the source of substitute supply for a decreed exchange, thus using the rediverted water for the decreed beneficial uses. WATER COURT PROCEEDINGS 9. As authorized by Sections 37-92-102(8)(d)(III) and (IV), C.R.S., the CWCB and Fort Collins agree to act as co-applicants to file an application in water court seeking approval of the Halligan Mitigation Releases as Protected Mitigation Releases and to cooperate in obtaining a final water court decree approving the Halligan Mitigation Releases as Protected Mitigation Releases. i. Fort Collins has the burden of satisfying the required elements of the water court application filed under Section 37-92-102(8), including, as necessary, proving no injury and defending against any claim of injury to uses or exchanges of water being made pursuant to appropriations or practices in existence on the date of the filing of the application for the proposed protection of the Halligan Mitigation Releases as Protected Mitigation Releases. However, in accordance with Section 37-92-102(8)(f)(I)(A), the CWCB has the burden of demonstrating to the water court that it duly determined that the proposed protection of the Halligan Mitigation Releases as Protected Mitigation Releases is appropriate as stream flows to preserve or improve the natural environment to a reasonable degree within the Halligan Qualifying Stream Reach. ii. Except for its own attorney and court filing fees, the CWCB is not responsible for paying costs of prosecuting the application, including the costs of hiring a consulting engineer or other witnesses or any attorney fees of other parties. RECORDS AND ACCOUNTING 10. Fort Collins shall be responsible for maintaining all records and accounting necessary for EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 347 Item 15. Page 10 of 12 the implementation of this Agreement, and all records required by the Division Engineer and applicable water court decrees for administration of the Halligan Mitigation Releases as Protected Mitigation Releases, using forms mutually agreeable to Fort Collins and the CWCB. 11. Fort Collins will provide accounting related to the operation of this Agreement to the CWCB upon reasonable request. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS 12. The term of this Agreement is perpetual unless terminated under the provisions of this paragraph. Except as expressly provided herein, this Agreement may only be amended or terminated by the written agreement of the parties in a subsequent agreement or amendment executed with the same formality as this Agreement. If Fort Collins decides, in its sole discretion, to no longer pursue the enlargement of Halligan Reservoir, Fort Collins may terminate this Agreement by providing notice pursuant to Paragraph 21. In such event, the Halligan FWMEP will not be implemented. If, at such time, a water court action for approval of Protected Mitigation Releases for the Halligan Project is pending in water court, then the CWCB and Fort Collins agree to withdraw such water court application. Fort Collins will be responsible for any costs owed to objectors because of the withdrawal. If a decree authorizing Protected Mitigation Releases for the Halligan Project has already been entered, Fort Collins will take appropriate actions to cancel that decree. 13. The CWCB is not responsible for modification of any structures that may be necessary for use of the Halligan Mitigation Releases to preserve or improve the natural environment. 14. This Agreement shall not be assignable by either party without the written consent of the other party. 15. Pursuant to Section 37-92-102(3), C.R.S., the terms of this Agreement shall be enforceable by each party as a water matter in the District Court for Water Division No. 1; provided, however, that before commencing any action for enforcement of this Agreement, the party alleging the violation shall notify the other party in writing of the alleged violation and the parties shall make a good faith effort to resolve their differences through informal consultation. 16. Specific performance of this Agreement shall be the sole and exclusive remedy for failure of either party to comply with any provision of this Agreement. EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 348 Item 15. Page 11 of 12 17. Enforcement of this Agreement and all the rights and obligations described herein is reserved solely to the CWCB and Fort Collins and not to any other person or entity. Any services or benefits which other persons or entities may receive because of this Agreement are incidental to the Agreement and do not create any third-party rights for these other persons or entities. 18. This Agreement shall be construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Colorado and shall be interpreted broadly to achieve its purposes. To the extent than any one or more of the identified Halligan Mitigation Release Rights or the Halligan Mitigation Releases operations described in this Agreement are not authorized for use as Protected Mitigation Releases in a decree entered by the water court pursuant to the application filed by Fort Collins and the CWCB in accordance with Section 37-92-102(8), this Agreement shall continue in full force and effect with respect to those Halligan Mitigation Release Rights and Halligan Mitigation Releases operations that are decreed as Protected Mitigation Releases. 19. Nothing in this Agreement shall preclude or limit Fort Collins from making releases or deliveries of water yielded by the Halligan Mitigation Release Rights for any purposes allowed by law. 20. Notwithstanding any other provisions of this Agreement to the contrary, the obligations of Fort Collins and CWCB in fiscal years after the fiscal year of this Agreement shall be subject to appropriation of funds sufficient and intended therefor, with each party having the sole discretion to determine whether the subject funds are sufficient and intended for use under this Agreement. 21. Any notice or request required or allowed to be given under this Agreement shall be in writing and considered effective when delivered by email or certified or registered mail addressed to the parties as follows: If to the CWCB: Colorado Water Conservation Board Stream and Lake Protection Section 1313 Sherman Street, Room 721 Denver, Colorado 80203 DNR_CWCBISF@state.co.us If to Fort Collins: City of Fort Collins c/o Nicole Poncelet-Johnson, Director of Water Utilities, and Jen Dial, Water Resources Manager EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 349 Item 15. Page 12 of 12 P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, Colorado 80522 Nponcelet-johnson@fcgov.com; jdial@fcgov.com IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the CWCB and Fort Collins have executed this Agreement as of the last date of execution set forth below. COLORADO WATER CONSERVATION BOARD By: ________________________________________ Date: _________________________ CITY OF FORT COLLINS By: ________________________________________ Kelly DiMartino, City Manager Date: _________________________ ATTEST: By: ______________________________________ City Clerk APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: By: ______________________________________ Eric Potyondy, Senior Assistant City Attorney EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 350 Item 15. Halligan Water Supply Project FINAL Fish and Wildlife Mitigation and Enhancement Plan Prepared by with support from June 7, 2023 EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 351 Item 15. Contents Acronyms and Abbreviations .................................................................................................................. v Key Terminology ................................................................................................................................... vii Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................... ES-1 1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 1-1 1.1 Purpose of this Fish and Wildlife Mitigation and Enhancement Plan ............................ 1-1 1.2 Contents of this Fish and Wildlife Mitigation and Enhancement Plan ........................... 1-2 1.3 Halligan Project Overview ............................................................................................ 1-2 1.3.1 Operations, Storage, and Water Rights ........................................................... 1-7 1.3.2 Estimated Halligan Project Cost....................................................................... 1-9 1.4 Regulatory Framework ................................................................................................ 1-9 1.4.1 National Environmental Policy Act .................................................................. 1-9 1.4.2 Clean Water Act Section 404 ......................................................................... 1-10 1.4.3 Federal Wildlife Regulations .......................................................................... 1-11 1.4.4 State of Colorado .......................................................................................... 1-12 1.4.5 Larimer County ............................................................................................. 1-12 1.4.6 Consultation, Coordination, and Public Input ................................................ 1-13 2 Fort Collins Water Portfolio ..................................................................................................... 2-1 2.1 Existing Water Supply and Demand ............................................................................. 2-1 2.2 Water Conservation and Water Restrictions ................................................................ 2-3 2.3 Future Water Demand ................................................................................................. 2-3 2.4 Related Regional Activities .......................................................................................... 2-4 2.4.1 Shared Vision Planning .................................................................................... 2-4 2.4.2 Fort Collins’ River Efforts ................................................................................. 2-4 2.4.3 Northern Integrated Supply Project ................................................................ 2-5 2.4.4 Poudre Runs Through It .................................................................................. 2-5 2.4.5 Poudre Flows Plan........................................................................................... 2-5 2.4.6 Wildfire Recovery and Monitoring Efforts ....................................................... 2-6 2.4.7 Coalition for the Poudre River Watershed ....................................................... 2-6 2.4.8 Preble’s Meadow Jumping Mouse Site Conservation Team ............................. 2-7 2.4.9 Platte River Species ......................................................................................... 2-7 3 Fish and Wildlife Conditions and Impacts ................................................................................ 3-1 3.1 Basis of Halligan Project Effects ................................................................................... 3-1 3.2 Resources Evaluated.................................................................................................... 3-2 3.3 Surface Water Hydrology ............................................................................................. 3-2 3.3.1 Current Conditions for Surface Water Hydrology ............................................ 3-3 3.3.2 Halligan Project Effects on Surface Water Hydrology ....................................... 3-3 3.4 Surface Water Quality ................................................................................................. 3-6 3.4.1 Current Conditions for Surface Water Quality ................................................. 3-6 EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 352 Item 15. 3.4.2 Halligan Project Effects on Surface Water Quality ........................................... 3-6 3.5 Aquatic Resources ..................................................................................................... 3-11 3.5.1 Current Conditions for Aquatic Resources ..................................................... 3-11 3.5.2 Halligan Project Effects on Aquatic Resources ............................................... 3-13 3.5.3 Wetlands ...................................................................................................... 3-15 3.6 Terrestrial Wildlife Including Big Game ...................................................................... 3-15 3.6.1 Current Conditions for Big Game ................................................................... 3-16 3.6.2 Current Conditions for Other Wildlife............................................................ 3-16 3.6.3 Halligan Project Effects on Big Game and Other Wildlife ............................... 3-16 3.7 Rocky Mountain Bighorn Sheep ................................................................................. 3-19 3.7.1 Current Conditions for Bighorn Sheep ........................................................... 3-19 3.7.2 Lone Pine Herd Additional Data Evaluation ................................................... 3-19 3.7.3 Lone Pine Herd Management Challenges ...................................................... 3-21 3.7.4 Halligan Project Effects on Rocky Mountain Bighorn Sheep ........................... 3-22 3.8 Special-status Species ................................................................................................ 3-23 3.8.1 Current Conditions for Federally Listed Species ............................................. 3-24 3.8.2 Current Conditions for State-listed Species ................................................... 3-25 3.8.3 Halligan Project Effects on Federally Listed Species ....................................... 3-28 3.8.4 Halligan Project Effects on State-listed Species.............................................. 3-29 3.9 Recreation ................................................................................................................. 3-31 3.9.1 Current Conditions ........................................................................................ 3-31 3.9.2 Halligan Project Effects on Recreation and Public Access ............................... 3-33 3.9.3 Evaluation of Future Public Use of the Enlarged Halligan Reservoir ............... 3-34 4 Proposed Fish and Wildlife Mitigation Plan............................................................................. 4-1 4.1 Mitigation Approach.................................................................................................... 4-1 4.1.1 Regulatory Mitigation Categories .................................................................... 4-2 4.1.2 Changes from DEIS Conceptual Mitigation Plan ............................................... 4-2 4.2 Avoidance and Minimization ....................................................................................... 4-4 4.2.1 Flow-related Operational Measures ................................................................ 4-4 4.2.2 Infrastructure Design Measures .................................................................... 4-19 4.2.3 Construction-related Measures ..................................................................... 4-20 4.2.4 Overhead Power Line and Pole Relocation .................................................... 4-31 4.2.5 Halligan Reservoir Sediment Management Plan ............................................ 4-31 4.3 Compensatory Mitigation Measures .......................................................................... 4-32 4.3.1 Preservation as Early Compensatory Mitigation Measure.............................. 4-32 4.3.2 Fish Passage at the Fort Collins Intake at Gateway Park................................. 4-35 4.3.3 Compensatory Mitigation for Halligan Project Impacts on Bighorn Sheep ..... 4-35 4.3.4 Compensatory Mitigation for Halligan Project Impacts on Stream Temperature ................................................................................................. 4-36 4.3.5 Compensatory Mitigation for Halligan Project Impacts on Wetlands ............. 4-36 4.3.6 Special-status Species ................................................................................... 4-36 EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 353 Item 15. 4.3.7 Recreational Resources ................................................................................. 4-37 4.3.8 Instream Water Rights .................................................................................. 4-39 4.4 Mitigation Costs and Schedule ................................................................................... 4-39 5 Proposed Fish and Wildlife Enhancement Plan ....................................................................... 5-1 5.1 Enhancement Measures .............................................................................................. 5-1 5.1.1 Aquatic Resources Enhancements ................................................................... 5-1 5.2 Surface Water Quality Enhancement ........................................................................... 5-5 5.2.1 Sediment-related Operational Measures......................................................... 5-5 5.2.2 Passive Aeration in Outlet Structure ................................................................ 5-5 5.2.3 Terrestrial Resources Enhancements............................................................... 5-6 5.3 Fort Collins Ecological Resource Monitoring ................................................................ 5-6 5.3.1 Streamflow Monitoring ................................................................................... 5-6 5.3.2 Sediment, Macroinvertebrates, and Water Quality Monitoring ....................... 5-7 5.3.3 Bighorn Sheep Collaring Study ........................................................................ 5-7 5.4 Enhancement Costs and Schedule ............................................................................... 5-7 6 References .............................................................................................................................. 6-1 Appendixes Appendix A Mapbook Appendix B Summary of Mitigation Measures Appendix C Surface Water Quality Supplemental Information Appendix D Water Quality Sampling Location Maps Appendix E Parks and Wildlife Commissioner and Public Comment Summary Appendix F FWMEP Virtual Open House Public Comments Tables Table 1-1. Estimated Halligan Project Costs Shown in 2022 Dollars ....................................................... 1-9 Table 3-1. Summary of Halligan Project Effects on Riffle and Pool Complexes ..................................... 3-15 Table 3-2. Cumulative, Permanent, and Temporary Impacts of Halligan Project on Big Game Habitat................................................................................................................................... 3-18 Table 3-3. Summary of DEIS Impact Evaluation of Halligan Project on Species of Concern ................... 3-23 Table 3-4. 2021 Bat Survey Results ..................................................................................................... 3-26 Table 4-1. Ramping Rate Limitations for Decreasing Releases from Fort Collins’ Portion of an Enlarged Halligan Reservoir[a] ................................................................................................. 4-12 Table B-1. FWMEP Measures and Costs ................................................................................................ B-1 Table C-2. Median and 85th Percentiles of Total Iron and Dissolved Iron Data ...................................... C-9 Figures Figure 1-1. Overview of Halligan Project Elements and Other Infrastructure ......................................... 1-4 Figure 1-2. Overview of the Halligan Existing and Enlarged Surface Areas ............................................. 1-5 Figure 1-3. Proposed Halligan Dam Footprint and Construction Areas .................................................. 1-6 Figure 2-1. Fort Collins Utilities Water Supply System ........................................................................... 2-2 EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 354 Item 15. Figure 3-1. Average Monthly Residence Times With and Without the Halligan Project Based on Common Technical Platform Flows, 1980–2005 ....................................................................... 3-8 Figure 3-2. Average Monthly Percentage of Flow from the North Fork on the Main Stem below the North Fork Confluence[a] ........................................................................................................ 3-11 Figure 3-3. Halligan Project Elements and Bighorn Sheep Suitable Habitat .......................................... 3-20 Figure 3-4. Sections 29 and 32 on the Western Edge of Halligan Reservoir .......................................... 3-32 Figure 4-1. North Fork, Zero-Flow in Phantom Canyon, May 2002 ........................................................ 4-6 Figure 4-2. North Fork, Zero-Flow Conditions below Calloway Diversion, August 2018 .......................... 4-9 Figure 4-3. Foraging Elk Herd .............................................................................................................. 4-20 Figure 4-4. Ute Ladies’-tresses Orchid ................................................................................................. 4-21 Figure 4-5. Townsend’s Big-Eared Bat ................................................................................................. 4-21 Figure 4-6. Raptor Nesting Platform in Laporte, Colorado ................................................................... 4-22 Figure 4-7. Proposed Construction Schedule to Avoid and Minimize Bighorn Sheep Disturbance at North Poudre Canal and Calloway Diversions ......................................................................... 4-28 Figure 4-8. Land Ownership and Mitigation Areas around Halligan Reservoir ...................................... 4-34 Figure 4-9. Fort Collins Intake at Gateway Park ................................................................................... 4-35 Figure 5-1. North Poudre Canal Diversion Structure .............................................................................. 5-3 Figure 5-2. Calloway Diversion Structure .............................................................................................. 5-4 Figure C-1. Bathymetric Map of Halligan Reservoir (Based on 2003 Survey) at Existing Full Pool ........... C-2 Figure C-2. Average Monthly Residence Time in Halligan Reservoir (Based on Observed Release Rates and Storage Volumes from 2010 to 2018) ................................................................................ C-2 Figure C-3. Dissolved Oxygen Profiles in Halligan Reservoir (2021) ........................................................ C-3 Figure C-4. Observed Chlorophyll a Concentrations in Halligan Reservoir (2016 to 2019) ...................... C-3 Figure C-5. Example Dissolved Oxygen Profiles from Seaman Reservoir, 2019 ....................................... C-4 Figure C-6. Example Profile Pair from Halligan Reservoir Showing Temperature Exceedance and No Adequate Refuge; July 10, 2018 ............................................................................................... C-5 Figure C-7. Hardness across the North Fork, 2016-2019 ........................................................................ C-6 Figure C-8. Example of Thermal Shock below Halligan Dam (NBH), 2017 ............................................... C-7 Figure C-9. Observed Weekly Average Temperatures across the North Fork on a Typical Summer Day with Bottom Releases from Halligan Reservoir, 7/19/2019 ................................................ C-8 Figure C-10. Observed Daily Maximum Temperatures across the North Fork on a Typical Summer Day with Bottom Releases from Halligan Reservoir, 7/19/2019 ................................................ C-8 Figure C-11. Weekly Average Temperatures on Select Summer Days in 2018 across the Main Stem Focus Reach ........................................................................................................................... C-11 Figure C-12. Daily Maxima on Select Summer Days in 2018 across the Main Stem Focus Reach .......... C-11 Figure C-13. Average Monthly Percentage of Flow from the North Fork on the Main Stem below the North Fork Confluence (based on observed flows 2009–2018) ......................................... C-13 Figure C-14. Diagram of Geologic Zones of the Poudre River Main Stem Focus Reach ......................... C-14 Figure C-15. Poudre River Fraction of Flow by Source, 2016 Monthly Averages................................... D-15 Figure D-1. Water-Quality Sampling Locations on the North Fork below Halligan Reservoir and its Tributaries ............................................................................................................................... D-1 Figure D-2. Macroinvertebrate and Pebble Count Sampling Sites on the North Fork ............................. D-2 Figure D-3. Water Quality Sampling Locations along the Poudre River .................................................. D-3 Figure D-4. Temperature Gages along the North Fork and Poudre River ............................................... D-4 EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 355 Item 15. Acronyms and Abbreviations Term Definition 2008 Mitigation Rule 2008 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Compensatory Mitigation for Losses of Aquatic Resources; Final Rule bighorn sheep Rocky Mountain bighorn sheep BLM U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management BMP best management practice C-BT Colorado–Big Thompson, in reference to the C-BT Project CCR Code of Colorado Regulations CDNR Colorado Department of Natural Resources CDPHE Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment CFR Code of Federal Regulations cfs cubic feet per second CMP Conceptual Mitigation Plan Coalition Coalition for the Poudre River Watershed Commission Parks and Wildlife Commission Corps U.S. Army Corps of Engineers CPW Colorado Parks and Wildlife CRS Colorado Revised Statute CWA Clean Water Act CWCB Colorado Water Conservation Board DAU data analysis unit DEIS Draft Environmental Impact Statement DM daily maximum DO dissolved oxygen DWR Colorado Department of Water Resources EIS Environmental Impact Statement EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ESA Endangered Species Act FEIS Final Environmental Impact Statement Fort Collins City of Fort Collins, acting through its Fort Collins Utilities FR Federal Register FWMEP Fish and Wildlife Mitigation and Enhancement Plan GIS geographic information system GMU Game Management Unit GPS global positioning system Halligan Project, Project Halligan Water Supply Project LAPCR Landowners Association for Phantom Canyon Ranches Main Stem Main Stem of the Cache la Poudre River MLOW multilevel outlet works EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 356 Item 15. Term Definition MMI macroinvertebrate multimetric index NEPA National Environmental Policy Act NISP Northern Integrated Supply Project North Fork North Fork of the Cache la Poudre River Northern Water Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District ROD Record of Decision SAM species activity mapping TMDL total maximum daily load U.S.C. United States Code USFWS United States Fish and Wildlife Service WQCD Water Quality Control Division EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 357 Item 15. Key Terminology Key terminology used throughout this report is defined in this section and is listed in alphabetic order. If a citation is listed, the definition provided is directly from that regulatory reference. Best Management Practices. Best management practices (BMPs) refer to structural and non-structural methods, measures, or practices implemented to prevent, reduce, or mitigate adverse impacts resulting from construction and operation of a project. BMPs may also be called control measures. Poudre River-related Terminology: Exchange Reach. For purposes of this Fish and Wildlife Mitigation and Enhancement Plan (FWMEP), the Exchange Reach is defined as the segment of the Main Stem between its confluence with the North Fork and the Fort Collins Intake(s): the Fort Collins Intake and Munroe Gravity Canal are located approximately 0.6 river mile and 1.5 river miles upstream of the North Fork confluence, respectively. Exchanges are a unique type of water right. They are, in essence, a trade where water is diverted at upstream locations when an equal amount of water is delivered to or released at downstream locations. Main Stem. In this FWMEP, the Main Stem refers to the portion of the Poudre River from the Munroe Diversion to the confluence with the South Platte River. Cooperating Agency. In the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) (Section 1.2), the United States (U.S.) Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) refers to cooperating agencies pursuant to 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Section 1501.8. The regulation states: “Upon request of the lead agency, any other Federal agency with jurisdiction by law shall be a cooperating agency. In addition, any other Federal agency which has special expertise with respect to any environmental issue may be a cooperating agency. A State, Tribal or local agency of similar qualifications may become a cooperating agency by agreement with the lead agency.” Ecological Function. Ecological function is defined as the work performed or role played individually or collectively by the physical, chemical, and biological processes that contribute to the maintenance of the aquatic and terrestrial environments that constitute the natural environment (Law Insider n.d.). Enhancement-related Terminology: Enhancement. Colorado Parks and Wildlife’s (CPW’s) rules and regulations for fish and wildlife mitigation and enhancement plans pursuant to Colorado Revised Statute (CRS) 37-60-122.2 define enhancement as “the improvement of the total value of fish and wildlife resources affected by the project beyond that required by mitigation and beyond that which would occur without the project” (2 Code of Colorado Regulations [CCR] 406-16). This involves activities conducted within existing aquatic or other resources that heighten, intensify, or improve one or more functions of the resource. Enhancement is often implemented for a specific purpose, such as to improve water quality, flood water retention, or wildlife habitat. Enhancement Plan. CPW’s rules and regulations for fish and wildlife mitigation and enhancement plans pursuant to CRS 37-60-122.2 define an enhancement plan as a “document describing the measures to be completed by the applicant which will enhance fish and wildlife resources beyond that which would occur without the project. It includes a cost estimate for the implementation of the plan and a schedule for completion” (2 CCR 406-16). Fort Collins’ enhancement plan is set forth in Chapter 5 of this FWMEP. EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 358 Item 15. Environmental Effect/Impacts. An environmental effect or impact is defined as any change to the environment, whether adverse or beneficial, resulting from an action taken. Direct effects/impacts are those that would result directly from implementing the Halligan Water Supply Project (Halligan Project). Most direct effects would occur from construction and from inundation by the enlarged Halligan Reservoir. Indirect effects/impacts are those that result from the Halligan Project but occur later in time or are farther removed in distance. The primary indirect effects would be associated with Project-related flow changes in the North Fork and the Main Stem. Flow-Related Operational Measures. These are measures that would re-establish a perennial flow regime of 3 cubic feet per second (cfs) to 5 cfs or more to the North Fork below the enlarged Halligan Reservoir, minimize abrupt changes to flows that would otherwise result from Fort Collins’ operations, and allow for a portion of the hydrologic peak flows to bypass the enlarged reservoir when Fort Collins could otherwise be diverting water to storage. These measures include the Winter Release Plan, Summer Low-flow Plan, Ramping Rate Limitations, and Peak Flow Bypass Program. Fort Collins. The proponent of the Halligan Project is the City of Fort Collins, acting through Fort Collins Utilities. Fort Collins Intake(s). Two diversions are located on the Main Stem where Fort Collins diverts water for municipal purposes. The two diversions that deliver water to Fort Collins’ Water Treatment Facility are: Fort Collins Intake. Diversion on the Main Stem located approximately 0.6 river mile upstream of the North Fork confluence, which diverts water into the Fort Collins pipeline. Munroe Canal. Diversion on the Main Stem located approximately 1.5 river miles upstream of the North Fork confluence, which delivers Fort Collins’ water into the Pleasant Valley Pipeline. In the future, releases from Fort Collins’ portion of the enlarged Halligan Reservoir will most likely be diverted by exchange at the Fort Collins Intakes. Of the approximately 1,700 acre-feet of annual average releases by Fort Collins under the Halligan Project, about 90 percent are diverted at the Fort Collins Intake and about 10 percent are diverted at Munroe Canal. Inherent Benefits. These are beneficial effects on natural resources as a result of the Halligan Project, including but not limited to ecological benefits resulting from flow-related operational measures and the natural re-establishment of wetland and riparian communities at the enlarged reservoir shoreline and on the North Fork. Linkage Area. Is being used to describe habitat that successfully moves animals across fracture zone. Fracture zones are highways, railroads, and similar potential barriers to wildlife movement and the adjacent development of private lands. So, even though use may vary by season of year or not it is still used as a movement or linkage area connecting two blocks of viable, suitable, and used habitat (Interagency Grizzly Bear Committee Public Lands Wildlife Linkage Task Force 2004). Mitigation-related Terminology: Mitigation. CPW’s rules and regulations for fish and wildlife mitigation and enhancement plans under CRS 37-60-122.2 define mitigation as “any action or measures taken to address undesirable project impacts on fish and wildlife resources which may be accomplished in several ways, including reducing, minimizing, rectifying, compensating, or avoiding impacts” (2 CCR 406-16). As used in this FWMEP, mitigation includes: EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 359 Item 15. Avoidance. These are measures undertaken to avoid adverse impacts of a project, such as design refinements to reduce the project footprint (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency [EPA] 1990). Minimization. This consists of measures undertaken to minimize adverse impacts through project modifications and permit conditions (40 CFR Sections 230.70–77). Compensatory Mitigation. This means any action or measures taken to address unavoidable project impacts on fish and wildlife resources after all appropriate and practical avoidance and minimization measures have been implemented. This may be accomplished in several ways, including rectifying or compensating impacts. Early Mitigation. These are mitigation efforts initiated by Fort Collins before construction and operation of the Halligan Project, or in some cases before developing this FWMEP. Mitigation Plan. CPW’s rules and regulations for fish and wildlife mitigation and enhancement plans developed pursuant to CRS 37-60-122.2 define a mitigation plan as a “document describing the measures to be completed by the applicant which will mitigate losses to fish and wildlife resources resulting from the project. It includes a cost estimate for the implementation of the plan and a time schedule for completion.” (2 CCR 406-16). Fort Collins’ mitigation plan is set forth in Chapter 4 of this FWMEP. Preservation. This involves permanently protecting ecologically important aquatic or other resources by implementing appropriate legal and physical mechanisms, such as conservation easements and title transfers. Preservation of aquatic resources may include protecting upland areas adjacent to aquatic resources as necessary to ensure protection or enhancement of the aquatic ecosystem (2008 Mitigation Rule [USACE 2008]; 73 Federal Register [FR] 19593). Restoration. This is defined as reestablishing or rehabilitating an aquatic or other resource with the goal of returning natural or historical functions and characteristics to a former or degraded resource. Restoration may result in a gain in resource function, acres, or both (2008 Mitigation Rule; 73 FR 19593). Monitoring-Related Terminology: Baseline Assessments. This consists of assessments undertaken before project implementation to document existing conditions in order to understand how resources may be affected by the project or are the subject of mitigation measures before mitigation and/or enhancement actions are taken. Construction Compliance Monitoring. This consists of monitoring undertaken to evaluate whether construction-related avoidance and minimization measures are being implemented. Mitigation Compliance Monitoring. This involves monitoring undertaken to evaluate whether compliance with the compensatory mitigation requirements are being met. Voluntary Enhancement Monitoring. This consists of monitoring that Fort Collins would perform voluntarily and that does not directly relate to monitoring required to evaluate compliance. Project. The Halligan Water Supply Project is also referred to as the “Halligan Project” in this FWMEP, which primarily entails the enlargement of Halligan Reservoir, construction of the replacement Halligan Dam, and replacement of the North Poudre Canal Diversion. The Project is referred to as Fort Collin’s “Proposed Action” in the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process and associated EIS. Halligan Project Area. This term is used to describe the general area of Project construction and the area affected by operations of the enlarged Halligan Reservoir. The Halligan Project Area refers generally EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 360 Item 15. to the area of the enlarged Halligan Reservoir; the North Poudre Canal Diversion; the North Fork downstream of Halligan Reservoir to the confluence with the Main Stem; the Exchange Reach; and areas temporarily or permanently affected by construction activities, plus a 0.5-mile buffer for noise, visual, or vibratory disturbance. The Halligan Project Area also includes roads that would be temporarily widened to provide access for construction of the Halligan Project. The Halligan Project Area does not include mitigation sites that are not adjacent to the areas listed in this section (refer to Section 1.3). EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 361 Item 15. Executive Summary The City of Fort Collins, acting through Fort Collins Utilities (Fort Collins), is pursuing the Halligan Water Supply Project (Halligan Project or Project), a municipal water supply project. Implementation of the Halligan Project requires various regulatory approvals, including federal permitting processes administered by the United States (U.S.) Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) under the Clean Water Act (CWA) and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). A Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) was issued by the Corps for the Halligan Project on November 22, 2019 and serves as the basis for documenting current conditions and impacts. Fort Collins has prepared this Fish and Wildlife Mitigation and Enhancement Plan (FWMEP) in coordination with Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW) staff pursuant to Colorado Revised Statute (CRS) 37-60-122.2 and applicable rules and regulations (2 CCR] 406-16). The Halligan Project Overview. The Halligan Project primarily involves enlarging the existing Halligan Reservoir on the North Fork of the Cache la Poudre River (North Fork), located approximately 25 miles northwest of Fort Collins. The existing Halligan Reservoir currently supplies water to shareholders of the North Poudre Irrigation Company (NPIC), which would continue to use and operate the historical reservoir pool. Fort Collins would store its water in the enlarged portion of the reservoir. Fort Collins’ water would primarily come from water rights historically used to irrigate now-developed lands in the Fort Collins area that have been transferred to municipal use. Existing infrastructure would be used to deliver water from the enlarged reservoir pool to Fort Collins’ water treatment facility. Since the release of the DEIS in November 2019, Fort Collins has modified their Proposed Action from rehabilitation and raising of the existing dam to constructing a new dam, which is also referred to as the replacement dam. Halligan Reservoir would be enlarged by replacing the existing 114-year-old dam, as of 2023, with a new dam constructed approximately 200 feet downstream of the existing dam. The replacement dam would raise the existing reservoir elevation by approximately 25 feet, to increase the total water storage capacity by approximately 8,200 acre-feet, for a total enlarged reservoir volume of approximately 14,600 acre-feet. Enlarging the reservoir would increase the current surface area of Halligan Reservoir from 253 to 391 acres. Fort Collins would release its water from the enlarged reservoir into the North Fork below the dam. Fort Collins’ releases would be conveyed approximately 24 miles in the North Fork to its confluence with the Main Stem of the Cache la Poudre River (Main Stem). Using an exchange, Fort Collins would then divert a like amount of water at either of the two Fort Collins Intakes on the Main Stem, located approximately 0.6 river mile and 1.5 river miles upstream. The Halligan Project also includes rebuilding the existing North Poudre Canal Diversion located on the North Fork approximately 6 river miles downstream of Halligan Reservoir. The replacement ensures that Fort Collins’ releases from the enlarged Halligan Reservoir would bypass the diversion and remain in the North Fork. In the DEIS Section 1.4.2, the Corps defined Fort Collins’ purpose and need for the Halligan Project as “to provide additional system firm yield for Fort Collins in order to satisfy an additional need of approximately 7,900 acre-feet per year to meet its projected approximate 2,065 municipal and industrial demands with water of a quality comparable to the water now delivered to its customers.” In addition, the Halligan Project ensures that Fort Collins can satisfy future water supply and demands by providing a storage reserve for emergency water supply, increasing drought security, and improving water system reliability and flexibility. The Fish and Wildlife Mitigation and Enhancement Plan. This FWMEP was developed in collaboration with CPW staff pursuant to CRS 37-60-122.2 and applicable regulations (2 CCR 406-16). In addition to EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 362 Item 15. describing the Halligan Project and its context, this FWMEP includes both a mitigation plan (Chapter 4) and an enhancement plan (Chapter 5). Fort Collins understands that CPW staff’s interpretation of these regulations are that only a portion of Fort Collins’ mitigation and enhancement measures will be considered to be part of the Parks and Wildlife Commission’s (Commission’s) proposed mitigation recommendation for purposes of CRS Section 37-60-122.2 and 2 CCR 406-16. Fort Collins also understands that CPW staff’s interpretation is that the Commission acknowledges the importance and value of all mitigation and enhancement measures as described in Fort Collins’ Modified Proposed Action and required by other agencies, but distinguishes a different category of which the Commission is recommending on top of, or in addition to those measures proposed within the Modified Proposed Action and required by other agencies. Fort Collins desires to complete this process for the FWMEP and has thus not taken a position on CPW staff’s interpretation. This FWMEP thus includes a comprehensive description of all of Fort Collins’ planned mitigation and enhancement measures for the Halligan Project that are related to fish and wildlife. Some of these commitments and measures are included as part of Fort Collins’ Modified Proposed Action for its federal permitting requirements in the Final EIS, and some of these commitments and measures were developed for purposes of this FWMEP. As such, Fort Collins’ total estimated mitigation and enhancement costs for all measures, as well as CPW’s interpretation of what are attributable to the Commission’s recommendations pursuant to CRS Section 37-60-122.2 are presented as part of this FWMEP. All cost commitments presented in the FWMEP are depicted in 2022 dollars and will be increased in the amount of the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics Consumer Price Index for Denver-Aurora- Lakewood from January 1, 2023 to the date of final payment under the FWMEP obligation. Chapters 1 and 2. These sections provide an overview and summary of the Halligan Project and its context. Chapter 1 includes information regarding current operations at Halligan Reservoir and along the North Fork, as well as proposed future operations after the reservoir is enlarged. Chapter 1 also provides current estimated costs and an overview of the regulatory framework. Chapter 2 describes Fort Collins’ water portfolio and extensive water conservation efforts. Additional and more detailed technical information and analyses are provided in the Corps’ DEIS and its technical reports (Corps 2019). Chapter 3. This section summarizes fish and wildlife conditions in the Halligan Project Area and effects of the Halligan Project. Since completion of Halligan Reservoir in 1909, operations of Halligan Dam and the North Poudre Canal Diversion have significantly and adversely affected river flows in the North Fork and impaired downstream aquatic habitats. The Halligan Project effects described in this FWMEP are based on detailed evaluations in the DEIS and supporting technical reports, and further analyses conducted since the DEIS. Most Halligan Project permanent impacts would occur from inundation by the enlarged reservoir along a portion of the North Fork upstream of the reservoir, including a Colorado Water Conservation Board (CWCB) instream flow water right, and at the footprint of the replacement dam. Temporary impacts would occur from construction activities, including access and materials mobilization and stockpiling, at the replacement dam and at the North Poudre Canal Diversion. Minor indirect impacts are anticipated for the North Fork between Halligan Reservoir. As well as minor indirect impacts for the Mainstem in the form of reduced runoff flows while diverting water to storage in the enlarged reservoir and for the Main Stem in the form of reduced flows within the Exchange Reach when Halligan Releases are being diverted by exchange into the Fort Collins Intakes. This FWMEP also addresses additional concerns regarding the Halligan Project that were identified by CPW staff during Project consultations. EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 363 Item 15. Chapter 4. The mitigation plan describes the measures that would be used to avoid and minimize Project impacts on fish and wildlife resources, as well as measures that would be used to compensate for unavoidable impacts on fish and wildlife resources. Key measures include: •Flow-related operational measures, including the following: –Winter Release Plan to provide continuous releases of 3 cubic feet per second (cfs) from the enlarged reservoir to the North Fork from October 1 through April 30 each year –Summer Low-Flow Program to maintain a continuous flow of at least 5 cfs in the approximately 22 miles of the North Fork between Halligan Dam and Seaman Reservoir from May 1 to September 30 each year –Ramping rate limitations on Fort Collins’ operations to gradually change flow rates associated with diversions and releases from the enlarged reservoir –Peak Flow Bypass Program to maintain historical peak flushing flows for at least 3 days •Operational measures for sediment management, such as construction-related sediment controls and the Peak Flow Bypass Program •Infrastructure design measures, including the following: –Design of new replacement Halligan Dam with redundancy in operation function –Enlarged outlet conduit to allow for the peak flow bypass –Design of the partial or total demolition of the existing Halligan Dam and features that remain in place, the details of which are not known at this time •Construction-related measures, including the following: –Best management measures, including control of erosion, dust, stormwater, and waste –Preconstruction surveys for certain federal- and state-listed species, including noxious weeds –Provide raptor nesting/roosting platforms –Modified existing infrastructure design for North Poudre Canal Diversion –Construction timing restrictions at the North Poudre Canal and Calloway Diversions •Compensatory mitigation for unavoidable Halligan Project impacts on fisheries, water quality and temperature, terrestrial wildlife, federally and state-listed species, and inundated instream flow water rights. –Early mitigation measure consisting of a conservation easement on the 4,557-acre Roberts Ranch –Design and construction of features to improve fish passage around the Fort Collins Intake on the Main Stem –Bighorn sheep mitigation, including improved food and water access, movement monitoring, avoiding/minimizing construction impacts, and compensation for mortalities –Funding for stream restoration as mitigation for stream temperature impacts Chapter 5. The enhancement plan summarizes the measures that Fort Collins proposes to incorporate into the Halligan Project that are not required to meet regulatory mitigation needs, but rather would be implemented to improve existing conditions for fish and wildlife resources in and around the Halligan Project Area. Key enhancement measures are summarized in this section. EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 364 Item 15. •Aquatic resource enhancements including the following: –Create a temporary environmental pool within Halligan Reservoir –Provide fish passage around the North Poudre Canal Diversion –Improve the North Fork channel at the Calloway Diversion and remove some or all elements of the diversion structure to support flow, sediment transport, and fish movement –Implement potential future ramping rate limitations for NPIC’s use of the enlarged reservoir •Terrestrial resource enhancements include the following: –Restrict domestic sheep and goat grazing on Fort Collins-owned land or on any easements on lands around Halligan Reservoir during construction –Advocate cessation of domestic sheep and goat grazing on other lands •Recreation resource enhancements include the following: –Reconcile title chain confusion related to certain lands thought to be part of the Cherokee State Wildlife Area – Middle Unit, with Fort Collins acquiring such lands and conveying an easement to CPW across these lands for public use –Fund a public access lease with Roberts Ranch –Establish parking area outside of the enlarged reservoir inundation area for public access EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 365 Item 15. 1 Introduction The City of Fort Collins (Fort Collins) proposes the Halligan Project to meet its strategic objective of providing a reliable, high-quality water supply. The Halligan Project is a municipal water supply project designed to provide additional system firm yield for Fort Collins to satisfy its projected municipal and industrial water demands with water quality comparable to that of the water now delivered to its customers. The Halligan Project primarily involves enlargement of the existing Halligan Reservoir and replacement of the existing North Poudre Canal Diversion. Halligan Reservoir would be enlarged by replacing the existing 114-year-old dam, as of 2023, with a new dam constructed approximately 200 feet downstream of the existing dam. The Halligan Project is described in greater detail in the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) Halligan Water Supply Project (United States [U.S.] Army Corps of Engineers [Corps] 2019) and is referred to as Fort Collins’ “Proposed Action,” with certain aspects relevant to fish and wildlife discussed in this Fish and Wildlife Mitigation and Enhancement Plan (FWMEP). 1.1 Purpose of this Fish and Wildlife Mitigation and Enhancement Plan This FWMEP was developed pursuant to Colorado Revised Statute (CRS) 37-60-122.2 and applicable rules and regulations (2 Code of Colorado Regulations [CCR] 406-16). This FWMEP sets forth the actions that Fort Collins would take to mitigate the potential impacts that the Halligan Project may have on fish and wildlife resources, and to enhance existing conditions in the Halligan Project Area (the general area of Project construction and the area affected by operations of the enlarged Halligan Reservoir; refer to the definition in the Key Terminology section and also refer to Figure 1-1). In addition to addressing Halligan Project impacts, which are based on the DEIS and subsequent analyses, this FWMEP also addresses additional concerns regarding the Halligan Project that were identified by Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW) staff during Project consultations. Fort Collins understands that CPW staff’s interpretation is that the Parks and Wildlife Commission (Commission) acknowledges the importance and value of all mitigation and enhancement measures as described in Fort Collins’ Modified Proposed Action and required by other agencies but distinguishes a different category of which the Commission is recommending on top of, or in addition to, those measures proposed within the Modified Proposed Action and required by other agencies. Therefore, the Commission’s proposed mitigation recommendation for purposes of CRS 37-60-122.2 and 2 CCR 406-16 may be a subset of Fort Collins’ mitigation and enhancement measures described in this FWMEP. It is Fort Collins’ understanding that all measures in this FWMEP have been evaluated by CPW staff to determine what would be recommended by the Commission. Rather than parsing the distinctions throughout the FWMEP, the categories based on CPW staff’s interpretation are captured in Appendix B, which shows a distinction between Fort Collins’ total estimated mitigation and enhancement costs and those CPW’s staff believe are attributable to the Commission’s recommendations via separate cost columns. Fort Collins intends to complete the mitigation and enhancement measures developed as part of this FWMEP, as well as those identified in Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 401 water quality certification and the Corps CWA Section 404 permit and associated Record of Decision (ROD). It is anticipated that compliance with the mitigation plan portion of this FWMEP will be attached as permit conditions by the Corps on the ROD and CWA Section 404 permit, and the mitigation commitments in this FWMEP will be in addition to any other measures required by other entities. EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 366 Item 15. 1.2 Contents of this Fish and Wildlife Mitigation and Enhancement Plan This FWMEP includes both a mitigation plan and an enhancement plan. The following sections are included in this FWMEP: • Chapter 1–Introduction (this chapter) describes the Halligan Project, purpose of the FWMEP, current operations of Halligan Reservoir, and proposed operations of an enlarged Halligan Reservoir, water rights, estimated Project cost, and the regulatory framework for the Halligan Project. • Chapter 2–Fort Collins Water Portfolio summarizes Fort Collins’ existing and future water supply and demand, as well as demand management through water conservation. Chapter 2 also provides information about current and related regional activities. • Chapter 3–Fish and Wildlife Conditions and Impacts describes current conditions and summarizes the anticipated effects of the Halligan Project on fish and wildlife resources, including inherent benefits of the Halligan Project. • Chapter 4–Proposed Fish and Wildlife Mitigation Plan describes the measures that would be used to avoid and minimize impacts on fish and wildlife resources, as well as those measures that would be used to compensate for unavoidable impacts on fish and wildlife resources. • Chapter 5–Proposed Fish and Wildlife Enhancement Plan summarizes the measures that Fort Collins proposes to voluntarily incorporate into the Halligan Project that exceed the mitigation requirements and are proposed to improve existing conditions in and around the Halligan Project Area. • Chapter 6–References provides detailed references to the works cited in this FWMEP. Maps of key Project elements and water quality sampling stations are provided in Appendix A and Appendix D. Appendix B provides a tabular summary of the components of this FWMEP. Appendix C is a table that lists the mitigation and enhancement measures described in Sections 4 and 5, including the cost of each item. Appendix E is a memorandum responding to Commissioner and public comments. Appendix F provides copies of all written public comments received on the FWMEP. 1.3 Halligan Project Overview The Halligan Project includes enlarging the existing Halligan Reservoir on the North Fork, located approximately 25 miles northwest of Fort Collins in Larimer County. The location of the Halligan Project is shown on Figure 1-1. Appendix A provides overview and detailed maps of key Project elements. Halligan Reservoir would be enlarged by replacing the existing 114-year-old dam, as of 2023, with a new dam constructed approximately 200 feet downstream of the existing dam. The replacement dam would raise the existing reservoir elevation by approximately 25 feet to increase the total water storage capacity by approximately 8,200 acre-feet, for a total enlarged reservoir volume of approximately 14,600 acre-feet. Enlarging the reservoir would increase the current surface area of Halligan Reservoir from 253 to 391 acres. Figure 1-2 shows the reservoir inundation area at the current and proposed enlarged ordinary high water mark, and Figure 1-3 presents anticipated construction features, including the replacement dam infrastructure, access roads, and potential borrow or stockpile areas. The Halligan Project also includes rebuilding the existing North Poudre Canal Diversion located approximately 6 river miles downstream of Halligan Reservoir to allow Fort Collins’ releases from the enlarged Halligan Reservoir to bypass the diversion and remain in the North Fork. EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 367 Item 15. The Halligan Project ensures that Fort Collins can satisfy future water supply and demands by: •Meeting future water demands of the Fort Collins Utilities water service area •Providing a storage reserve for emergency water supply •Increasing drought security •Improving water system reliability and flexibility EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 368 Item 15. Figure 1-1. Overview of Halligan Project Elements and Other Infrastructure (Refer to Appendix A for detailed maps) EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 369 Item 15. Figure 1-2. Overview of the Halligan Existing and Enlarged Surface Areas EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 370 Item 15. Figure 1-3. Proposed Halligan Dam Footprint and Construction Areas EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 371 Item 15. 1.3.1 Operations, Storage, and Water Rights 1.3.1.1 Current Operations of Halligan Reservoir Halligan Reservoir is an existing on-stream reservoir that North Poudre Irrigation Company (NPIC) constructed in 1909 to supply water to its shareholders. Fort Collins acquired Halligan Reservoir and certain surrounding lands from NPIC in 2004 pursuant to a 1993 option agreement. Although Fort Collins owns Halligan Reservoir, the reservoir is currently operated by NPIC and supplies water to NPIC shareholders only. Water is currently released from Halligan Reservoir and diverted at the North Poudre Canal Diversion, where it is conveyed in the North Poudre Canal into NPIC’s ditch and reservoir system for delivery to NPIC shareholders. The 1993 option agreement between Fort Collins and NPIC allows Fort Collins to enlarge Halligan Reservoir but requires Fort Collins to reconvey the reservoir and associated lands back to NPIC if Fort Collins abandons the Halligan Project or is otherwise unable to enlarge the reservoir. Under current operations, NPIC fills Halligan Reservoir starting in the fall. Filling continues until water levels reach the dam spillway crest and water spills over the dam into the North Fork. Spilling typically occurs annually in the spring but can occur as early as December or January. NPIC begins releasing water to the North Fork from the dam outlet in the spring. NPIC then diverts the releases at the North Poudre Canal Diversion, which is located approximately 6 river miles downstream of Halligan Dam. During the irrigation season (summer through early fall), NPIC typically “sweeps” the river by diverting all flows into North Poudre Canal, the initial portion of which is a tunnel through the canyon wall. Where the tunnel daylights approximately 1.9 miles downstream, water that NPIC is not entitled to use or that is in excess of the North Poudre Canal’s capacity is returned to the river through a return structure. These operations typically result in low-flow conditions, dry-up points, and disconnected pools in the 1.9-mile stretch of the North Fork between the North Poudre Canal Diversion and where some water is returned (Figure 1-1). NPIC frequently releases water from Halligan Reservoir at a rate that they can divert into the North Poudre Canal at the North Poudre Canal Diversion. During the irrigation season, NPIC typically diverts all water released from Halligan Reservoir, unless spilling at the dam results in a larger amount of water than can be diverted at the North Poudre Canal. At the end of the irrigation season, NPIC typically commences diverting water into Halligan Reservoir for storage and releases from Halligan Reservoir cease. Winter reservoir operations typically result in low- flow conditions, dry-up points between November and March, and disconnected pools in the North Fork for approximately 10 miles between Halligan Reservoir and the first downstream tributary, Rabbit Creek (Figure 1-1). Dam inspection reports summarize current conditions of the dam, as indicated by the State of Colorado’s Dam Safety Office. Inspection reports indicate that the existing Halligan Reservoir dam is currently sound. However, the dam is over 114-years old, as of 2023, and seepage through the dam and freeze-thaw cycles will continue to degrade the dam and present an increasing safety risk unless it is rehabilitated. As described in the DEIS, significant construction would be required in the future to rehabilitate the existing dam if the Halligan Project is not implemented. Design of the replacement Halligan Dam is underway and involves close coordination with the State of Colorado’s Dam Safety Office. 1.3.1.2 Proposed Future Operations of the Enlarged Halligan Reservoir The enlarged Halligan Reservoir would be operated by Fort Collins. Although Fort Collins intends to meet any operational commitments included in this FWMEP, actual operations of the Halligan Project may EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 372 Item 15. change pursuant to applicable permits and approvals, water rights administration, or other things beyond Fort Collins’ control. No changes to these commitments are anticipated at this time. If operations of the Halligan Project change significantly from those described in this FWMEP, Fort Collins and CPW will re-evaluate whether additional mitigation measures are necessary as a result. The enlarged reservoir would continue to be filled with direct flows from the North Fork. Fort Collins would generally keep its portion of the enlarged Halligan Reservoir relatively full until the water is needed to meet demands during droughts or other water supply shortages. Fort Collins’ future operations of the enlarged Halligan Reservoir have been designed to not only avoid and minimize potential impacts from the Halligan Project, but also improve the existing conditions of the North Fork below Halligan Reservoir. Fort Collins’ operations of the enlarged Halligan Reservoir include year-round releases from the enlarged reservoir to provide flows in the North Fork below Halligan Reservoir and eliminate dry-up points that are currently found along the North Fork at various times of the year. These flow-related operational measures are described in detail in Section 4.2.1. Fort Collins’ releases from the enlarged Halligan Reservoir would be delivered down the North Fork to its confluence with the Main Stem and typically “exchanged up” to the Fort Collins Intake(s) on the Main Stem. NPIC would continue to operate its portion of the enlarged Halligan Reservoir, including diversions, storage, and releases, as it does currently. Fort Collins would generally use water from Halligan Reservoir to meet demands after other sources of water are unavailable. The enlarged Halligan Reservoir has no predetermined demand or release pattern, but in general, releases from the enlarged Halligan Reservoir would occur as follows: •To meet Fort Collins’ reusable water demand when other reusable water sources are lacking •During dry periods or other water supply disruptions as needed to meet Fort Collins single-use and reusable water demands when other Fort Collins’ water sources are unavailable or insufficient 1.3.1.3 Water Rights for Storage in an Enlarged Halligan Reservoir Fort Collins would use several water rights to fill the enlarged Halligan Reservoir, including the following: •Changed water rights attributable to shares in the so-called “Southside Ditches” companies (Arthur Irrigation Company, Larimer County Canal No. 2 Irrigating Company, and New Mercer Ditch Company) •The Halligan Reservoir Enlargement conditional water right •A portion of the one-eighth interest of the Grey Mountain conditional water right •Changed water rights attributable to shares in the Water Supply and Storage Company The majority of Fort Collins’ water stored in the enlarged Halligan Reservoir would come from the changed water rights in the “Southside Ditches” companies that were historically used to irrigate farms in portions of the Fort Collins area that have since been developed. Fort Collins changed the use of these water rights and, pursuant to the Water Court decrees approving the changes, Fort Collins must maintain the return flow patterns associated with the historical irrigation use of these water rights. Thus, the Halligan Project is, for the most part, not a new demand on the Poudre River system as a whole1, but instead, a conversion of water use from direct flow irrigation to municipal storage. 1The project will result in flow changes on the North Fork of the Poudre River, but not the overall Poudre system. EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 373 Item 15. 1.3.2 Estimated Halligan Project Cost Fort Collins’ Modified Proposed Action would cost an estimated $157.8 million2 (2022 dollars). The estimated cost includes pre-construction costs (for example, field exploration and design), construction costs (labor, equipment, materials, and supplies), and land and other acquisition costs. The project cost estimate does not include costs of mitigation or enhancements (as described in Appendix B), or any costs related to risk or uncertainty given the limited conceptual design that exists. Table 1-1 provides a breakdown of the estimated project cost. Table 1-1. Estimated Halligan Project Costs Shown in 2022 Dollars Task Estimated cost Pre-construction[a] $13,865,000 Construction[a] $130,719,000 Permitting & Legal $2,892,000 Land Acquisition $10,315,000 Total $157,791,000 [a] The sum of these two values are presented in Appendix B. 1.4 Regulatory Framework The Halligan Project has undergone and continues to undergo significant regulatory scrutiny at the federal, state, and local levels. For final Halligan Project authorization, Fort Collins is required to obtain numerous federal and state permits, licenses, and approvals as identified in DEIS Section 1.6 (Corps 2019). The following subsections summarize the primary regulatory processes related to the Halligan Project effects on fish and wildlife, although other approvals and processes may be required that are not included in this summary. 1.4.1 National Environmental Policy Act The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires federal agencies to consider the potential environmental impacts of proposed actions before authorizing a “major federal action.” The Halligan Project is considered a “major federal action” because it may significantly affect the human environment as defined by NEPA. The Halligan Project would discharge fill material into jurisdictional waters of the U.S. and, thus, also require authorization by the Corps under CWA Section 404, as described in Section 1.4.2. The Corps Omaha District, Denver Regulatory Office, is the lead federal agency for the NEPA process and is preparing an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) to evaluate potential environmental impacts resulting from the Halligan Project. The Corps will use the EIS in determining a final permit decision that will be documented in the ROD. The Corps published a DEIS on November 22, 2019 (Corps 2019) that described analyses of the potential environmental impacts associated with the Halligan Project. The analyses and DEIS were developed in compliance with the Council on Environmental Quality’s NEPA regulations (40 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] Parts 1500–1508) and the Corps NEPA implementation procedures for its regulatory program (33 CFR Part 325). The DEIS provides a comparison of the Halligan Project (described there as 2 These values are estimated by the Corps as part of the Halligan Project and done in a similar manner for all Halligan Project alternatives. They do not reflect all the actual costs to Fort Collins of the Modified Proposed Action. For example, the Corps calculates Permitting & Legal expenses as 2% of Pre- construction and Construction costs combined when actual expenses have been significantly more to date for Fort Collins. EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 374 Item 15. the Proposed Action) and several alternatives to the Halligan Project. The DEIS also addresses factors relevant to the CWA Section 404(b)(1) guidelines (40 CFR Part 230) and applicable public interest review criteria identified in 33 CFR Part 320.4. The Corps is currently developing a Final EIS (FEIS) that will address comments on the DEIS received from the public, resource agencies, and other stakeholders. The DEIS presents a draft Conceptual Mitigation Plan (CMP) prepared by Fort Collins (City of Fort Collins 2019c) that includes both mitigation and enhancement measures. Based on public comments received on the DEIS, comments from Project stakeholders, and discussions with CPW staff, this FWMEP builds upon and/or replaces many of the aquatic life and terrestrial wildlife components of the draft CMP. An updated final CMP will be prepared by Fort Collins for the Final EIS. The U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management (BLM) is a cooperating federal agency, and will determine NEPA adequacy for Project activities or impacts that may occur on BLM lands. 1.4.2 Clean Water Act Section 404 CWA Section 404 regulates the discharge of dredged or fill material into waters of the U.S., including jurisdictional wetlands. The CWA Section 404 permit program is administered by the Corps with oversight by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (EPA 1972). The Halligan Project would result in a regulated discharge; therefore, Fort Collins is seeking authorization of the discharge under a CWA Section 404 individual permit. Projects subject to the CWA Section 404 individual permit process must comply with CWA Section 404(b)(1) guidelines, which provide direction for evaluating activities regulated under CWA Section 404. Under the guidelines, “no discharge of dredged or fill material may be permitted if there is a practicable alternative to the proposed discharge which would have less adverse impact on the aquatic ecosystem, so long as the alternative does not have other significant adverse environmental consequences.” To comply with the guidelines, a permit applicant must take all appropriate and practicable steps to avoid and minimize adverse impacts on waters of the U.S. Compensatory mitigation may be required to offset any unavoidable impacts and ensure compliance with the CWA Section 404(b)(1) guidelines. • CWA Section 401 Water Quality Certification— A CWA Section 401 water quality certification is a state approval process for water quality impacts that is administered by the Water Quality Control Division of the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE) to implement CWA Section 401 (refer to CRS 25-8-302(1)(f)). The CWA Section 401 water quality certification process is conducted according to Regulation 82 (5 CCR Section 1002-82). Any additional mitigation conditions or requirements that are required for CWA Section 401 water quality certification will be incorporated into the CWA Section 404 permit. Fort Collins is collecting data and conducting additional water quality and temperature analysis for the Halligan Project in preparation for the CWA Section 401 water quality certification application. 1.4.2.1 2008 Compensatory Mitigation for Losses of Aquatic Resources The Corps Colorado Mitigation Procedures (Corps 2020) describes compensatory mitigation procedures for wetland and stream impacts in Colorado, and outlines the steps that the Corps districts may follow to meet regulatory obligations. Although Colorado Mitigation Procedures was formally approved by the Corps for mitigation procedures in April 2020, it has not been used on the Halligan Project because mitigation planning was already well underway when these procedures were approved. The compensatory mitigation plan will be consistent with Corps regulations and mitigation policy. EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 375 Item 15. The Corps and EPA established the type and extent of compensatory mitigation necessary to demonstrate compliance with the CWA Section 404(b)(1) guidelines (40 CFR Part 230) in the 2008 Mitigation Rule (73 Federal Register [FR] 19593; EPA and Corps 2008). The Corps determines the appropriate form and amount of compensatory mitigation required for a Section 404 permit based on the nature and extent of anticipated unavoidable impacts on aquatic resources. Fort Collins will prepare a wetlands mitigation plan independent of this FWMEP for future authorization by the Corps as part of the CWA Section 404 permitting process. 1.4.3 Federal Wildlife Regulations The following federal wildlife regulations apply to the Halligan Project: •Endangered Species Act (ESA)—The ESA protects species that are federally listed as threatened or endangered under the federal ESA of 1973 as amended (16 United States Code [U.S.C.] Section 1531 et seq.) (USFWS 1973). In accordance with ESA Section 7, projects with a federal nexus that could affect federally listed species and/or their habitats require consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). Impacts on candidate species are not required to undergo a Section 7 consultation unless the species becomes listed during project planning and construction. In accordance with ESA Section 7, the EIS describes evaluations conducted to determine potential impacts on federally listed species from activities related to implementing the Halligan Project and each alternative to the Halligan Project. A Biological Assessment is then conducted for the Project to identify measures that compensate for the Project’s impacts on federally listed species and/or their designated critical habitat. The USFWS then renders a Biological Opinion after they have reviewed the Biological Assessment and consulted with the lead federal agency. The Corps has begun the Section 7 consultation process for the Halligan Project. •Migratory Bird Treaty Act and Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act—The Migratory Bird Treaty Act (16 U.S.C. Sections 703–712) established a federal prohibition, “unless permitted by regulations, to pursue; hunt; take; capture; kill; attempt to take, capture, or kill; possess; offer for sale; sell; offer to purchase; purchase; deliver for shipment; ship; cause to be shipped; deliver for transportation; transport; cause to be transported; carry or cause to be carried by any means whatever; receive for shipment; transportation, or carriage; or export at any time, or in any manner, any migratory bird, part, nest, or egg of any such bird” (USFWS 2004). Similarly, the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (16 U.S.C. Sections 668–668c) prohibits the “taking” of bald or golden eagles, including their parts, nests, and eggs. In accordance with the Acts and as part of the NEPA process, potential impacts on protected bird species have been evaluated, and appropriate avoidance, minimization, or mitigation measures have been incorporated into this FWMEP. •Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act—The federal Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (16 U.S.C. Sections 661–666c) (USFWS 1934) places requirements on water development projects, including consultation with the USFWS and state fish and wildlife agencies (in this case, CPW) when the “waters of any stream or other body of water are proposed or authorized, permitted or licensed to be impounded, diverted or otherwise controlled or modified” by any agency under a federal permit or license. The consultation goal is conserving wildlife resources by preventing loss and/or damage to them, as well as potentially improving the resources as part of the proposed project. State-listed species are also considered during such a consultation. In Colorado, this requirement is largely fulfilled through consultation with USFWS and CPW, and by developing and implementing this FWMEP. The Corps must prepare a Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act report for the USFWS that “provides 1) clear documentation of the proposed project’s impacts on fish and wildlife resources EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 376 Item 15. and 2) specific recommendations as to the measures that should be taken to conserve those resources.” 1.4.4 State of Colorado The following state statutes apply to various resources covered in this FWMEP and are most relevant to the FWMEP: •Fish and Wildlife Mitigation Plan—This FWMEP was prepared to satisfy the requirements of CRS 37-60-122.2. The statute states that “fish and wildlife resources found in and around state waters which are affected by the construction, operation, or maintenance of water diversion, delivery, or storage facilities” are a “matter of statewide concern and that impacts on such resources should be mitigated by the project applicants in a reasonable manner.” The statute further explains that the extent and nature of the mitigation should be “economically reasonable and maintain[s] a balance between the development of the state’s water resources and the protection of the state’s fish and wildlife resources.” Such fish and wildlife mitigation plans are to be developed by the project applicant, generally working in cooperation with CPW staff members, and submitted to the Commission. If the Commission and applicant agree on the plan, the Commission then forwards it to the Colorado Water Conservation Board (CWCB) for adoption as the official state position on the mitigation actions required of the applicant. CRS 37-60-122.2 distinguishes mitigation of Halligan Project impacts from enhancement of fish and wildlife resources over existing conditions. The Procedural Rules for the Commission (Chapter 16) provide definitions for both a mitigation plan and an enhancement plan (refer to the Key Terminology section of this report). This FWMEP includes both a mitigation plan that contains measures developed to mitigate Halligan Project impacts, and an enhancement plan that enhances fish and wildlife resources over and above existing levels without the Halligan Project. Fort Collins is required by CRS 37-60-122.2 to submit a proposed mitigation plan, but submittal of an enhancement plan is voluntary. •CWCB Rule 7 Process—The enlarged Halligan Reservoir would inundate approximately 0.75 mile of the North Fork upstream of the current reservoir where the CWCB holds a decreed instream flow water right. Fort Collins would, therefore, need to undergo a process to seek approval to inundate an instream flow under the CWCB’s instream flow program rules (Rule 7, 2 CCR 408-2) (CWCB n.d.). During this process, the CWCB may seek recommendations from, among others, CPW and the Colorado Division of Water Resources (DWR). CWCB would consider factors such as the extent of inundation proposed, impacts on the natural environment, any unique or rare characteristics of the instream flow water right to be inundated, any regulatory requirements or conditions imposed upon the applicant by federal, state and/or local governments, land ownership, economic benefits, and the mitigation or compensation offered by Fort Collins to offset adverse impacts on the instream flow right. Ultimately, the CWCB Board would either approve, conditionally approve, defer, or deny the request to inundate. 1.4.5 Larimer County Colorado House Bill 74-1041 authorized certain local governments, including counties, to identify, designate, and regulate areas and activities of state interest through a local permitting process to provide them with control over certain development projects. The Halligan Project is located entirely within Larimer County, and Larimer County is a cooperating agency on the Halligan Project. Larimer County’s 1041 regulations are specified in the County’s land use code. Unless specifically exempted, EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 377 Item 15. Section 10.3.1(J) requires a 1041 Permit for “Site selection and construction of a new water storage reservoir or expansion of an existing water storage reservoir resulting in a surface area at high water line in excess of 50 acres, natural or manmade, used for the storage, regulation and/or control of water for application to a beneficial use, including augmentation, commercial, domestic, industrial, municipal, and replacement uses, provided this designation excludes water storage reservoirs used exclusively for irrigation or stormwater detention facilities. A new water storage reservoir shall also include all appurtenant uses, structures and facilities (i.e., those necessary and integral to the proper functioning of the project), including internal roads, parks, parking, trails, recreational uses, and other uses.” The Halligan Project thus requires a 1041 Permit from Larimer County pursuant to the procedures in Larimer County’s land use code. 1.4.6 Consultation, Coordination, and Public Input Fort Collins consulted with CPW during preparation of this plan. In addition, CPW and cooperating agencies reviewed and commented on the DEIS and some associated reports. CRS 37-60-122.2 requires CPW and the CWCB to review and provide input on the mitigation proposed to address Halligan Project impacts on fish and wildlife resources. Although CRS 37-60-122.2 does not require public review and input, Fort Collins and CPW have developed a process to also allow for public participation as part of the development of this FWMEP. The Corps (through the NEPA process), Fort Collins, and CPW have provided, and will continue to provide, the following public meetings and opportunities to solicit input on the potential impacts and mitigation for the Halligan Project: • Fort Collins has provided many updates about the Halligan Project in public forums to Fort Collins City Council and the Fort Collins Water Commission (previously known as the Water Board) throughout the life of the Halligan Project. Fort Collins has also published newspaper articles about the Halligan Project and maintains a website where the public can receive Halligan Project-related updates and submit comments on the Halligan Project at any point. Fort Collins regularly seeks out opportunities to educate and solicit feedback about the Halligan Project, including targeted stakeholder presentations or discussions, distribution of information at community events, videos, and social media posts. • On January 26, 2006, the Corps submitted written requests to the EPA, USFWS, U.S. Forest Service, CPW, Weld County, and Larimer County to participate as cooperating agencies in the preparation of the then-planned joint EIS for the Halligan and Seaman Water Supply projects pursuant to 40 CFR Section 1501.6. The Corps subsequently recognized that the CDPHE, Colorado Department of Natural Resources (CDNR), Colorado State Historic Preservation Officer, and the BLM had expertise or regulatory authority over aspects of the Halligan and Seaman Water Supply projects. Those agencies were also invited and agreed to serve as cooperating agencies; the CPW, CDPHE, CDNR, BLM, EPA, USFWS, and Larimer County accepted the invitation to serve as cooperating agencies, but Weld County declined to serve as a cooperating agency. As of the writing of this FWMEP, the proposal for the Seaman Water Supply Project has been withdrawn and is inactive. • On February 1, 2006, the Corps published the Notice of Intent in the FR to prepare an EIS to analyze the potential impacts of two water supply projects known as the Halligan-Seaman Water Management projects in Northern Colorado (71 FR 5250). • On February 23, 27, and 28, 2006, three public scoping meetings were held at the Livermore Community Church in Livermore, the Lincoln Center in Fort Collins, and the Bunk House at Island Grove in Greeley, respectively. EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 378 Item 15. •As part of the NEPA process, the Corps initially contacted 59 Native American tribes in writing to solicit input regarding the Halligan Project. Only two tribes, the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe and the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe, responded to the request. On May 23, 2019, the Corps provided a consultation letter to seven Native American tribes, including the Apache Tribe of Oklahoma, Gros Ventre and Assiniboine Nations, Northern Cheyenne Tribe, Comanche Nation, Cheyenne-Arapaho Tribes of Oklahoma, Arapaho Tribe of the Wind River Reservation, and the Northern Apache Tribe. In meetings with Fort Collins, the Corps indicated that they will continue to reach out to tribal contacts as the NEPA process continues. •On November 22, 2019, the Corps published the DEIS for the Halligan Project. A public hearing was held in Fort Collins on January 13, 2019, which was attended by approximately 85 people. Comments on the DEIS were accepted through January 21, 2020. Approximately 60 written comment letters or oral comments were received on the Halligan Project. •On April 27, 2023, Fort Collins released the FWMEP Application on the Halligan Project website. •From May 1 through May 15, 2023, Fort Collins hosted a virtual open house and comment period for the public to review the FWMEP and provide feedback on the FWMEP. –Fort Collins received eight public comments on the final draft FWMEP. Fort Collins has prepared a separate memo to further address Commissioner and public comments and questions, Appendix E. Copies of the public comments are included in Appendix F. •On May 4, 2023, Fort Collins presented the FWMEP to the Commission Meeting hosted at the Colorado Mountain College Spring Valley at Glenwood Springs Campus, Glenwood Springs, CO, Fort Collins and CPW staff addressed Commission comments and questions. Afterwards, two entities provided verbal public comment on the FWMEP. –Fort Collins has prepared a separate memo to further address Commissioner and public comments and questions, Appendix E. In addition, the two entities that provided verbal comments later provided written public comment on the FWMEP. The information proved by the Commission, public entities, and individuals were used to revise the Final FWMEP Copies about the public comment can be found in Appendix F. •Commission Meeting (location) note to reviewers: Location, date and summary to be added after this event occurs. At the June 22 or 23, 2023 Commission meeting, Fort Collins will present the final FWMEP to the Commission for its consideration as the Commission’s recommendation regarding the mitigation of fish and wildlife resources from the Halligan Project. •CWCB meeting: The Halligan FWMEP will be presented to the CWCB at their July 2023 board meeting. EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 379 Item 15. 2 Fort Collins Water Portfolio 2.1 Existing Water Supply and Demand Fort Collins, through Fort Collins Utilities, is one of several water providers in Fort Collins’ municipal boundaries and growth management area. Fort Collins generally provides water service to the central portion of the Fort Collins community. Various water districts provide water service to the other portions of the Fort Collins community. The water service areas for Fort Collins and the neighboring water districts are shown on Figure 2-1. Fort Collins’ water supplies are surface supplies and come from two physical systems: the Poudre River watershed and Horsetooth Reservoir.3 Fort Collins diverts water from the Poudre River watershed into its system on the Main Stem at the Fort Collins Intake(s). These supplies are primarily native Poudre River water, but also include some water from the Colorado, Michigan, and Laramie rivers. Fort Collins also diverts water at other locations to irrigate parks, golf courses, two cemeteries, greenbelt areas, and some schoolgrounds, as well as to meet contractual raw water delivery obligations and to meet return flow and other obligations. Fort Collins also takes delivery of water from Horsetooth Reservoir at the Soldier Canyon Outlet. These supplies are primarily Colorado River water from the Colorado–Big Thompson (C-BT) Project and Windy Gap Project. Fort Collins’ water system is described in greater detail in the DEIS. Certain aspects of Fort Collins’ system are shown on Figure 2-1. Fort Collins treats water from the Poudre River watershed and Horsetooth Reservoir at the Fort Collins Water Treatment Facility. The treated water is then delivered to Fort Collins’ customers through approximately 540 miles of pipeline to over 34,000 taps. Fort Collins’ customers include residences (single and multifamily) and commercial entities of various types. In 2014, Fort Collins delivered 7.4 billion gallons of water to approximately 136,500 people. In 2020, demand increased to 7.7 billion gallons of water delivered to approximately 142,800 people. 3 Horsetooth Reservoir borders the City of Fort Collins and is an East Slope terminal reservoir in the C-BT System. More information on the C-BT Project, which is operated and maintained by Northern Water and the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, is provided at https://www.northernwater.org/what-we-do/deliver-water/colorado-big-thompson-project. EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 380 Item 15. Figure 2-1. Fort Collins Utilities Water Supply System Source: City of Fort Collins 2021a EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 381 Item 15. 2.2 Water Conservation and Water Restrictions Fort Collins has a strong commitment to ensuring the efficient and responsible use of water. Fort Collins’ water conservation program started in 1977 and continues to evolve to support the community in using water efficiently. Some of Fort Collins’ water conservation efforts are detailed in the DEIS, as well as Fort Collins’ 2015 Water Efficiency Plan (City of Fort Collins 2015a). Fort Collins’ conservation efforts include metering of all customers and a customer data portal; customer leak notifications; free irrigation system audits and home water assessments; irrigation and fixture equipment rebates; landscaper trainings; water-efficient landscape conversion trainings and financial incentives; conservation-oriented water rate structures; extensive customer outreach, including monthly water use reports and targeted industry outreach; a restrictive covenants ordinance; conservation kit giveaways; and building audit. Currently, planned efforts focus on leveraging advanced water use meter data, promoting and supporting greater outdoor water efficiency, greater integration of water efficiency into land use planning and building codes, expanding commercial and industrial strategies, and efforts to increase community water literacy. Fort Collins is also updating water supply requirement costs for new developments to improve equity while incentivizing efficient design. Fort Collins also uses the Water Shortage Action Plan (City of Fort Collins 2020b), previously known as the Water Supply Shortage Response Plan, to manage water shortages. As defined in the plan, water shortage conditions occur when projected water supply is less than the anticipated water demand, which considers required water reserves in storage and other criteria. The following events, or combination of events, are examples of scenarios that could cause a water shortage: drought; water quality issues, such as contamination or fire impacts; and infrastructure issues, such as broken pipeline or water treatment facility issues. The population and demand within Fort Collins’ water service area are expected to grow. Water conservation efforts and water shortage management practices have helped reduce water use and manage supply challenges. However, as discussed in the DEIS, future demand exceeds the amount of water that could be conserved through conservation measures; therefore, the timing of when increasing future water demand exceeds Fort Collins’ existing water supplies can be delayed through water conservation efforts, but not avoided. 2.3 Future Water Demand Future water demand is calculated based on a projected population growth in the Fort Collins’ water service area, combined with projections of future potable water demand using the reliable gallons per capita per day forecasting technique detailed in the DEIS (Corps 2019). The Corps estimated in the DEIS that Fort Collins’ 2065 potable water demand will be approximately 38,400 acre-feet, an increase of about 11,700 acre-feet from the 2015 potable water demand. This estimate incorporated minimized demand based on reduced water used as a result of the water conservation and water supply management techniques described previously. In 2019, Fort Collins completed the Fort Collins Utilities Water Supply Vulnerability Study (City of Fort Collins 2019a), in which the enlargement of Halligan Reservoir was assumed. That study found that climate change is the most significant vulnerability affecting Fort Collins’ water supply. Future climate conditions may be more impactful to Fort Collins’ ability to meet its water supply planning policy criteria than the occurrence of any particular infrastructure outage or environmental condition simulated by the study’s risk scenarios. However, climate change is the most difficult risk to quantify or track. Long-term trends are difficult to measure and are obscured by the natural variability in wet and dry years. EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 382 Item 15. Fort Collins will participate in, or stay informed of, state and federal climate change studies to help Fort Collins understand the trajectory of climate change in the region. Fort Collins’ projected increases in population and water demand, coupled with the risks of climate change causing temperature and precipitation variations, have both been identified as key vulnerabilities to Fort Collins’ water supply. Without the additional firm yield from the Halligan Project, the performance of Fort Collins’ water supply system would be significantly impacted, and current water supply planning policy criteria could not be met under most future climate and demand conditions. 2.4 Related Regional Activities This section describes regional activities that may help inform the best application or use of Halligan Project-related mitigation in this FWMEP, including other major water supply projects in the Poudre River watershed in various stages of planning and execution, as well as research-based initiatives and collaborative work groups. 2.4.1 Shared Vision Planning One element of Halligan Project planning included a Shared Vision Planning process (Lorie et al. 2010), a 7-year collaborative planning process focused on modifying planned expansions of Halligan and Seaman Reservoirs on the North Fork to develop design strategies that would improve flows on the North Fork. The core assumption of the Shared Vision Planning process was enlargement of both Halligan and Seaman Reservoirs. During the process, Fort Collins worked collaboratively with the City of Greeley, regulatory agencies, nongovernmental organizations, and other interested parties on development of mutually beneficial and desirable solutions for both projects. However, the City of Greeley is no longer pursuing expansion of Seaman Reservoir, and, therefore, the joint reservoir operational measures explored in the Shared Vision Planning process are no longer available to improve flow conditions on the North Fork. Fort Collins has nonetheless incorporated many of the other measures developed in the process into the Halligan Project. Over 19 years of Halligan Project planning, design and operation development, mitigation planning, and stakeholder collaboration has been completed since the Project was initiated in 2003. 2.4.2 Fort Collins’ River Efforts Fort Collins owns a majority of the Poudre River’s floodplain as it flows through Fort Collins and is, therefore, engaged in a long-term effort to support a self-sustaining healthy resilient Poudre River (Main Stem). In recent decades, Fort Collins has proactively implemented projects aimed at restoring the river’s connection with its riparian floodplain, connecting aquatic habitats longitudinally, protecting established instream flows, and maintaining stormwater capacity to reduce risk to Fort Collins’ assets and public safety. While numerous projects have already been completed, it is expected that these integrated reach-scale river restoration projects will continue into the next several decades. In 2011, Fort Collins completed the Cache La Poudre River Natural Areas Management Plan Update (City of Fort Collins 2011) that detailed management goals, strategies, and objectives for Fort Collins’ 21 properties along the river. An update to that management plan is being developed to establish conservation priorities and management tactics for these natural riverine habitats given contemporary ecological stressors, management issues, and dramatic increase in recreational uses. Fort Collins developed the Poudre River Downtown Master Plan (City of Fort Collins 2014) for the Poudre River Main Stem in the downtown corridor (Shields Street to Mulberry Street) to improve in- river and bankside recreation, aquatic habitat connectivity, bank protection, flood mitigation and floodplain management, public safety and access, and transportation. The master plan provides a long- EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 383 Item 15. term vision for this downtown reach and identifies multiple projects to be implemented over an extended period of time. The construction of a whitewater park in 2019 downstream of College Avenue was the first project implemented from this plan. In 2014, Fort Collins completed an Ecological Response Model in collaboration with a team of scientists to better understand past, present, and potential future river conditions through Fort Collins (Bestgen et al. 2019). This effort, along with numerous other monitoring and biological assessment initiatives, support a community driven quest for taking a data-informed management approach to promoting a healthy Poudre River. In 2017, Fort Collins released the State of the Poudre River Report: A River Health Assessment (City of Fort Collins 2017), which examined the conditions of the Main Stem from the lower portion of Poudre Canyon through Fort Collins to Interstate (I-)25. The effort used an assessment method developed by Fort Collins, known as the River Health Assessment Framework (City of Fort Collins 2015b, 2019b), which was adapted from the Functional Assessment of Colorado Streams protocol (Beardsley et al. 2015). Fort Collins has used the information related to river health and river function gained from this effort to generally inform the measures described in this FWMEP. In 2022 to 2023, Fort Collins is teaming with the Coalition for the Poudre River Watershed (Coalition) to create an updated River Health Assessment Framework. The updated framework will identify the overarching framework for reporting on the river’s health from the headwaters to its confluence, and aims to identify methods specific to topic and location. 2.4.3 Northern Integrated Supply Project The Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District (Northern Water) delivers raw water and operates infrastructure that serves numerous communities in northern Colorado. Northern Water, acting through an enterprise on behalf of 15 water providers north of Denver, is seeking a CWA Section 404 permit from the Corps to undertake the Northern Integrated Supply Project (NISP). NISP would use conditional water rights to divert water from the Poudre and South Platte Rivers to provide 40,000 acre-feet of new reliable water supply annually to meet part of the participants’ future water supply needs. NISP involves constructing two new reservoirs—Glade and Upper Galeton—with capacities of 170,000 and 45,624 acre-feet, respectively. The Corps is the lead federal agency and has been analyzing the environmental impacts of NISP since 2004. The Corps i ssued a ROD in December 2022. 2.4.4 Poudre Runs Through It The Poudre Runs Through It work group is a diverse group of regional leaders and experts with varying interests in the Poudre River, including members from Fort Collins Utilities and Natural Areas. The group convenes agricultural, municipal, environmental, recreation, business, and other stakeholders with the goal of identifying opportunities for cooperative action to help meet their healthy river and working river goals. The Poudre Runs Through It defines a “healthy working river” as “one that supplies the goods and services demanded by our complex society, within the existing and evolving water rights system and honoring existing property rights, while maintaining and improving ecological integrity and resilience” (CSU 2020). Fort Collins shares in this goal of a healthy working river and values input from the work group. 2.4.5 Poudre Flows Plan The Poudre Flows Plan is a project to increase flows in the Cache la Poudre River, from the Poudre River canyon mouth to its confluence with the South Platte River. A key aspect of the plan is to not injure or adversely affect other water rights and existing water operations. The plan began in 2013 as an outgrowth of the Flows Subcommittee of the Poudre Runs Through It work group. This plan is being EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 384 Item 15. pursued by a coalition consisting of the Cache la Poudre Water Users Association, Fort Collins, the cities of Greeley and Thornton, CPW, CWCB, the Colorado Water Trust, and Northern Water. Under the Poudre Flows Plan, water that was historically diverted for irrigation and other consumptive uses will be added to the river as “augmentation water” and protected from diversion in defined stream reaches. The Poudre Flows Plan is being pursued as a plan to augment stream flows pursuant to CRS 37-92-102(4.5). An application for approval of the plan was filed with the Water Court on April 29, 2021. The current sources of augmentation water for the plan are certain water rights owned by Fort Collins and the cities of Greeley and Thornton. Additional augmentation water sources are intended to be added to the plan after it is approved. The plan will begin operations following the Water Court’s entry of a final decree, currently anticipated to occur in 2024. 2.4.6 Wildfire Recovery and Monitoring Efforts The 2020 Cameron Peak and East Troublesome Wildfires are the two largest wildfires in Colorado history. These fires combined to burn more than 400,000 acres of forested landscape. Post-fire pollution continues to pose significant challenges to maintaining the availability and quality of Fort Collins’ drinking water supplies. Fort Collins Utilities has developed post-wildfire water quality monitoring and recovery plans (City of Fort Collins 2021b), which outline a range of different collaborative water quality programs to assist with addressing these pollution concerns. These programs include, for example, targeted post-storm runoff event sampling, real-time water quality monitoring to inform water treatment and other staff, and monitoring long-term trends to better understand watershed recovery. Fort Collins is a partner in the Larimer Recovery Collaborative Watershed Subcommittee, which is a diverse collaborative stakeholder group focused on watershed recovery following the Cameron Peak Fire. The primary watershed recovery concern following the fire is hillslope erosion, and the most effective treatment is the application of wood mulch. The subcommittee has prioritized sub-watersheds within the burn scar for treatment based on burn severity, slope, erosion risk, and other factors, which ultimately targets finite resources to have the greatest treatment results. In 2021, Fort Collins Utilities helped share the cost of treatment of more than 5,000 high priority acres at a total cost of $11,353,805. Additional priority acres will be treated in 2022. Fort Collins also continues to work to minimize the risk of future large-scale wildfires in the Cache la Poudre Basin by investing in targeted regional cost share collaborative wildfire mitigation projects. Priority areas identified for future treatment include areas that drain to the North Fork upstream of Halligan Reservoir. 2.4.7 Coalition for the Poudre River Watershed The Coalition is a nonprofit organization established with the mission of improving and maintaining the ecological health of the Poudre River watershed through community collaboration. With the goal of increasing watershed resiliency and health, the Coalition released the Upper Poudre Watershed Resilience Plan Final (JW Associates, Inc. 2017). The plan describes conditions in the Upper Poudre Watershed and identifies target areas, priorities, and actions with the overall goal of increasing watershed resilience. The plan assesses the baseline health of the riparian and river corridor of the Poudre River watershed upstream of the mouth of the Poudre River Canyon using a close adaptation of the Cache la Poudre River: River Health Assessment Framework (City of Fort Collins 2015b). Fort Collins has coordinated with the Coalition and CPW to help inform the development of the mitigation and enhancement measures described in this FWMEP. EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 385 Item 15. 2.4.8 Preble’s Meadow Jumping Mouse Site Conservation Team The Poudre Site Conservation Team for Preble’s meadow jumping mouse (Zapus hudsonius preblei) (Preble’s) was established in 2019, and comprises stakeholders organized by the USFWS representing local communities and natural resource management partners, including private landowners and local, state, and federal governments and agencies. The team’s goal is to facilitate the recovery of Preble’s, a threatened species protected under the ESA, in the North Fork watershed in accordance with the Recovery Plan Preble’s Meadow Jumping Mouse (USFWS 2018). This recovery plan focuses on abating threats to Preble’s and promoting riparian habitat persistence, with the ultimate goal of recovering the subspecies so that it no longer warrants listing under the ESA. Specifically, the recovery goal for the North Fork watershed is a minimum of 57 miles of healthy, connected Preble’s habitat. Fort Collins is an active participant in the team, supporting such efforts as outreach, recovery population habitat selection, and site identification for riparian habitat improvements in the North Fork riparian corridor. 2.4.9 Platte River Species Fort Collins participates in the South Platte Water Related Activities Program (SPWRAP), which outlines a programmatic approach for USFWS Section 7 consultation that is described in the Platte River Recovery Implementation Program. Currently, mitigation is not expected to be needed for South Platte River depletions. If mitigation needs associated with the Halligan Project are identified during this programmatic approach or based on USFWS consultation, they will be incorporated into the mitigation strategy for the Halligan Project. EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 386 Item 15. 3 Fish and Wildlife Conditions and Impacts This chapter describes the fish and wildlife resources that are anticipated to be affected by the Halligan Project, as identified in the DEIS and supporting technical reports (Corps 2019), the current conditions influencing those resources, and a summary of the anticipated effects of the Halligan Project on each resource. Background information is presented regarding the status of each resource, followed by a summary of the potential impacts of the Halligan Project on fish and wildlife, including both beneficial and adverse effects. Mitigation measures that Fort Collins is proposing for the Halligan Project are described in Section 4, and enhancement measures are described in Section 5. Appendix B presents a tabular summary of Halligan Project impacts, mitigations, and costs. Since completion of Halligan Reservoir in 1909, operations of Halligan Dam and the North Poudre Canal Diversion have significantly and adversely affected river flows in the North Fork and impaired downstream aquatic habitats. Enlargement of the reservoir through the Halligan Project provides an opportunity for Fort Collins to provide year-round flows in the North Fork through the flow-related operational measures described in Section 4.2.1, leading to environmental benefits for fish and wildlife in and along the North Fork downstream of the dam. Halligan Project impacts would occur from inundation by the enlarged reservoir along a portion of the North Fork upstream of the reservoir and at the footprint of the replacement dam. Also, impacts would occur from construction activities, including access and materials mobilization and stockpiling, at the replacement dam and at the North Poudre Canal Diversion. These effects would result directly from implementing the Halligan Project. Indirect effects are those that are Project-induced but occur later in time or are farther removed in distance. Indirect effects associated with the Halligan Project include increased flows in most months that benefit conditions along the North Fork downstream of the dam, as well as some impacts resulting from reduced flows on the North Fork when water is being diverted to storage in the enlarged Halligan Reservoir. As well as reduced flows for the Main Stem in the Exchange Reach upstream of the North Fork confluence when Halligan Releases are being diverted by exchange into Fort Collins Intakes. Another potential indirect effect of the Halligan Project is the risk of a stress- related die-off of Rocky Mountain bighorn sheep (bighorn sheep) (Ovis canadensis), discussed further in Section 3.7.4. 3.1 Basis of Halligan Project Effects The Halligan Project effects described in this FWMEP are based on detailed evaluations in the DEIS and supporting technical reports, and further analyses conducted since the DEIS. Because of advancements in project design, the Halligan Project effects presented in the DEIS are being revised in the FEIS. These revisions are expected to be minor and are a refinement of the Proposed Action in the DEIS. In the DEIS, effects estimates were based on enlargement of the existing dam to raise the reservoir level by approximately 25 feet. Impacts in the FEIS will be determined based on the design plan summarized in Section 1.3 of this FWMEP, which involves replacing the more than 114-year-old dam, as of 2023, with a replacement dam constructed approximately 200 feet downstream of the existing dam. Consistent with the dam enlargement described in the DEIS, the dam replacement presented in the FEIS and this FWMEP would raise the existing reservoir elevation by approximately 25 feet to increase the total water storage capacity by approximately 8,200 acre-feet, for a total enlarged reservoir volume of approximately 14,600 acre-feet. Enlarging the reservoir would increase the current surface area of Halligan Reservoir from 253 to 391 acres. EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 387 Item 15. Fort Collins anticipates developing the following infrastructure and construction areas in association with the Halligan Project: • Replacement of Halligan Dam, including outlet works, stilling basin, and other appurtenant structures constructed approximately 200 feet downstream of the existing dam • Relocation of existing overhead power lines and poles from the southwest end of the existing reservoir to the new dam since the old power poles would be inundated during the Halligan enlargement • Reconstruction of the North Poudre Canal Diversion • Partial or total demolition of the existing dam after the replacement dam is constructed • Temporary construction areas and features, including temporarily widened roads to allow for construction vehicle access, construction staging areas, concrete batching plant, and possible borrow pits for concrete aggregate • Construction of a temporary construction access river crossing below the existing dam • Permanent remnants of construction, including waste rock piles, new access roads in the immediate area of the reconstructed dam, and/or widened roads in limited areas where the roads cannot be reclaimed on portions of Fort Collins’ property and/or where private property owners request to retain widened roads Future operation of the Halligan Project is described in Section 1.3.1.2. Features that would be constructed as part of avoidance, minimization, compensatory mitigation, and enhancement measures are described in Sections 4 and 5. At this time, details of the extent, methods, and impacts related to dam demolition are not known. Fort Collins will consult with CPW as needed on the dam demolition. Differences in Halligan Project effects between the DEIS and FEIS are expected to be minimal. 3.2 Resources Evaluated The following resources associated with fish or wildlife are addressed in this FWMEP: • Surface water hydrology (Section 3.3) • Surface water quality (Section 3.4) • Aquatic resources (Section 3.5) • Terrestrial wildlife, including big game (Section 3.6) • Rocky Mountain Bighorn Sheep (Section 3.7) • Special-status species (Section 3.8) • Recreation (Section 3.9) DEIS Table 4-2 lists all the resources that are addressed in the DEIS but do not necessarily relate to fish and wildlife. More information about these resources can be found in the DEIS (Corps 2019). 3.3 Surface Water Hydrology This section describes the current conditions and potential Project effects on surface water resources (Halligan Reservoir, the North Fork, and Main Stem) potentially affected by changes in surface water hydrology resulting from implementation of the Halligan Project. EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 388 Item 15. 3.3.1 Current Conditions for Surface Water Hydrology Snowmelt provides the largest water supply to the North Fork, with runoff primarily occurring from May to July. The DEIS Section 3.6.2.3.1 documents a typical unregulated snowmelt flow regime for the North Fork upstream of Halligan Reservoir; this portion of the North Fork channel is supply limited for sands and finer gravels (Corps 2019). Historically, NPIC captures water from the North Fork to fill the reservoir beginning in the fall and continuing until water spills over the existing dam to the North Fork in the spring, although spilling can occur as early as December or January. NPIC typically releases water from the existing dam outlet structure from spring through fall, nearly draining the reservoir in most years. As described in the DEIS Section 3.3.5 and Chapter 4 and in Section 3.3.2 of this FWMEP, Halligan Reservoir and the North Poudre Canal Diversion affect flows. Under current operations, the North Fork can experience many zero-flow days in both winter and summer, particularly during dry or average hydrologic years, creating low-flow conditions and disconnected pools. The DEIS describes zero-flow days in the North Fork below Halligan Dam in winter months when the reservoir is filling, and below the North Poudre Canal Diversion (6 miles downstream of the reservoir) to the North Poudre Canal Diversion turn back or confluence with the downstream tributaries in summer when water is diverted for NPIC shareholders. Flow simulations produced for the DEIS and supporting Surface Water Resources Technical Report (CDM Smith 2017) estimated that the North Fork downstream of the North Poudre Canal Diversion has zero-flow days approximately 40 percent of the time during both winter and summer months. Consequently, under current conditions, the aquatic habitat in the North Fork is disconnected between the North Poudre Canal Diversion and the first downstream tributary inflow. Rabbit Creek, Stonewall Creek, and Lone Pine Creek provide small inflows to the North Fork, and zero- flow days are less common downstream of these tributaries. For the Main Stem, the DEIS Section 3.3.6 notes that trans-basin water deliveries supply significant flows in the Upper Poudre, while irrigation, municipal, and industrial diversions influence flows downstream of the flow gage located near the mouth of the Poudre Canyon. Multiple dry-up locations currently exist on the Main Stem. Dramatic flow changes occur naturally on the North Fork in the spring and summer months during spring runoff and summer storms, and also currently occur below Halligan Reservoir during the fall and winter months as a result of NPIC’s ongoing and historical operations of the existing Halligan Reservoir. CPW has raised concerns in meetings with Fort Collins that these drastic changes in conditions associated with NPIC’s operations, particularly sudden decreases from high to low flow, can adversely affect fish populations. 3.3.2 Halligan Project Effects on Surface Water Hydrology The Halligan Project would result in both beneficial effects and adverse impacts on the surface water hydrology of the North Fork and on the associated aquatic resources and river morphology (GEI Consultants, Inc. [GEI] 2016; Western EcoSystems Technologies, Inc. [WEST] 2017b; City of Fort Collins 2017). Each of these effects is described in more detail in the following sections. 3.3.2.1 Inundation Effects Enlarging Halligan Reservoir would increase the current surface area from 253 to 391 acres at full storage capacity. The water surface area of the enlarged Halligan Reservoir is anticipated to fluctuate from 200 acres to 391 acres. In the enlarged reservoir, NPIC would continue to fill and drain nearly all of their reservoir storage capacity each year, while Fort Collins would fill and drain only a portion of the EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 389 Item 15. enlarged reservoir capacity. The water surface elevation of the enlarged Halligan Reservoir would fluctuate at slower rates than the current typical rates for the reservoir. The Halligan Project would inundate two sections on the North Fork: (1) permanent inundation of a short (approximately 200 feet) section of the North Fork between the existing dam and the replacement dam (Downstream Permanently Inundated 200 feet); and (2) the intermittent inundation of an approximately 0.75 mile stretch of the North Fork upstream of the existing Halligan Reservoir (Upstream Intermittently Inundated 0.75 mile). •Downstream Permanently Inundated 200 Feet. During construction the aquatic community in a short section (approximately 200-feet) of the North Fork would be temporarily disrupted during the construction of the replacement dam in between the existing and replacement dam. In addition, another portion of the reach, approximately 200 feet downstream of the replacement dam down to the temporary construction river crossing, will be impacted. Once construction is complete the approximately 200-feet between the replacement dam and the existing dam would be permanently inundated, converting the controlled river habitat to reservoir. •Upstream Intermittently Inundated 0.75 Mile. DEIS Sections 4.8.3.1 and 4.8.3.4.1.1 discuss the intermittent inundation of the North Fork which would transition the aquatic environment of the 0.75-mile free-flowing (lotic) aquatic habitat to an intermittently ponded (lentic) inlet channel. Meaning in late summer, fall, and early winter the stream would contain significantly higher levels of fine sediment which will eliminate pool habitat and reduces cobble and gravel habitat used for fish spawning. The permanent inundation of the controlled stream below the existing dam and the intermittent inundation and permanent sedimentation of 0.75 mile of natural free-flowing stream, as well as associated lotic system functions, would be a permanent direct impact from the Halligan Project that would eliminate existing lotic aquatic habitat upstream. 3.3.2.2 Inundation Effects on an Instream Flow Water Right The CWCB has an instream flow water right (Water Court Case 1985CW430) on the North Fork from its confluence with Dale Creek to the current inlet of Halligan Reservoir. The reach of the instream flow water includes the approximately 0.75 mile of the North Fork stream that would be intermittently inundated and permanently impacted by enlarging Halligan Reservoir, as discussed in the previous subsection. This inundation will cause injury to the CWCB instream flow water right. In Water Court Case 2013CW3185, Fort Collins and the CWCB reached an agreement regarding how to proceed with respect to the instream flow water right. Key portions of that agreement are summarized in this subsection. Fort Collins agreed to seek CWCB approval to inundate and to provide mitigation either pursuant to: (a)Rule 7 of the Rules Concerning the Colorado Instream Flow and Natural Lake Level Program, 2 CCR 408-2; or (b) an agreement pursuant to the CWCB rules and regulations enacted under CRS Sections 37-60-108 and 37-92-102(3). Fort Collins has submitted to the CWCB a request to defer the CWCB’s consideration of a request to inundate pursuant to Rule 7j of those rules and regulations. The CWCB has agreed to defer such consideration until permitting by other state, federal, or local governmental agencies concerning the Halligan Reservoir enlargement is completed. If Fort Collins is required by other governmental entities to provide mitigation to offset impacts of the Halligan Reservoir enlargement, the CWCB has agreed to consider the cumulative effects of such EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 390 Item 15. mitigation on the mitigation or compensation it will require as a condition of granting its approval to inundate any portion of the CWCB instream flow water right. 3.3.2.3 Flow Effects on the North Fork Downstream of Halligan Reservoir Indirect impacts on the North Fork downstream of Halligan Reservoir would include a minor reduction (DEIS Section 4.3.2) in flows during peak stream flow months when water is diverted to storage in the enlargement under Fort Collins’ various water rights decreed for storage in Halligan Reservoir, and temporary flow effects related to dam construction. Below the replacement dam, the North Fork would benefit from Fort Collins’ operational commitments associated with the Project, specifically the Winter Release Plan, which provides continuous release of 3 cfs from the enlarged reservoir from October through April to maintain flows in the North Fork below Halligan Reservoir.4 Although the Winter Release Plan is an operational commitment and not a mitigation measure, it is described in more detail with other flow-related operational measures in Section 4.2.1 to facilitate understanding of how all flow- related operations will be conducted. Based on modeling results presented in the DEIS Section 4.3.3.3.3, with the Winter Release Plan daily mean flows in the North Fork from the replacement dam to the North Poudre Canal Diversion are expected to increase from November through January, and from October through March for the reach below the North Poudre Canal Diversion to at least Seaman Reservoir. The Halligan Projects’ Winter Release Plan eliminates the zero-flow days downstream of Halligan Reservoir to the North Poudre Canal and significantly reduces the number of months with zero-flow days both below the North Poudre Canal and at the Livermore Gage. The Halligan Project may improve river connectivity during low-flow periods and could increase downstream areas of riffle and pool complexes. These flow-related operational measures would have varying beneficial effects on approximately 22 miles of the North Fork, from the replacement Halligan Dam to Seaman Reservoir. The beneficial effects from the Winter Release Plan would be most impactful where the North Fork currently experiences very low or no flow (for example, below Halligan Reservoir in winter), but those benefits may diminish farther downstream where water enters the North Fork from its tributaries (for example, Rabbit and Lone Pine Creeks). The Winter Release Plan dedicates continuous 3 cfs releases from the enlarged Halligan Reservoir to the North Fork from October 1 to April 30 of the following year. This operation would satisfy Fort Collins’ wintertime return flow obligations, decrease winter consumption of other water sources (that is, Horsetooth Reservoir), and result in the concurrent environmental benefit of improving North Fork stream flows during periods when river flows are typically low (Section 4.2.1.2). 3.3.2.4 Flow Effects on the Poudre River Main Stem On the Main Stem both above and below its confluence with the North Fork, the DEIS Section 4.3.3.3.4 indicates that the Halligan Project’s modeled effects on-stream flows were considered within normal variability and are not meaningful. On the Main Stem above the confluence, a minor increase in stream flows above the Munroe Canal Diversion is expected. Below the Munroe Canal and Fort Collins pipeline diversions to the North Fork confluence, the Halligan Project is expected to cause minor reductions in annual stream flows as a result of diversions of Halligan Reservoir releases made by exchange. Minor reductions have occurred year-round, but were typically highest in June and July, mostly as a result of increased use of Fort Collins’ changed rights in the Southside Ditches. As described in the DEIS, the Halligan Project would generally increase the fraction of water originating from the North Fork in the Main Stem downstream of the confluence by about 4 percent on an average annual basis. 4 3 cfs would be released from Halligan Reservoir. The amount attributed to this release would be reduced by transit losses assessed by the water commissioner. EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 391 Item 15. 3.4 Surface Water Quality Current conditions for surface water quality and potential surface water quality impacts of the Halligan Project were evaluated and summarized for this plan. Areas addressed include Halligan Reservoir, the North Fork, Seaman Reservoir, and the Main Stem. 3.4.1 Current Conditions for Surface Water Quality Current conditions for surface water quality relevant to the Halligan Project are summarized in Appendix C, which includes overviews of surface water quality current conditions for Halligan Reservoir, Seaman Reservoir, the North Fork, and the Main Stem. The summary of current conditions in Appendix C is based on information presented in the DEIS as well as detailed recent studies (Hydros 2020, 2021a, 2021b, 2021c, 2021d, and 2022b). These recent studies rigorously document the conceptualization of existing major drivers of spatial and temporal variability in temperature and water quality based on evaluation of observed water-quality data, flow data, diversion patterns, reservoir operations, geology, point sources, land use, and spatially varying meteorological conditions. Appendix C is also supported by two memoranda (Hydros 2022a and 2022c). These two memoranda were developed to document key water-quality discussion topics from meetings held with CPW during the FWMEP development process. 3.4.2 Halligan Project Effects on Surface Water Quality Halligan Project effects on surface water quality were anticipated based on the detailed conceptual understandings of Halligan and Seaman Reservoirs, the North Fork, and the Main Stem as well as consideration of Halligan Project effects on flows, as summarized in Appendix C and supported by Hydros Consulting, Inc. (Hydros; 2020, 2021a, 2021b, 2021c, 2021d, and 2022b). Fort Collins asserts that no water-quality impacts due to the Halligan Project are currently anticipated in Halligan Reservoir itself, or in Seaman Reservoir. Additionally, numerous meetings5 and rounds of comments and responses were completed with CPW and the Water Quality Control Division (WQCD) to communicate and coordinate on anticipated surface water-quality effects.6 Key discussion topics from those meetings are documented in Hydros publications (2022a and 2022c). The approach to identifying potential Halligan Project surface water-quality impacts was largely based on consideration of existing conditions and anticipated changes relative to applicable aquatic life standards. A potential impact was anticipated if a concentration or temperature increase (or decrease in the case of dissolved oxygen [DO]) was anticipated because of the Halligan Project, and the system is currently either approaching or exceeding the corresponding aquatic life standard. Additionally, if a large (considering the magnitude of the aquatic life standard) concentration or temperature increase (or decrease in the case of DO) was anticipated to occur because of the Halligan Project, that was also identified as a potential impact on aquatic life. Both acute and chronic aquatic life standards were considered for temperature and water quality. Additionally, following discussions with CPW, literature- based iron concentrations below the currently applicable chronic total iron standard for aquatic life were also considered as thresholds of potential concern for chronic dissolved iron below Halligan Reservoir (refer to Section 3.4.2.5). In this process, iron stands as a unique case of consideration of potential impacts relative to values more stringent than current standards. The rationale for this largely standards-based approach is that, for temperature and water quality, aquatic life regulations provide an existing, enforceable, quantifiable, state-specific regulatory basis for the identification of impacts. Fort Collins recognizes that state standards do not necessarily provide 5 Fort Collins met with CPW to discuss surface water quality on the following dates: July 9, 2020; February 3, 2022; February 17, 2022; February 24, 2022; April 14, 2022; May 3, 2022; May 17,2022; May 20, 2022; July 18, 2022; and September 9, 2022. 6 Note that the analyses to be completed to identify impacts for the 401 Certification Application will differ from those completed for the FWMEP. EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 392 Item 15. guidelines for the identification of impacts for the FWMEP for other resources areas (for example, surface water hydrology, aquatic resources, terrestrial wildlife, special-status species, and recreation) and that CPW may have additional concerns about potential Project effects on aquatic resources and wildlife that are not fully addressed by a standards-based approach but that may be addressed through this FWMEP. To understand and evaluate these additional potential concerns, Fort Collins and their technical consultants engaged in numerous meetings5 with CPW and the WQCD to discuss water quality and temperature current conditions, the approach to identifying potential water quality impacts, and the potential impacts identified. One outcome of these discussions, as noted previously, is the consideration of a threshold more stringent than existing standards as a special-case exception for iron below Halligan Reservoir, in response to CPW’s expressed concerns regarding the protectiveness of the existing aquatic life standard for this constituent. Additional temperature and water quality modeling is planned for the CWA Section 401 water quality certification process. This includes temperature modeling of the North Fork and Poudre River Mainstem, as well as temperature and water quality modeling of Halligan and Seaman Reservoirs. Note that modeling for Halligan Reservoir will simulate the effects of the relocation of the dam and the selected demolition plan. Modeling results will allow for more definitive determination of any long-term water- quality impacts associated with the new dam configuration that are not anticipated at this time. Modeling for the CWA Section 401 water quality certification process will also support the antidegradation analysis. Antidegradation analyses will allow for the identification of smaller-scale impacts, if present, relative to the baseline available increment, which cannot be reliably identified before numerical modeling. Any antidegradation impacts (including those relative to aquatic life standards) will be evaluated as part of the CWA Section 401 water quality certification application. Further, per the 2017 Memorandum of Understanding (CDPHE and CDNR 2017), intended to streamline the state’s role regarding FWMEP and CWA Section 401 water quality certification permitting for water supply projects, CPW may coordinate with CDPHE on the CWA Section 401 water quality certification, including development of conditions. Therefore, in the event that additional aquatic life surface water- quality impacts are identified through modeling and associated antidegradation analysis to be conducted for the CWA Section 401 water quality certification process, CPW will have an opportunity to participate in development of appropriate CWA Section 401 water quality certification conditions for the Halligan Project. If the additional temperature and water quality modeling demonstrates that there are impacts on aquatic life that will not be addressed in the CWA Section 401 water quality certification, Fort Collins will work with CPW to develop additional mitigation measures as needed. The following subsections describe each of the currently anticipated potential surface water-quality impacts of the Halligan Project. Additionally, the rationale for not anticipating DO impacts downstream of Halligan Reservoir is provided. A range of other key constituents/locations were considered, but ultimately no impacts are anticipated, as documented in recent memoranda to CPW (Hydros 2022a and 2022c). These memoranda reflect information presented in various communications and meetings with CPW. 3.4.2.1 Water Temperature on the North Fork from Halligan Reservoir Dam to Seaman Reservoir Decreased summer flow rates at times because of the Halligan Project could cause or contribute to existing summer temperature exceedances (acute and chronic) in the North Fork between Halligan Reservoir and Seaman Reservoir. These impacts would be expected to occur at times in the months of July through September, varying by year, depending on hydrology. EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 393 Item 15. 3.4.2.2 Water Temperature on the North Fork Below Seaman Reservoir Decreased summer flow rates at times because of the Halligan Project could cause or contribute to existing summer temperature exceedances (primarily chronic, but also potentially acute) in the CWA Section 303(d)-listed reach of the North Fork below Seaman Reservoir. These impacts would be expected to occur at times in the months of July through September, varying by year, depending on hydrology. 3.4.2.3 Dissolved Oxygen Below Halligan Reservoir Recognizing the anticipated increase in residence time for Halligan Reservoir with the Halligan Project (that is, roughly doubling average monthly residence time through the summer based on modeled flows from 1980 to 2005; Figure 3-1; Hydros 2022a), the potential for low DO (that is, at levels of concerns to aquatic life) in releases from Halligan Reservoir was considered but ruled out as an anticipated impact. This section explains the considerations behind that decision. Figure 3-1. Average Monthly Residence Times With and Without the Halligan Project Based on Common Technical Platform Flows, 1980–2005 There is the potential that DO concentrations in the hypolimnion of Halligan Reservoir could decrease in some years in the summer because of the Halligan Project. The magnitude of this potential effect is uncertain but expected to be relatively small, given the competing factors associated with the reservoir expansion. These competing factors include an increase in summer residence time (more time for oxygen consumption in the hypolimnion through decay of organic matter/sediment oxygen demand), a potentially larger hypolimnion (providing a greater volume for dilution of any oxygen effects), and possible cooler bottom temperatures (slowing the rate of organic matter decay). It is acknowledged that the net result of these competing factors could result in a small decrease in DO at the bottom of Halligan Reservoir. However, any such decrease is not expected to cause DO EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 394 Item 15. concentrations to reach levels of concern for aquatic life below Halligan Reservoir for two reasons. First, in spite of existing cases of observed low DO in the Halligan Reservoir hypolimnion during stratification, there are no observed cases of DO concentrations approaching levels of concern (aquatic life standards) in the North Fork at the sampling location below the dam (NBH). Therefore, any small changes to DO at the bottom of Halligan Reservoir are unlikely to result in major changes at NBH that would cause concern. Second, there are plans to include passive aeration into the design of the new Halligan Reservoir dam outlet, as described in Section 4.2.2. This passive aeration should increase the rate of reaeration of releases, addressing any small decrease in DO that may occur because of the Project. Based on this, DO below Halligan Reservoir is discussed here, but it is not identified as an anticipated adverse impact of the Halligan Project. This anticipated response will be further evaluated (quantitatively) as part of the modeling planned for the CWA Section 401 water quality certification process. 3.4.2.4 Sediment Below Halligan Reservoir Careful management of existing sediment in Halligan Reservoir is needed during construction of the new dam and for long-term operations of the reservoir with the Halligan Project. Without such construction and operational planning, it is possible that a detrimental sediment release event could occur. 3.4.2.5 Iron Below Halligan Reservoir As described in Appendix C, CPW has raised concerns that the current iron standard for aquatic life is not adequately protective7 and that existing concentrations below Halligan are currently above levels of concern identified in recent literature (Cadmus et al. 2018). There is the potential that iron concentrations below Halligan Reservoir could increase in late summer with the Halligan Project because of increased duration of stratification and corresponding increased internal loading from sediments (though there is no concern that iron concentrations would approach the current aquatic life iron standard). CPW has expressed specific concerns about deposition of iron below Halligan Reservoir having the potential to inhibit periphyton growth and directly interfere with benthic macroinvertebrates and early life stages of fish. While there are no observations of iron deposition/precipitation onto benthic material below the current Halligan Dam, CPW is concerned this may occur in the future with the Halligan Project. 3.4.2.6 Water Temperature on the Main Stem from Munroe Canal Diversion to the North Fork Halligan Project diversions at the Fort Collins Intakes could cause and/or exacerbate chronic summer temperature standard exceedances in most years by causing slight warming in a reach that already exhibits exceedances of temperature standards. These impacts would be expected to occur in the months of July through September, varying by year, depending on hydrology. Note that the majority of Halligan Project diversions from the Main Stem would occur at the Fort Collins pipeline diversion (as opposed to the Munroe Canal Diversion upstream). Therefore, the primary focus reach for this anticipated potential impact is the approximately 0.5 river mile reach from the Fort Collins pipeline diversion to the North Fork confluence. There will also be decreased flows (and corresponding increases in summer temperatures) in the 0.9 river mile reach between the Munroe Canal Diversion and the Fort Collins pipeline diversion, but the greater effects on flow rates and temperatures are expected to occur between the Fort Collins pipeline diversion and the North Fork confluence. 7 Note that, while CPW has expressed concerns with the existing aquatic life standard for total iron, WQCD has made it clear that the existing standards will be the basis for analysis in the HWSP 401 Certification Application, and a 251 ug/L will not be considered in that analysis as an aquatic life standard for total iron. EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 395 Item 15. 3.4.2.7 Water Temperature on the Main Stem from North Fork to Hansen Supply Canal Halligan Project diversions at the Fort Collins Intakes could cause and/or exacerbate chronic summer temperature standard exceedances in most years by causing slight warming in the reach from the North Fork to Hansen Supply Canal that already exhibits exceedances of temperature standards. These impacts would be expected to occur in the months of July through September, varying by year, depending on hydrology. Note that no adverse effects to water temperature on the Main Stem downstream of Hansen Supply Canal are anticipated from the Halligan Project. The small warming effects anticipated upstream of Hansen Supply Canal are not expected to cause issues downstream of Hansen Supply Canal because of the cooling influence of Hansen Supply Canal inflows in the summer months. As noted in Section 3.4.2, Hansen Supply Canal releases comprise a large fraction of summer flow where it enters the Main Stem (averaging 42 percent for July to September), making the river less sensitive to small changes in flow rates through Poudre River Segment 10b. In spite of the combined effects of increased amount of diversions at Munroe Canal and Fort Collins pipeline diversions with increased summer flows from the North Fork, adverse water quality effects from the Halligan Project, in terms of aquatic life, are not anticipated on the Main Stem below the North Fork. While the Halligan Project will change the fraction of flow in the Poudre River coming from the North Fork, the changes are expected to be small (Figure 3-2). As noted in Section 3.4.2, the largest differences in water quality between the North Fork and the Main Stem upstream of the North Fork occur in summer months, but minimal percent changes in North Fork contributions to Main Stem flows are expected in summer (Figure 3-2). Additionally, these small percent flow changes in summer are at the time of year when the North Fork contributes the smallest percentage to the Main Stem, further minimizing effects on Main Stem water quality. Beyond monthly average effects, review of individual years of modeled flows with and without the Halligan Project show minimal changes to the resulting distribution of flow contributions from the North Fork to the Main Stem, particularly in summer months (Hydros 2022). In short, the small anticipated changes in the fraction of flow from the North Fork would not be expected to cause a notable shift in water quality on the Main Stem, particularly given the fact that no aquatic life water-quality standards (other than temperature) are currently being approached or exceeded on either the North Fork or the Main Stem downstream of the North Fork. EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 396 Item 15. Figure 3-2. Average Monthly Percentage of Flow from the North Fork on the Main Stem below the North Fork Confluence[a] [a] Based on modeled flows of future conditions with and without the Halligan Project, 1980 to 2005. Modeled flows reflect the combined Halligan Project effects of increased diversions upstream of the North Fork and changes to flow patterns from the North Fork to the Main Stem. Note that these flows include the Summer Low-flow Plan and Winter Release Plan (these are incorporated into all modeled flows with the Halligan Project), but these flows do not include an agreement with the City of Greeley for immediate pass-through of those mitigation flows through Seaman Reservoir. 3.5 Aquatic Resources Aquatic biological resources include fish, benthic macroinvertebrates, periphyton, and aquatic plant communities and their habitat. The suitability of a stream to support aquatic resources is influenced by multiple factors, including hydrology (Section 3.3) and water quality (Section 3.4), geomorphology, and riparian vegetation. The North Fork below Halligan Reservoir provides mountain-to-plains transitional habitat suitable for small-bodied native fish, as well as trout and other species. Throughout consultation with CPW (for example, meetings between CPW and Fort Collins in fall 2020) for the Halligan Project, CPW indicated that their primary focus for the North Fork below Halligan Reservoir is to protect small- bodied native fish species and rainbow trout. This section describes the geomorphology and currently present fish species assemblages in the North Fork to provide a baseline understanding of current conditions for aquatic resources, with a particular focus on small-bodied native fish and rainbow trout. 3.5.1 Current Conditions for Aquatic Resources The DEIS Section 3.8.5 describes modified flow regimes and habitat conditions in the North Fork compared to historical conditions because of the operation of Halligan Reservoir, built in 1909, and the Seaman Reservoir, built in 1941. DEIS Section 3.8.5 states that currently, stream habitat upstream of Halligan Reservoir includes a mix of approximately half riffles and half pools, and runs-glides. The banks are stable, and the substrate is a mix of gravel, cobble, and boulders. There was not excessive EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 397 Item 15. sedimentation of the substrate (Corps 2019). Halligan Reservoir, the North Fork flows through Phantom Canyon, which laterally confines the river channel with little to no overbank/floodplain areas. A notable transition in river condition occurs within Phantom Canyon at the North Poudre Canal Diversion; immediately downstream of the North Poudre Canal Diversion, the thalweg becomes indistinct, and the North Fork is often dry, filled with bed material, and heavily encroached by vegetation. As described in the DEIS and summarized in Section 3.3.1, the total flow of the North Fork is sometimes captured by the North Poudre Canal Diversion, and releases from both the Halligan and Seaman Reservoirs are sometimes reduced to zero, leading to zero-flow days and dry-up points throughout the year. In the dry sections, habitat for aquatic organisms is temporarily eliminated, although some of the functions of stream habitat persist in a limited way through the dry periods (for example, some organisms can find limited habitat refuge in isolated pools or by burrowing into moist substrate, and isolated sections of deep pools and upwelling groundwater are present downstream of the North Poudre Canal Diversion that provide refuge). The DEIS Section 3.8.3.4 summarizes fish survey data from 1959 through 2017 based on the presence of species and relative abundance. The North Fork supported mostly warmwater fish in terms of number of species, but brown trout (Salmo trutta) was often the most abundant during recent sampling events (CPW 2018). Species assemblage data (unpublished), collected between 1960 and 2019 (CPW 2020a) was analyzed to identify specific small-bodied native fish of interest in the North Fork that may be potentially affected by shifting operational strategies. The fish survey of the North Fork used for analysis was conducted during November 2017 (CPW 2018). Information obtained from the 2017 Fishery Sampling Survey Summary provides the information about the fish communities in the North Fork below Halligan Reservoir. Despite the altered flow regime in the North Fork, the 2017 Fishery Sampling Survey Summary notes that the fishery within Phantom Canyon has maintained a viable trout population and native fish component. These fish sampling efforts indicated high densities of introduced salmonids and small- bodied native fish. Five species native to the drainage were collected in 2017 in the North Fork below Halligan Reservoir and above the North Poudre Canal Diversion. Of those five native species, only two were observed downstream of the North Poudre Canal Diversion. Non-native species were found both above and below the North Poudre Canal Diversion. Unpublished data provided by CPW (CPW 2020a) collected over the past 59 years on the North Fork between Halligan and Seaman Reservoirs, including the 2017 study described in the previous paragraph, identified the following species in the North Fork: • Native species: black bullhead (Ameiurus melas), creek chub (Semotilus atromaculatus), green sunfish (Lepomis cyanellus), Iowa darter (Etheostoma exile), johnny darter (Rhinichthys cataractae), fathead minnow (Pimephales promelas), longnose dace (Rhinichthys cataractae), longnose sucker (Catostomus larkiaus), and white sucker (Catostomus commersonii). • Introduced species: brook stickleback (Culaea inconstans), brown trout (Salmo trutta), cutbow (Oncorhynchus larkia × mykiss), rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss), and yellow perch (Perca flavescens). Spawning of small-bodied native fish in the North Fork is temporally limited by seasonal water temperatures. Species observed in the North Fork below Halligan Reservoir require temperatures that range from 12 degrees Celsius (°C) to 29°C (Woodling 1985). Based on temperature data analyzed from 2016 to 2020 (Hydros 2021d), the North Fork below Halligan Reservoir currently maintains suitable spawning temperatures for small-bodied native fish from approximately June to October. EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 398 Item 15. 3.5.1.1 Current Conditions for Macroinvertebrates DEIS Section 3.8.3.6 discusses current conditions for macroinvertebrates in the North Fork. The section references existing macroinvertebrate data available from the CDPHE (2012), Miller Ecological Consultants (Miller) (2009), and the Nature Conservancy (2012), along with additional data collected in 2015 by GEI in support of the DEIS (GEI 2019). DEIS Section 3.8.3.6 summarizes the current conditions for macroinvertebrates on page 3-146: Benthic macroinvertebrate data were available from at least one site in each segment, primarily from the current conditions time period. In Segment 1 (below Halligan Dam), an abundant community of invertebrates exists, including some sensitive mayfly, stonefly, and caddisfly species, suggesting water quality is sufficient to support sensitive species. However, the number of taxa, number of mayfly, stonefly, and caddisfly species, and diversity are lower than expected at the site downstream of Halligan Reservoir compared to other sites in the study area, indicating the community may be experiencing some stress. The reduced number of taxa and low diversity downstream of Halligan Reservoir is a common characteristic of tailwater benthic invertebrate communities due to the altered physical and chemical environment downstream of reservoirs. The DEIS Section 4.8.3.4.2 analysis found that the macroinvertebrate multimetric index (MMI) scores improved in Segment 1 (Halligan Reservoir Outlet to the North Poudre Canal Diversion) from 43 in 2011 to 70 to 82 in 2015 (well above the attainment threshold). MMI scores collected by GEI in 2015 in Segment 2a (North Poudre Canal Diversion to Rabbit Creek) ranged from 76 to 79 (well above the attainment threshold). MMI scores in Segment 2b (Rabbit Creek to Seaman Reservoir Inlet) were 47 in 2005 and 67 in 2007 (the MMI score of 67 was above the threshold for Attainment in 2007). The data for Segment 3 (Seaman Reservoir Outlet to Confluence) suggest that the tailwater effect seen below Halligan Reservoir is also occurring downstream of Seaman Reservoir, resulting in a high density of a few species and relatively low diversity index values. A MMI score of 46 was calculated for the spring 2003 sample. Three samples from 2015 had MMI scores ranging from 64 to 72 (above the attainment threshold of 52), suggesting recent improvements in the macroinvertebrate community. No macroinvertebrate sampling has occurred above Halligan Reservoir; however, one may assume a high MMI score in the reach above Halligan Reservoir due to the relatively pristine stream conditions including a healthy riffle-pool plan form, boulder-cobble-gravel substrate, and natural stream hydrology. 3.5.2 Halligan Project Effects on Aquatic Resources The Halligan Project’s influence on aquatic resources is closely tied to surface water hydrology, as described in Section 3.3. Therefore, both the beneficial and adverse effects on aquatic resources generally follow those described for surface water hydrology in Section 3.3. The DEIS Section 4.3.8 (Corps 2019) and supporting technical reports describe the Halligan Project’s expected beneficial and adverse effects on the aquatic resources and river morphology of the North Fork (GEI 2016; WEST 2017b; City of Fort Collins 2017). In the DEIS, Halligan Project effects were evaluated by predicting the influence of flow changes on available habitat used by aquatic organisms, including riffle and pool complexes, which are special aquatic sites identified in the Section 404(b)(1) guidelines. As discussed above in Inundation Effects (Section 3.3.2.1), the Halligan Project would inundate two sections on the North Fork: (1) permanent the inundation of a short (approximately 200 feet) section of the North Fork between the existing dam and the replacement dam (Downstream Permanently EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 399 Item 15. Inundated 200 feet); and (2) the intermittent inundation of an approximately 0.75 mile stretch of the North Fork upstream of the existing Halligan Reservoir (Upstream Intermittently Inundated 0.75 mile). • Downstream Permanently Inundated 200 Feet. During construction the aquatic community in a short section (approximately 200-feet) of the North Fork would be temporarily disrupted during the construction of the replacement dam in between the existing and replacement dam. In addition, another portion of the reach, approximately 200 feet downstream of the replacement dam down to the temporary construction river crossing, will be impacted. Once construction is complete the approximately 200-feet between the replacement dam and the existing dam would be permanently inundated, converting the controlled river habitat to reservoir. • Upstream Intermittently Inundated 0.75 Mile. DEIS Sections 4.8.3.1 and 4.8.3.4.1.1 discuss the intermittent inundation of the North Fork would transition the aquatic environment of the 0.75-mile free-flowing (lotic) aquatic habitat to an intermittently ponded (lentic) inlet channel. The transition would result from significantly higher levels of fine sediment which will eliminate pool habitat and reduces cobble and gravel habitat that could be used for fish spawning. DEIS Sections 4.8.3.1 and 4.8.3.4.1.1 identify the loss of approximately 0.75 mile of the North Folk, including approximately 3.5 acres of free-flowing riffle and pool complexes as major adverse effect. DEIS Section 4.8.3.4.1.1 describes the North Fork as a coldwater stream community of fish, benthic macroinvertebrates, and algae that would be replaced with a reservoir community as a result of the Halligan Project. Many of the fish species, such as the recreationally important brown and rainbow trout, would still be able to use the reservoir habitat; however, some functions such as spawning would be eliminated in the inundated sections as described above in Section 3.3.2.1. Other species, such as longnose dace, prefer stream habitat and likely would not use the reservoir (Corps 2019; DEIS Section 4.8.3.4.1.1). The permanent inundation of the controlled stream below the existing dam and the intermittent inundation and permanent sedimentation of 0.75 mile of natural free-flowing stream, as well as associated lotic system functions, would be a permanent direct impact from the Halligan Project that would eliminate existing lotic aquatic habitat upstream. DEIS Section 4.8.3.4.4 describes the benefit of improved stream flows from operation of the enlarged reservoir, including minimum winter and summer flow releases and peak flow bypasses (refer to Section 4.2.1 of this FWMEP) for a distance of approximately 22 miles along the North Fork below Halligan Reservoir. The DEIS Section 4.8.3.4.1.3 states that the Halligan Project would maintain instream habitat for aquatic organisms throughout the year, thus eliminating dry riverbed conditions and resulting in major seasonal beneficial effects for aquatic resources from Halligan Reservoir downstream to the North Poudre Canal return flow (approximately 8 miles) on the North Fork with moderate beneficial effects from the North Poudre Canal return flow down to Rabbit Creek (approximately 2 miles), and minor benefits extending from the Rabbit Creek down to Seaman Reservoir, a total distance of approximately 12 miles. The Halligan Project would increase stream flows in winter and other traditionally low-flow periods, improve river connectivity during low-flow periods from a condition with frequent dry-up points, and increase downstream areas of riffle and pool complexes. The enlarged reservoir operations would eliminate almost all8 zero-flow days at frequent dry-up points and minimize extreme flow fluctuations from Fort Collins’ use of the enlargement. The DEIS notes that additional flows would result in a more robust plant community and improve the fishery health of the North Fork. As described in the DEIS, about 5.8 to 12.1 acres of riffle and pool complexes in the North Fork would 8 See potential exceptions at end of this section 4.2.1.1 Winter Release Plan “Curtailment of the Winter Release Plan” and section 4.2.1.2 Summer Low- flow Plan “Curtailment of the Summer Low-flow Plan”. EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 400 Item 15. experience continuous flow and no zero-flow days. Table 3-1 summarizes Halligan Project effects on riffle and pool complexes on the North Fork. Table 3-1. Summary of Halligan Project Effects on Riffle and Pool Complexes Area Effect Riffle and Pool Complex Area (acres) North Fork upstream of existing reservoir (DEIS Section 4.8.3.4.1.2) Loss due to inundation -3.5 North Fork between existing dam and replacement dam (based on geographic information system [GIS] evaluation by Jacobs) Loss due to inundation -0.3 North Fork downstream of replacement dam to Rabbit Creek 10 miles, which is 4 miles below the North Poudre Canal Diversion (DEIS Section 4.8.3.4.1.3) Benefit from year- round flows +5.8 to +12.1[a] Net Effect +2.0 to +8.3[a] [a] Varying calculations have been used to determine the area of restored riffle-pool complexes downstream of the North Poudre Canal Diversion. 3.5.3 Wetlands Wetlands effects are regulated under the CWA and will be addressed through the SWA Section 404 permitting process. Wetlands conditions, effects, and mitigation are regulated by the Corps. They will be described in the FEIS, and are not addressed in this FWMEP. Fort Collins will prepare a wetlands mitigation plan independent of this FWMEP for future authorization by the Corps as part of the CWA Section 404 permitting process. Wetland habitats exist around Halligan Reservoir and along the North Fork upstream and downstream of the reservoir. Wetlands provide an important habitat type for both terrestrial and aquatic wildlife of the region. Many species of amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals utilize these habitats at various times in their life. Several of these species are uniquely adapted to these aquatic environments. Wetland habitats are especially vital for migratory birds, and numerous big game species such as deer, elk, and bear will commonly use wetlands for food and shelter. The DEIS notes that the net impact on wetlands from the Halligan Project would be moderate. Although inundation would result in the long-term loss of 16.74 acres of wetland (10.92 acres of palustrine scrub-shrub wetlands, 4.89 acres of lacustrine littoral emergent wetlands, 0.021 acre of palustrine emergent wetlands, and 0.91 acre of forested wetlands) mostly along or below the ordinary high water mark of the existing reservoir, nearly 11 acres of wetland are expected to re-establish along the enlarged reservoir ordinary high water mark. The Halligan Project flow-related operational measures (Section 4.2.1) may improve river connectivity during low-flow periods between Halligan Reservoir downstream to the North Poudre Canal return flow on the North Fork, and provide more wetted area that would benefit approximately 22 miles of the North Fork, and may improve riparian wetlands. 3.6 Terrestrial Wildlife Including Big Game Habitat within the Halligan Project Area supports a diverse array of mammals, and includes undeveloped and undisturbed forest, shrubland, and grassland areas, as well as riparian communities and wetlands. The DEIS identifies a variety of large and small mammals that range within the Project Area, including game species such as elk (Cervus canadensis), mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus), white-tailed deer EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 401 Item 15. (Odocoileus virginianus), Rocky Mountain bighorn sheep, mountain lion (Puma concolor), black bear (Ursus americanus), and pronghorn (Antilocapra americana). Rocky Mountain bighorn sheep are discussed in Section 3.7. 3.6.1 Current Conditions for Big Game The DEIS describes similar conditions for big game species (elk, deer, and pronghorn). For elk, the Halligan Project is within CPW’s Elk Data Analysis Unit E-4—the Red Feather-Poudre Canyon Elk Herd. The primary impact on elk habitat in this data analysis unit is the growth of small acreage rural subdivisions and the resulting loss of overall and winter elk range. The DEIS indicates that both mule deer and white-tailed deer inhabit CPW’s Deer Data Analysis Unit D-4—the Red Feather-Poudre Canyon Deer Herd, which encompasses the Halligan Project Area. Similar to elk, the primary impact on deer is the growth of rural subdivisions and small acreage developments that would result in the loss of deer overall and winter range. As described in the DEIS, CPW identifies potential water development projects within the Data Analysis Unit D-4 as potentially having a pronounced cumulative impact on overall and winter deer range for the Red Feather-Poudre Canyon Deer Herd. In the early 2000s, the deer herd population objective was decreased to reduce the prevalence of chronic wasting disease. The population objective has since been increased because chronic wasting disease is no longer affecting the herd. Pronghorn are common in undeveloped grasslands and shrublands of eastern Colorado, including the area around Halligan Reservoir. The Halligan Project is within Pronghorn Data Analysis Unit PH33. As noted in the DEIS, CPW mapped pronghorn range covering Halligan Reservoir, and has identified a concentration area where winter population densities are greater than surrounding areas from the eastern end of the reservoir and extending to the north and east. The DEIS notes that CPW does not identify any significant issues related to this herd. 3.6.2 Current Conditions for Other Wildlife The DEIS notes that grasslands and shrublands in and around the Halligan Project can potentially support healthy populations of small mammals, such as rabbits, squirrels, chipmunks, mice, and other rodents, and the predator species that feed on small mammals, such as coyote, fox, and badger. Riparian areas and wetlands can support additional species, including raccoon, muskrat, meadow vole, and Preble’s meadow jumping mouse. Deciduous trees near riparian areas, as well as rock crevices, can provide potential roosts for bats. Rocky outcroppings also provide feeding and general cover for a variety of animals. 3.6.3 Halligan Project Effects on Big Game and Other Wildlife The long-term impacts of the Halligan Project on most small, medium, and large terrestrial mammals would be negligible or not measurable. As described in the DEIS, potential long-term big game range impacts would result from habitat inundation caused by new inundation from the enlarged reservoir (approximately 138 acres). As a result, some terrestrial vegetation and wildlife habitat would be replaced with open water habitat, thereby reducing habitat availability for terrestrial (for example, big game, small mammals, and upland migratory birds) species, while increasing habitat for aquatic species (for example, waterfowl). The access roads, borrow pits, and dam footprint would result in a smaller permanent impact (approximately 27 acres). Temporary impacts (approximately 31.5 acres) would be related to construction and include relocation of existing overhead power lines and poles, removal of vegetation around the dam and reservoir, as well as facilities or areas that would be restored following construction, including access roads and staging areas. Proposed mitigation for vegetation and habitat loss impacts on the Cherokee State Wildlife Area (SWA) are discussed further in Section 4 of this plan. EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 402 Item 15. The DEIS noted that indirect effects on wildlife and big game could involve stress and displacement of wildlife caused by noise and disturbance from construction activities, transportation of people and materials, and general human activity in the reservoir and NPIC diversion areas. In addition, vehicle and equipment emissions and fugitive dust also might displace wildlife. Proposed avoidance and minimization measures for noise and construction-related activities (that is, timing restrictions for the relocation of overhead power lines and poles at Halligan Reservoir and for the North Poudre Canal and Calloway Diversions) are discussed in Section 4 of this FWMEP. There may be a shift in the movement of some big game species as a result of construction activities and disturbances that could result in increased collisions with vehicles. This displacement and disturbance of big game may place additional stress on individuals of these species; however, the DEIS determined that it is likely to have a negligible effect on elk, mule deer, white-tailed deer, and pronghorn populations. Wildlife resources at Halligan Reservoir could also be indirectly affected by the possible introduction or establishment of noxious weeds, soil erosion, and potential alteration of stream flows in the North Fork. The potential effects of altered flows along the North Fork because of the Winter Release Plan and Summer Low-flow Plan are expected to have an overall minor benefit to wetland and riparian vegetation on the North Fork. Noxious weed establishment and soil erosion would affect native vegetation communities. A change in vegetation resulting from the establishment of noxious weeds and soil erosion may result in a lower carrying capacity for some species in the area; however, it would be unlikely to result in complete loss of suitable habitat. However, the Project will minimize construction impacts through the development and implementation of a noxious weed management plan and revegetation and erosion control plans. The enlarged reservoir may also have a negligible to minor effect on wildlife movement as a result of inundation of existing wildlife trails on the North Fork upstream of the existing reservoir. The Corps anticipates that wildlife would acclimate quickly to these changes that would occur in the inundation area because the existing reservoir’s water level varies seasonally. The DEIS evaluated regional species of big game, other mammals, birds, reptiles, and amphibians for potential effects of the Halligan Project on individual species or supporting habitat. Based on that evaluation, it is expected that the Halligan Project would result in no or negligible adverse effects on the following species: • Elk • White-tailed deer • Pronghorn • Black bear • Mountain lion • Other small, medium, and large terrestrial mammals • Raptors • Waterfowl • Migratory birds • Bats • Amphibians • Reptiles In the DEIS, the Corps assumed that long-term effects such as limiting range types, and suitable habitat within those range types, were the most relevant effects for big game species. The mule deer was the only big game species identified in the DEIS that would experience impacts on suitable habitat within a limiting range type as a result of the Halligan Project, with approximately 118 acres (approximately 0.09 percent) of impact on severe winter range. The DEIS notes that effects on mule deer movement EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 403 Item 15. from the Halligan Project, including inundation of the North Fork within the Cherokee SWA, would be negligible to minor because known migration corridors would not be affected. Table 3-2 summarizes permanent and temporary impacts on big game range from the Halligan Project9 relative to range type in the data analysis unit (the geographic area that includes year-round range of a big game herd). Table 3-2. Cumulative, Permanent, and Temporary Impacts of Halligan Project on Big Game Habitat Range Type Range Type in the DAU (acres), from DEIS Table 4-55 Permanent Impacts (acres)[a] Temporary Impacts (acres) Range Loss as Percentage of DAU Range Loss as Percentage of GMU[b] (acres) Effect Determination in DEIS Bighorn sheep— overall range (Section 3.7)[c] 208,771 155.5 31.5 0.07% 0.15% Negligible Elk—overall range 208,771 165.0 31.5 0.08% 0.09% Negligible Mule deer—overall range 1,145,320 165.0 31.5 0.01% 0.09% Minor Mule deer—severe winter range 128,724 165.0 31.5 0.13% 0.15% Minor Mule deer—winter range 613,074 165.0 31.5 0.03% 0.09% Minor Pronghorn— overall range 109,535 165.0 31.5 0.15% 0.73% Negligible Pronghorn—winter range 174,203 165.0 31.5 0.1% 0.75% Negligible White-tailed deer—overall range 239,940 22.7 13.6 0.01% 0.14% Negligible [a] DEIS Table 4-55 presents slightly lower permanent impacts (up to 132.5 acres). This table presents estimated cumulative long-term direct effects would result from inundation (138 acres) and direct footprint impacts associated with dam replacement construction (27 acres), for a total of approximately 165 acres. [b] The Lone Pine bighorn sheep herd are in GMU S40, while the elk, deer, and pronghorn are part of GMU 191. [c] The DEIS based bighorn sheep impacts on DAUs RBS-1 for an overall range area of 208,771 acres. Based on input from CPW, bighorn sheep range has been further evaluated in this FWMEP based on the GMU level for the Lone Pine herd, as described in Section 3.7. Based on that analysis, Project-related habitat loss for bighorn sheep may be up to 0.15 percent of overall range. DAU = data analysis unit GMU = game management unit 9 Permanent impacts on big game range presented here differ slightly from the impacts listed in Table 4-55 of the DEIS because of updated dam design elements. EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 404 Item 15. 3.7 Rocky Mountain Bighorn Sheep 3.7.1 Current Conditions for Bighorn Sheep Halligan Reservoir lies within the known overall range and habitat use area of the Lone Pine bighorn sheep herd (also known as the S40 Herd). According to CPW, the Lone Pine herd is a low-elevation herd that uses a range of habitat throughout the year. CPW has expressed concerns that the current CPW species activity mapping (SAM) for the Lone Pine herd is incomplete based on recent CPW data collection efforts; thus, CPW has advised Fort Collins to use caution when applying CPW SAM data to this herd. The current population of the Lone Pine herd has declined from an estimated 35 bighorn sheep in 2016, to 15 bighorn sheep in 2021. The cause for the population decline is unknown (CPW 2021b). Range maps based on the CPW SAM data were evaluated in the DEIS and indicate that Halligan Reservoir is within the bighorn sheep overall and summer range. Anecdotal evidence referenced in the DEIS has subsequently been confirmed by CPW that bighorn sheep use the area below Halligan Dam, Phantom Canyon, and adjacent habitat, and are frequently seen approximately 2.5 miles south of Halligan Reservoir and approximately 1 mile west of Phantom Canyon Ranch near Calloway Hill. In addition, members of Lone Pine herd use a linkage area that connects habitat east of Highway 287 to Phantom Canyon and farther southwest to the Lower Cherokee and Lone Pine units of the SWA. The bighorn sheep habitat areas as provided by CPW have been identified on Figure 3-3. 3.7.2 Lone Pine Herd Additional Data Evaluation Fort Collins performed an additional evaluation of bighorn sheep conditions to support discussions with CPW. Figure 3-3 shows the best available data on the Lone Pine herd that were reviewed for the Halligan Project and mitigation strategy development. The habits of this herd, including home range, habitat use, production areas, and natural movement routes, have not been thoroughly studied. However, compilation of available data and local observations indicate that the Lone Pine herd covers more than approximately 16 square miles of viable habitat near the Halligan Project. CPW is using trail cameras and radio collars to collect Lone Pine herd range and movement data. This data collection is ongoing, and CPW does not expect to have quantitative data available in the near term (CPW 2021a). EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 405 Item 15. Figure 3-3. Halligan Project Elements and Bighorn Sheep Suitable Habitat EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 406 Item 15. The following summarizes the current understanding of the Lone Pine herd range and habits around the Halligan Project Area. • Upstream of Halligan Reservoir–Based on CPW data (CPW 2021b), the Lone Pine herd uses available habitat in the Cherokee Park area. Bighorn sheep have been documented as far north as the Middle Unit of the Cherokee SWA, Phantom Canyon, and south of County Road 74E (Red Feather Lakes Road). • Halligan Reservoir–The extent of herd range use at and near the Halligan Dam is not well understood. To date, the areas immediately adjacent to Halligan Reservoir near the existing dam have not been mapped as suitable habitat by CPW (Figure 3-3). Suitable habitat is determined based on vegetative and topographical habitat features, namely steep rocky slopes with escape cover near open areas suitable for grazing. Field observations from CPW staff and the public indicate that bighorn sheep cross Phantom Canyon below Halligan Dam generally between North Poudre Canal Diversion and the Calloway Diversion with increased presence in the spring and fall months. • North Fork downstream of Halligan Reservoir–Trail camera images and field observations document Phantom Canyon use by the Lone Pine herd throughout the year. Bighorn sheep are frequently seen approximately 2.5 miles south of Halligan Reservoir and approximately 1.0 mile west of The Nature Conservancy’s Phantom Canyon Ranch near Calloway Hill. The linkage area that connects the habitat east of Highway 287 along Stonewall Creek and the ridgeline to Phantom Canyon where it then widens in the vicinity of Calloway Hill on to the Cherokee SWA, including parts of Rabbit Creek Ranch. This linkage area is important because it provides suitable temporary habitats and allows for the movement of individuals or the Lone Pine herd population to known larger suitable habitat patches across a fractured landscape. Surrounding areas–Ram bands have been seen east of Highway 287 along Stonewall Creek using prominent escarpments (Steamboat Rock area), and with annual fidelity, the herd uses private lands east of the Lone Pine Unit of the Cherokee SWA and east of Phantom Canyon. Near Stonewall Creek upstream of its confluence with the North Fork, local residents have observed individual rams annually from approximately March to October, east of Highway 287 on the 10-mile parcel of Roberts Ranch, as far north as the Steamboat Rock land feature, and east to approximately 1.0 mile east of Steamboat Rock. Rams have been hit and killed by vehicles on Highway 287 in this area (Thode, pers. comm. 2021). 3.7.3 Lone Pine Herd Management Challenges According to CPW (CPW 2021b), an existing and ongoing challenge in managing the Lone Pine herd is the known proximity to domestic sheep grazing, which has the potential to introduce disease to wild bighorn sheep. Several land managers within the Lone Pine herd-occupied range along the North Fork River corridor use domestic sheep and goats for weed management. Although domestic sheep can be an effective vegetation management tool, this practice increases the chance of commingling between the Lone Pine herd and domestic sheep. Domestic sheep grazing has been occurring seasonally from late April through mid-July since 2016 on private land within the range of the Lone Pine herd. The greatest concern of commingling between the Lone Pine herd and domestic sheep is the transmission of deadly pathogens between domestic sheep populations and bighorn sheep. Fort Collins staff have been exploring opportunities to effectively separate the Lone Pine herd and domestic sheep in this area for several years; however, because of local interest, domestic sheep management practices have not changed in this area. An additional challenge identified by CPW is the degradation of bighorn sheep habitat on the Cherokee SWA’s Lower Unit, Roy Brown Unit, and Lone Pine Unit over the past decade caused by invasive EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 407 Item 15. cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum). Cheatgrass has diminished the quality of bighorn sheep habitat on the landscape where once high-value bighorn sheep habitat occurred. Figure 3-3 shows the best available data on the Lone Pine herd that have been reviewed for the Halligan Project and mitigation strategy development. 3.7.4 Halligan Project Effects on Rocky Mountain Bighorn Sheep The direct and indirect effects from the Halligan Project described for terrestrial wildlife and big game in Section 3.6 generally apply to bighorn sheep. The DEIS notes that severe winter range is the limiting range type for bighorn sheep. As noted in the DEIS, because there is no loss of bighorn sheep severe winter range, both long- and short-term direct effects of the Halligan Project on bighorn sheep would be negligible, with no measurable or perceptible consequences to the Lone Pine herd from long-term habitat loss created by inundation. However, CPW has asserted that the Lone Pine herd in the affected area is a low-elevation herd that has no defining seasonal range. This herd uses the different habitat types within the entire bighorn sheep range throughout the year based on the specific habitat requirements needed at the time. The overall habitat has a multitude of foraging, lambing, resting, mating, thermal cover, and predator avoidance areas that are used many times throughout the year in no specific season. Relative to direct permanent effects, the Lone Pine herd’s S40 Unit has a total area of 272,892 acres, of which 99,286 acres are mapped as overall range for bighorn sheep. Direct habitat loss (155.5 acres) from the Project within the S40 Unit amounts to 0.15 percent loss of overall range within the Lone Pine herd’s S40 Unit. Indirect effects and temporary direct effects on bighorn sheep and other big game could involve displacement caused by noise and disturbance from construction activities, transportation of people and materials, and general human activity in the reservoir and NPIC diversion areas. In addition, vehicle and equipment emissions and fugitive dust may have an effect on bighorn sheep distribution. Displacement of bighorn sheep and emissions of dust may increase the likelihood of respiratory distress, making bighorn sheep more susceptible to disease. There may be a shift in the movement of bighorn sheep as a result of construction activities. The DEIS also acknowledges that a potential indirect impact of Halligan Dam rehabilitation is stress-related die-off of bighorn sheep. The DEIS Section 4.12.22, originally determined that indirect effects from Halligan Dam rehabilitation would be moderate. This was largely because of limited documentation of bighorn sheep in the vicinity of Halligan Reservoir, and because the Halligan Project Area is outside any known bighorn sheep concentration area and is a small part of the overall range. CPW has recently collected data indicating that rams use the lower Phantom Canyon area. However, effects are expected to be minimized because the majority of work activity will be outside this resident bighorn sheep production area and work in the lower Phantom Canyon area would occur during winter months when there is minimal bighorn sheep activity in the area and domestic sheep and goats are not grazing on open range. In DEIS Section 4.12.2.2 the Corps recognized that the risk to bighorn sheep is difficult to predict because of the lack of site-specific data and factors unrelated to the Halligan Project, such as disease and drought. The Corps further noted that if the Halligan Project caused a die-off similar to what happened at Waterton Canyon (75 percent to 85 percent and 2-year continued lamb mortality), it would be a major long-term (greater than 20 years) indirect effect on the local bighorn sheep herd that may or may not be permanent. CPW provided specific concerns regarding impacts on bighorn sheep posed by Halligan Project construction activities at the dam and the North Poudre Canal Diversion in a memorandum dated January 11, 2021 (CPW 2021a) and expanded upon these concerns in subsequent meetings with Fort Collins. EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 408 Item 15. CPW identified two primary concerns for adverse impacts on bighorn sheep: • Direct disturbance and stress from construction activities–Construction activities may disrupt bighorn sheep feeding or movement and can be negatively affected by fugitive dust, which can increase stress and the likelihood of disease. • Seasonal movement disruption causing increased risk for commingling with domestic sheep– Construction activities could disrupt or alter bighorn sheep movements and push the Lone Pine herd into nearby domestic sheep and goat grazing allotments; this would increase the chance of commingling and pathogen transfer between domestic and bighorn sheep. This could increase the chance of a disease outbreak and a potential bighorn sheep die-off; the likelihood of disease outbreak increases even further when combined with the added stress from construction general habitat disturbances. These temporary construction-related impacts could exacerbate the conditions in which bighorn sheep may commingle with domestic sheep used for weed management within the Halligan Project Area. 3.8 Special-status Species The DEIS describes terrestrial species of concern that could be affected by the Halligan Project. These species of concern are federally listed as threatened or endangered under the ESA; identified as sensitive by the BLM; listed as threatened, endangered, or of special concern by Colorado; or listed as a Tier 1 species in Colorado’s State Wildlife Action Plan (CPW 2015), which are species of highest conservation priority in the state. The DEIS focuses on those species that (1) have suitable habitat present within the Project Area (that is, within construction or inundation footprints); and (2) have been documented in the Project Area or their distributional range overlaps the Project Area according to CPW, Colorado Heritage Program datasets, or site-specific surveys. Available information about current conditions and potential impacts from the Halligan Project on special-status species is summarized in the following sections. Table 3-3 lists federal or state species of concern and summarizes the potential effects from the Halligan Project on each species based on the DEIS evaluation. Table 3-3. Summary of DEIS Impact Evaluation of Halligan Project on Species of Concern Species Concern Listing Impact of Halligan Project on Each Species, from DEIS[a] Preble’s Federal and State, Threatened Major impact; will be addressed through ESA consultation process and not included in this FWMEP Ute ladies’-tresses orchid (Spiranthes diluvialis) Federal, Threatened No effect; will be addressed through ESA consultation process and not included in this FWMEP American white pelican (Pelecanus erythrorhynchos) BLM sensitive species Minor benefit Platte River Species (Five Species) Federally listed Unperceivable; will be addressed through ESA consultation process and not included in this FWMEP Rocky Mountain bighorn sheep State Tier 2, BLM sensitive species Negligible direct effect, possibility of moderate to major indirect effect; discussed in Section 3.7[b] EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 409 Item 15. Species Concern Listing Impact of Halligan Project on Each Species, from DEIS[a] Northern pocket gopher (Thomomys talpoides macrotis) State, SOC Minor effect, discountable and insignificant River otter (Lontra canadensis) State, Threatened Minor benefit Townsend’s big-eared bat (Corynorhinus townsendii pallescens) State SOC, BLM sensitive species Minor effect Bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) State SOC, BLM sensitive species No permanent direct effects; minor benefit from increased foraging habitat Golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) State Tier 1, BLM sensitive species Discountable and insignificant Northern leopard frog (Lithobates pipiens) State Tier 1, State SOC Minor benefit Common garter snake (Thamnophis sirtalis) State Tier 2, State SOC Minor benefit [a] Impacts are summarized here as none, beneficial, low, or moderate, based on detailed descriptions provided in the DEIS. [b] CPW has stated their concern that potential impacts on bighorn sheep could range from moderate to severe should a herd die-off occur. SOC = species of concern 3.8.1 Current Conditions for Federally Listed Species 3.8.1.1 Preble’s Meadow Jumping Mouse and Habitat Preble’s is a federal- and state-listed threatened species in Colorado. Pioneer Environmental Services (Pioneer) conducted an extensive trapping survey at Halligan Reservoir for Preble’s meadow jumping mice between June and August of 2003 (WEST 2017a), which documented the presence of Preble’s around the reservoir. Critical habitat for Preble’s is designated along the lower portions of the North Fork starting at Halligan Dam and includes its tributaries and portions of the Poudre River. The enlarged Halligan Reservoir inundation area upstream of the existing dam is outside Preble’s critical habitat. The replacement dam and portions of the construction areas would include small areas of critical habitat. Preble’s impacts and mitigation measures will be addressed through the ESA consultation process, and are not included in this FWMEP. 3.8.1.2 Ute Ladies’-Tresses Orchid and Colorado Butterfly Plant Ute ladies’-tresses orchid is a federally listed threatened species. Potential habitat for Ute ladies’-tresses orchid occurs along the North Fork and tributaries both upstream and downstream of the Halligan Reservoir. As documented in the DEIS, no Ute ladies’-tresses orchids were detected in surveys conducted at Halligan Reservoir from 2006 to 2008 (WEST 2017a). Additional evaluations conducted by Jacobs in 2021 (Jacobs 2021) were concentrated within potential Ute ladies’-tresses orchid habitat around the narrow riparian habitat below the existing dam. No Ute ladies’-tresses orchids were observed during the 2021 survey, and habitat was determined to be marginally suitable for Ute ladies’- EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 410 Item 15. tresses orchid because of the presence of dense riparian grasses and dense overstory of willow and alder. Colorado butterfly plant (Oenothera coloradensis) was previously federally listed as a threatened species; however, on December 5, 2019, the USFWS removed this species from the Federal List of Endangered and Threatened Plants because of recovery (USFWS 2019). No known populations of the Colorado butterfly plant occur within the Halligan Project Area. Therefore, this species is not further discussed in this FWMEP. 3.8.1.3 American White Pelican The American white pelican is a BLM sensitive species and a Tier 2 species in the State Wildlife Action Plan (SWAP) (CPW 2015). The DEIS indicates that American white pelicans were observed on Halligan Reservoir; therefore, the reservoir is considered potential loafing or foraging habitat for this species. Halligan Reservoir is not within mapped American white pelican nesting areas. 3.8.1.4 Platte River Species Because the Main Stem and North Fork are hydraulically connected to the Platte River System, ESA Section 7 consultation with the USFWS is required to determine any adverse effects that would occur on the five federally listed downstream species: least tern (Sterna antillarum), piping plover (Charadrius melodus), whooping crane (Grus americana), pallid sturgeon (Scaphirhynchus albus), and western prairie fringed orchid (Platanthera praeclara). These species are not further discussed in this FWMEP. 3.8.2 Current Conditions for State-listed Species The DEIS evaluated reviewed state-listed species and species of concern using CPW species profiles (CPW n.d.) and the SWAP to identify information pertaining to habitat information and distribution. State-listed species and species of concern that could be affected by the Project are discussed in the following sections. 3.8.2.1 Rocky Mountain Bighorn Sheep Rocky Mountain bighorn sheep is a BLM sensitive species and is listed as a Tier 2 species in the SWAP. Tier 2 species are defined as “species [that] remain important in light of forestalling population trends or habitat conditions that may lead to a threatened or endangered listing status, but the urgency of such action has been judged to be less” (CPW 2015). This species is considered a big game species; current conditions are discussed in Section 3.7. 3.8.2.2 Northern Pocket Gopher The northern pocket gopher is a state species of concern. The Halligan Project Area includes suitable foothill shrubland habitat and is within the distributional range of this species. 3.8.2.3 River Otter River otters are listed by Colorado as a threatened species. As described in the DEIS, the open water of the North Fork and Halligan Reservoir could provide habitat for the river otter, although the known range of the river otter ends approximately 16 miles south of the reservoir. The range of the river otter includes the Poudre River and a small section of the North Fork, from the confluence of these rivers to approximately 1 mile upstream of the Seaman Reservoir. 3.8.2.4 Townsend’s Big-Eared Bat Townsend's big-eared bat is a BLM sensitive species, a state species of special concern, and is listed as a Tier 1 species in the SWAP. The DEIS indicates that rocky outcrops and canyons downstream of the EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 411 Item 15. Halligan Dam along the North Fork may provide roosting habitat, and the open water of Halligan Reservoir, scattering of sagebrush, and wetlands within the Halligan Project Area may provide Townsend's big-eared bats with foraging habitat. This species usually forages over water, at the edge of vegetation, and over sagebrush (Armstrong et al. 2011). This bat species has been recorded downstream of the Halligan Dam in Phantom Canyon (Colorado Natural Heritage Program 2015). Bat conservation has received increasing attention with the general decline of bat populations caused by habitat loss, poisoning, and disease, including white-nose syndrome. Bat Survey On July 16, 2021, Jacobs biologists conducted a bat presence/absence survey below Halligan Dam. An auditory detection survey was completed, along with visual observation of bat feeding activity with the riparian area from the dam to 0.5 mile downstream of the dam. The single survey was conducted over a 3-hour period beginning at dusk (7:30 p.m. to 10:30 p.m.). Several lone bats were detected with an auditory detection device, but no large concentrations of bats were observed. Table 3-4 summarizes the bat species detected based on audio signature, but variability occurs within species; therefore, identification has not been confirmed. Table 3-4. 2021 Bat Survey Results Species Detected Number of Detections Pallid bat (Antrozous pallidus) 1 Big brown bat (Eptesicus fuscus) 11 Red bat (Lasiurus borealis) 2 Hoary bat (Lasiurus cinereus) 1 Silver-haired bat (Lasionycteris noctivagans) 2 Western small-footed myotis (Myotis ciliolabrum) 1 Little brown bat (Myotis lucifugus) 6 Long-legged myotis (Myotis volans) 1 Unidentified detections 12 Total 37 The scattered occurrences of lone bat detections suggests that bats use the area below the existing Halligan Dam for foraging, but the presence or absence of day or night bat roosts could not be determined based on the limited survey. 3.8.2.5 Bald Eagles and Golden Eagles The bald eagle is a state species of special concern and is a BLM sensitive species. The golden eagle is listed as a Tier 1 species in the SWAP and is also a BLM sensitive species. Both bald eagles and golden eagles are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act of 1940. This prohibits the take; possession; sale; purchase; barter; offer to sell, purchase, EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 412 Item 15. or barter; transport; export; or import of any part, nest, or eggs of alive or dead bald or golden eagles. State and federal recommendations outline seasonal limitations on nest encroachment or disturbance. Bald eagles rely mainly on fish as their principal source of food during the summer months, frequently nesting and foraging along rivers and lakes. The DEIS notes that bald eagles are known to forage in areas of open water and were observed during field surveys of the Halligan Reservoir and the North Fork during the summer of 2020 and 2021. No bald eagle nests or winter roost sites occur within the Halligan Project Area, and the area is outside winter concentration, winter foraging, and winter range areas for bald eagles identified on CPW wildlife distribution maps (CPW 2020b). Golden eagles primarily subsist on small mammals, such as rabbits, hares, ground squirrels, and prairie dogs. The DEIS notes that suitable golden eagle foraging habitat occurs within the entire Halligan Project Area except for the reservoir itself, which does not provide nesting or foraging habitat. The effects are anticipated to be temporary and are discussed in Section 3.8.4.5. Golden eagles were observed during field surveys of the North Fork downstream of the Halligan Dam. A nest was observed by Jacobs biologists, in summer of 2021, on a rocky vertical cliff wall approximately 0.5 mile downstream of the North Poudre Canal Diversion structure. Raptor Nest Survey On July 16, 2021, Jacobs biologists conducted a nest survey within and immediately adjacent to the inundation footprint of the enlarged reservoir and impact area for the new dam. Trees and shrubs, as well as grassland areas within or adjacent (within 50 feet) to the proposed access road connecting the Halligan Dam to Highway 287 were also surveyed. Additionally, nesting raptor surveys were conducted on June 23, July 16, and July 19, 2021. Biologists used binoculars to survey the visible 0.5-mile radius from the dam for raptor nests. No nests were located within or adjacent to the footprint of the existing dam. The following observations were made during the nest surveys: • A lone bald eagle was observed perched frequently and for extended periods of time on power line poles above Halligan Dam and on rock outcroppings on the north side of the dam, but nesting activity was not observed, and a nest location was not apparent. • A great horned owl (Bubo virginianus) was observed on several occasions below the dam, suggesting that an owl nest may be in Phantom Canyon below the dam. • A red-tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis) nest was present near the Calloway Diversion. The nest appeared to be maintained and is presumed to be active, but no hawks were observed on the nest. • Two magpie (Pica nuttalli) nests were located in trees adjacent to the access road, but the nests were not occupied at the time of the survey. • As discussed previously, an active golden eagle nest was observed in Phantom Canyon about 0.5 mile downstream of the North Poudre Canal Diversion structure. 3.8.2.6 Northern Leopard Frog The northern leopard frog is a Colorado species of special concern and is listed as a Tier 1 species in the SWAP. The DEIS notes that the Halligan Project Area supports aquatic environments, such as streams and wetlands, that would be suitable habitat for the northern leopard frog. 3.8.2.7 Common Garter Snake The common garter snake is a species of special concern in Colorado and is listed as a Tier 2 species in the SWAP. Common garter snakes are typically found in aquatic and riparian habitats within or adjacent EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 413 Item 15. to floodplains of streams and rivers. The DEIS notes that the Halligan Project Area supports aquatic environments, such as streams and wetlands, that would be suitable habitat for the common garter snake. Common garter snakes are typically found below 6,000 feet in elevation along the South Platte River and its tributaries in northeastern Colorado. 3.8.3 Halligan Project Effects on Federally Listed Species The DEIS identified 11 terrestrial species of concern that have either been documented or have suitable habitat and ranges within the Halligan Project Area. No suitable habitat is present for black-tailed prairie dog (Cynomys ludovicianus) or burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia); therefore, these species are not evaluated further in this FWMEP. Long-term direct effects on species of concern evaluated in the DEIS included habitat loss or disturbance and effects on foraging, reproduction, and distribution from inundation and construction. Temporary removal of vegetation associated with construction may have potential short-term effects on species of concern until areas would be revegetated. Indirect effects on species of concern would be related to effects on wetlands, riparian vegetation communities, and other vegetation resources along the North Fork and Main Stem resulting from changes to water flows. Short-term indirect impacts from construction may result from construction-related activity, noise, vibrations, lighting, and other disturbances. 3.8.3.1 Preble’s Meadow Jumping Mouse and Habitat Effects from the Halligan Project on Preble’s habitat are regulated through the ESA and will be addressed through the development of a mitigation plan in coordination with the USFWS. Therefore, Preble’s conditions, effects, and mitigation are not addressed in detail in this FWMEP. The DEIS determined that the Halligan Project would have a major permanent adverse impact on Preble’s habitat as a result of inundation of riparian woodlands and shrublands. Based on the Modified Proposed Action the Project will permanently displace 5.26 acres of Preble’s habitat around the existing reservoir edge and downstream of the existing dam within the footprint of the proposed dam. A Preble’s habitat functional assessment, approved by the USFWS, found that the permanent effects equate to the loss of 4.04 functional units of habitat (much of the reservoir edge habitat has low habitat functional for Preble’s). Temporary impacts on Preble’s habitat (related to construction access) are estimated to be 0.47 acres (0.36 functional unit). Fort Collins has worked proactively to preserve habitat on the Roberts Ranch Conservation Area and has worked closely with the Preble’s Species Conservation Team in the effort to establish a Preble’s recovery population in the North Fork watershed. Many of the Halligan Project beneficial effects, mitigation, and enhancements described in this FWMEP would benefit Preble’s habitat through increased stream flow and likely improved riparian conditions. 3.8.3.2 Ute Ladies’-tresses Orchid The Halligan Project has the potential to impact wetland and riparian habitat that may be considered suitable for the Ute ladies’-tresses orchid. In the DEIS, the Corps determined that the Halligan Project would have no effect on the Ute ladies’-tresses orchid because no known occurrences of this plant were identified within the study area. Ute ladies’-tresses orchid conditions, effects, and mitigation are not addressed in detail in this FWMEP. However, many of the beneficial effects, mitigation, and enhancements described in this FWMEP could benefit Ute ladies’-tresses orchid habitat through increased stream flow and improved riparian conditions. 3.8.3.3 American White Pelican American white pelicans were observed on Halligan Reservoir; therefore, the reservoir is considered potential loafing or foraging habitat for the American white pelican. Because loafing or foraging habitat EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 414 Item 15. would be expanded through reservoir enlargement, the Halligan Project would result in a minor benefit for the American white pelican, as described in the DEIS. 3.8.3.4 Platte River Species The CMP (City of Fort Collins 2019c), prepared as part of the DEIS, documented that effects on the five federally listed downstream Platte River species are expected to be unperceivable, and that the Halligan Project is not expected to result in any discernable changes to stream flow in the South Platte River. Fort Collins participates in the SPWRAP, which outlines a programmatic approach to Section 7 consultation with the USFWS. Currently, mitigation is not expected to be needed for South Platte River depletions. If mitigation measures are identified during this programmatic approach or from USFWS consultation, they will be incorporated into the mitigation strategy for the Halligan Project. 3.8.4 Halligan Project Effects on State-listed Species 3.8.4.1 Rocky Mountain Bighorn Sheep Halligan Project impacts on bighorn sheep are discussed in detail in Section 3.7. 3.8.4.2 Northern Pocket Gopher Although northern pocket gophers have not been documented within the study area, the DEIS indicated that the Halligan Project would result in a minor effect on the northern pocket gopher as a result of inundation of foothill shrublands suitable habitat. These effects would be discountable and insignificant because they would not have a noticeable effect on populations within the surrounding area because other suitable habitat is available. Temporary impacts anticipated are limited to temporary construction access and staging areas that will be reclaimed upon completion of the Project. 3.8.4.3 River Otter Because the known range and sightings of the river otter do not overlap with the inundation areas of the Halligan Project, the DEIS Section 4.13.2.6 states that expanding the reservoir would not adversely impact this species. The DEIS Section 4.13.3.6 also states that a potential minor indirect benefit to river otters could result from the Halligan Project. More specifically, increased stream flows to the North Fork from the Winter Release Plan and the Summer Low-flow Plan could improve the fishery health and, in turn, would provide a larger, more stable food source for river otters. Because there is no documented occurrence of river otter in the section of the North Fork below Halligan Dam where construction would occur, nor in or near the inundation upstream (0.75 mile section) above the enlarged reservoir, no temporary impacts are anticipated. 3.8.4.4 Townsend’s Big-eared Bat The DEIS determined that roost habitat would not be directly affected by the Halligan Project, but construction noise and vibration associated with the Halligan Project may cause temporary disturbance effects on Townsend’s big-eared bats using nearby roost habitat. Furthermore, overall effects to foraging habitat would be discountable and insignificant, and the Halligan Project would have a minor impact on Townsend’s big-eared bat. Year-round winter and summer minimum stream flows (Section 3.3.2) provided by operations of the enlarged reservoir would enhance riparian foraging habitat below Halligan Reservoir for Townsend’s big-eared bats. 3.8.4.5 Bald Eagles and Golden Eagles The DEIS determined that the Halligan Project would not likely cause permanent direct effects on bald eagles. Although some foraging sites around Halligan Reservoir may be altered as a result of inundation, the expanded surface area of the enlarged reservoir would create new foraging areas, creating a minor EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 415 Item 15. beneficial effect on bald eagles. Because there are no active nesting pairs, roost sites, or suitable winter habitat temporary impacts associated with construction activities such as noise, nighttime lighting, blasting, and potential batch plant operation impacts on foraging activities are anticipated to be minor (temporary avoidance) and short term in duration. Bald eagle use of the area is expected to return to preconstruction levels shortly after construction is completed. Increased reservoir surface area will provide increased foraging opportunity for bald eagles in the long term. For golden eagles, expansion of Halligan Reservoir would reduce habitat for their prey base in inundation and construction areas. However, in the DEIS, impacts were considered discountable and insignificant because golden eagles are wide-ranging, and vast areas of open foothills shrubland and grassland for foraging would remain after reservoir expansion. Long-term direct effects on golden eagles would be minor. Temporary impacts associated with construction activities such as noise, nighttime lighting, blasting, and potential batch plant operation impacts on foraging activities are anticipated to be minor (temporary avoidance) and short term in duration. Golden eagle use of the area is expected to return to preconstruction levels following completion of replacement dam construction. Revegetation of temporary construction disturbance areas, and regrowth of a reservoir edge riparian community is anticipated to be completed within approximately 5 to 7 years. 3.8.4.6 Northern Leopard Frog The Halligan Project supports aquatic environments, such as streams and wetlands, that could be suitable habitat for the northern leopard frog. However, northern leopard frog has not been observed around the reservoir and it is unlikely that leopard frog inhabits the reservoir edge wetlands given the inconsistent and fluctuating water levels, lack of emergent wetland vegetation (narrow reservoir edge wetlands are dominated by willow and cottonwood canopy), and general lack of suitable breeding habitat; steep rocky reservoir banks offer very little refuge or dispersal area for the leopard frog as water levels draw down in mid-summer and reservoir becomes disconnected from the minimal and narrow bands of emergent wetland vegetation that does exist around the reservoir. The DEIS indicates an overall minor beneficial effect from the Halligan Project on northern leopard frog habitat. The DEIS Section 4.12.3.11 indicates that some suitable habitat would be adversely affected because approximately 16.74 acres of wetlands would be inundated from the enlarged reservoir. New, similar habitat could be created at the new enlarged reservoir edge after soils and vegetation acclimate to the new hydrology. This process of reservoir edge riparian community re-establishment is anticipated to occur over approximately 5 to 7 years but may take longer if drought conditions persist after Project completion. Enlarging Halligan Reservoir would permanently displace riverine habitat on the downstream side of the existing dam, but because of the high energy associated with the current dam operations spillway and significant disturbance existing in this tight rocky canyon, the area immediately below the existing dam is not considered suitable for northern leopard frog. Year-round winter and summer stream flows (Section 3.3.2) provided by operation of the enlarged reservoir would enhance habitat for the northern leopard frog in Phantom Canyon and the Livermore Valley. Lastly, the Halligan Project would compensate for the loss of any wetland habitat (to be determined through the Section 404 permitting process and not discussed in this FWMEP), which would also benefit the northern leopard frog by replacing poor reservoir edge habitat with wetlands that would provide equal or potentially greater northern leopard frog habitat function. As noted in Section 4.12.2.1.5 of the DEIS, some mortality of reptiles and amphibian adults, juveniles, eggs, tadpoles, and larvae might occur during construction, but this would not likely result in a long-term decline of amphibians at Halligan Reservoir or along the North Fork. The removal of vegetation for construction, both long- and short-term, would potentially remove cover and foraging resources for EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 416 Item 15. some reptiles and amphibians. Still other reptiles and amphibians might be killed or displaced as a result of construction activities. The Halligan Project might locally reduce species abundance during construction; however, it would not likely lead to large-scale species loss or require species protection due to habitat loss. Halligan Dam rehabilitation would have a negligible to minor effect on amphibians and reptiles. 3.8.4.7 Common Garter Snake Typically, common garter snakes are found in aquatic and riparian habitats within or adjacent to floodplains or streams and rivers that occur below 6,000 feet in elevation (CPW n.d.). The DEIS indicates that the Halligan Project would affect suitable habitat for the common garter snake, and downstream segments of the North Fork are within the range of the common garter snake. However, because the reservoir is located approximately 6,300 feet in elevation, above the known range limit, the Halligan Project would not have negative effects on the common garter snake around the reservoir (Pioneer 2017a). As described for other species, year-round winter and summer minimum stream flows (Section 3.3.2) provided by operation of the enlarged reservoir would enhance habitat for garter snakes on the North Fork. Therefore, the Halligan Project is expected to result in an overall benefit to the species, and species-specific mitigation measures are not proposed in this FWMEP. 3.9 Recreation 3.9.1 Current Conditions Recreational use on Halligan Reservoir has historically been, and currently is, restricted to owners and guests of the Landowners Association for Phantom Canyon Ranches (LAPCR). Some public use may have occurred on portions of Halligan Reservoir that were thought to be in the Middle Unit of the Cherokee SWA. Since 1988, the LAPCR has had recreational and agricultural use rights to the surface of Halligan Reservoir and what is currently City-owned land in and around Halligan Reservoir, through lease agreements with NPIC and later Fort Collins. The current lease provides LAPCR with recreational use of the surface of Halligan Reservoir and recreational and agricultural use of City-owned land in and around Halligan Reservoir until construction of the Halligan Project concludes. Other areas around Halligan Reservoir that provide recreational activity include the Cherokee SWA located west of the reservoir, which is used primarily for hunting and fishing, and the North Fork downstream of the reservoir, which is used for fishing by private property owners and guests of The Nature Conservancy’s Phantom Canyon Ranch. Although a parking area near the inlet of Halligan Reservoir is accessible through the SWA, the surface of the Halligan Reservoir and Fort Collins-owned land in and around the reservoir is not open to public access. 3.9.1.1 Land Ownership Land ownership and access around Halligan Reservoir and at potential mitigation sites is a key factor in Halligan Project activities, including ecological monitoring and mitigation. As part of Fort Collins’ due diligence related to planned acquisition of property rights to build and operate the enlarged Halligan Reservoir, Fort Collins conducted detailed research on land ownership in and around Halligan Reservoir. This research identified isolated parcels in Section 29 and northeast ¼ of Section 32 that were thought to be held in fee title by CPW but were determined to be held in fee by a private entity or Fort Collins (Figure 3-4). The parcels total approximately 39 acres. Upper portions of the enlarged Halligan Reservoir would be located on portions of these lands, which are, for the most part, surrounded by the Cherokee SWA–Middle Unit. It was also determined that the parking area near the west side of Halligan Reservoir EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 417 Item 15. in the northeast ¼ of Section 32 is located on property held in fee by Fort Collins. To Fort Collins’ knowledge, there is no agreement or easement in place that provides public access to the private entity’s or this portion of Fort Collins’ land. Figure 3-4. Sections 29 and 32 on the Western Edge of Halligan Reservoir EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 418 Item 15. 3.9.2 Halligan Project Effects on Recreation and Public Access The DEIS Section 4.16.4.2 indicates that, overall, the Halligan Project would result in a mostly negligible effect on long-term land- and water-based recreational activity and related economic activity, although site-specific beneficial and adverse effects would occur. The enlarged Halligan Reservoir would inundate an approximately 0.75-mile reach of the North Fork upstream of the existing Halligan Reservoir, resulting in the loss of approximately 20 acres of potential hunting lands and river fishing along a 0.4-mile stretch of this reach. Most of the primary inundation area along the North Fork in Sections 29 and 32, T11N, R70W, was historically believed by CPW to be in the Cherokee SWA since the acquisition of the land in the late 1960s/early 1970s. According to CPW the public has accessed this part of the inundation area for over 50 years10. Fort Collins staff was performing its due diligence in researching land ownership all around Halligan Reservoir and identified discrepancies in various deeds, including those in Sections 29 and 32. Following thorough title research of the inundation area, recorded title to the inundation area in these sections is privately owned or owned by Fort Collins. Additionally, the parking area near the west side of Halligan Reservoir in the northeast ¼ of Section 32 located on Fort Collins’ property is within this primary area to be inundated by the enlarged Halligan Reservoir. None of the lands privately owned or owned by Fort Collins are authorized for public hunting or fishing. No publicly owned lands for authorized public hunting or fishing recreation will thus be technically impacted by the Project. However, public access could be affected until the access issues are resolved, as described in Section 4.3.7.1. In addition to the primary inundation created by the ordinary high water mark of the enlarged Halligan Reservoir, Fort Collins is required by DWR (refer to Rule 7.9.3.3 in 2 CCR 402-1, Division of Water Resources Rules and Regulations for Dam Safety and Construction) to acquire fee ownership or an easement for lands that would be inundated by the modeled inflow design flood surcharge, which will include lands in Sections 29 and 32 that are part of the Cherokee SWA owned by CPW. Since the private entity or Fort Collins owns the land about 14 feet above the ordinary high water mark of the enlarged Halligan Reservoir, the only floods that will be above the private entity or Fort Collins’ lands would have a recurrence interval of 1 in 100,000 (0.001%) and the maximum probable flood has a recurrence interval of 1 in 10,000,000 (0.00001%). Although this highly infrequent inundation will not be permanent, public use of these lands would be impacted while these lands are inundated, and until they are reclaimed following any flooding event, if necessary. It is estimated that approximately 21 acres of land owned by CPW would be inundated during the probable maximum flood for which Fort Collins would need a flood easement from CPW. Because the surface of Halligan Reservoir is not open to the public for recreational use, construction of the Halligan Project would not impact public recreation on the reservoir. The LAPCR’s private access to Halligan Reservoir (refer to Section 3.9.1) would be minimally impacted during construction and would be limited to specific times when the reservoir level would be drawn down near the end of construction for partial or total demolition of the existing dam. LAPCR currently would have no rights to access the surface of the enlarged reservoir following completion of construction. Fort Collins has no current plans to allow recreation on the surface of Halligan Reservoir following construction. If, in the future, surface water recreation is considered at the enlarged Halligan Reservoir, Fort Collins agrees to consult with 10 Fort Collins is evaluating if and the extent to which the public has accessed this part of the inundation area and makes no representations on this issue. EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 419 Item 15. CPW. A safety buffer on the water out to approximately 300 feet upstream of the existing dam would likely be implemented during the construction period. Wildlife watching, hiking, horseback riding, and other land-based activities occur on properties surrounding Halligan Reservoir. Construction activity, including noise and dust generation and increased traffic volumes (construction workers and trucks), may temporarily affect the quality of these experiences. However, construction activities would predominantly be confined to the area near the existing dam site, which is not within residential view. 3.9.3 Evaluation of Future Public Use of the Enlarged Halligan Reservoir Fort Collins and CPW held multiple meetings to discuss the possibility of allowing public recreation on the enlarged Halligan Reservoir and some of the surrounding City owned land. From approximately 2016 through 2019, CPW and Fort Collins discussed various recreation concepts that included opening all or portions of Halligan Reservoir to public recreation after enlargement. The recreation concept included in the DEIS included reservoir access through the Cherokee SWA, whereby shoreline and surface water fishing opportunities with human-propelled watercraft would be available at the enlarged Halligan Reservoir to those with a valid hunting or fishing license, or SWA pass. The only public recreation access would be through the Cherokee SWA so this recreation concept anticipated the reservoir operating as a part of the administrative boundaries of the Cherokee SWA and would be consistent with the existing regulations of the SWA. To further evaluate the costs, benefits, and impacts of opening the enlarged Halligan Reservoir to public recreation, Fort Collins staff members, in conjunction with CPW staff input, used a framework adopted by Fort Collins’ Natural Areas Department (Interagency Visitor Use Management Council 2016) to evaluate the impacts and benefits of recreation at and around the enlarged Halligan Reservoir. The study focused on the following topics: • Ecological impacts • Cultural resource impacts • Social considerations • Administrative considerations At the conclusion of the analysis, Fort Collins staff members recommended that public recreation at the enlarged Halligan Reservoir not be pursued, even in a limited nature, predominantly because of ecological impacts that Fort Collins staff members anticipated based on DEIS analyses and their own professional experiences. Other elements that factored into the decision included the cost of providing safe recreational opportunities to this area, and the relatively narrow range of recreationalists who would benefit from the opportunity.11 Fort Collins understands CPW’s desire to see public angling access at the enlarged Halligan Reservoir. Since the Halligan Project is not impacting surface water recreation at Halligan Reservoir, Fort Collins and CPW have agreed to continue discussions related to recreational opportunities at the enlarged Halligan Reservoir in a process separate from the current processes to enlarge Halligan Reservoir and the FWMEP. To formalize this commitment, Fort Collins will include language in an intergovernmental agreement with CPW to continue discussions related to recreation at the enlarged Halligan Reservoir. Those discussions may include the reservoir being managed for recreation by CPW as a part of the Cherokee SWA. 11 Access for public recreation at an enlarged Halligan Reservoir would be provided through Cherokee SWA, which requires a valid hunting, fishing, or recreational day use license to enter, as well as a high-clearance four-wheel drive vehicle. These access limitations do not fully align with Fort Collins’ focus on equity and affordability to provide equal opportunities for its citizens. EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 420 Item 15. 4 Proposed Fish and Wildlife Mitigation Plan This chapter constitutes the proposed mitigation plan for anticipated Halligan Project impacts on fish and wildlife resources. The impacts are summarized in Section 3 and described in greater detail in the DEIS and associated technical reports.12 Avoidance, minimization, and compensatory mitigation measures have been developed to address fish and wildlife impacts identified in the DEIS, as well as other concerns identified by CPW staff specific to impacts on fish and wildlife resources. The DEIS (Corps 2019) presented a draft CMP prepared by Fort Collins (City of Fort Collins 2019c) that includes both mitigation and enhancement measures. Based upon public comments received on the DEIS, comments from Project stakeholders, and discussions with CPW staff, this FWMEP builds upon and/or replaces many of the aquatic life and terrestrial wildlife components of the draft CMP. All measures included in this FWMEP are also summarized in the table contained in Appendix B. Mitigation areas are mapped in Appendix A. An updated final CMP will be prepared by Fort Collins for the Final EIS. 4.1 Mitigation Approach Fort Collins has developed an approach to mitigation that will not only serve to satisfy regulatory requirements for protection of fish and wildlife, but also seeks to improve existing social13 and ecological conditions for the people and natural systems of the Poudre River watershed. This approach also applies to enhancement measures described in Section 5. Fort Collins’ mitigation objectives for the Halligan Project have been developed to comply with applicable regulatory requirements while acknowledging the importance of the Poudre River watershed to the Fort Collins community, as detailed in the 2020 Strategic Plan (City of Fort Collins 2020a) and as follows: • Avoid and minimize Halligan Project impacts on natural systems, to preserve ecological integrity • Compensate for unavoidable Halligan Project impacts through mitigation measures that restore or replace locally important resources and function • Improve ecological function of the North Fork system as a whole Considering these mitigation objectives, and recognizing the important and localized ecological functions of the impacted resources, Fort Collins developed the following guidelines to identify and prioritize potential mitigation opportunities incorporated into this FWMEP: • Account for the inherent benefits from the Halligan Project, including those anticipated to result from flow-related operational measures and the natural re-establishment of wetland and riparian communities at the enlarged reservoir shoreline and on the North Fork. • Prioritize mitigation opportunities located near Halligan Reservoir and the North Fork to enhance or replace the natural functions in the same watershed and stream system, maintaining locally significant resources and ecological functions. • Prioritize mitigation concepts that involve working with local partners. 12 This FWMEP does not alter in any way the DEIS and associated technical reports and their descriptions of the Halligan Project’s effects. To the extent that there are inconsistencies between the Halligan Project’s effects as described in this FWMEP and the DEIS, any such inconsistencies will not be interpreted to reduce the mitigation Fort Collins intends to complete for the Halligan Project. 13 Refer to the Shared Vision Planning process in Section 2.4.1 regarding social conditions. EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 421 Item 15. •Prioritize mitigation concepts that benefit whole systems or multiple resources. •Identify and target local resources known to be in a degraded condition that can be improved to increase function and ecological benefit. Fort Collins developed the mitigation measures presented in this FWMEP based on the mitigation objectives and guidelines to benefit numerous environmental components. Based on all of Fort Collins’ work on the Halligan Project over the years, it is Fort Collins’ position that this overall mitigation approach considers the entire ecological system, where the functional benefits of the mitigation actions taken together are greater than the sum of the Halligan Project’s impacts on those individual parts. As an example, the Winter Release Plan and Summer Low-flow Plan will work together to essentially eliminate dry-up points along the North Fork and improve existing stream hydrology. These improvements would benefit not only the aquatic ecosystem, including fish and macroinvertebrates, but also the hyporheic zone hydrology of the stream. The resulting greater hydrologic connectivity would likely support the function of surrounding wetlands and riparian vegetation, which, in turn, would benefit wildlife that depend on healthy riparian environments. This section provides a mitigation strategy for each affected fish and wildlife resource. In many instances, several mitigation strategies address one resource but likely have a ripple effect benefiting other resources. The mitigation and enhancement approach summarized in Sections 4 and 5, respectively, has been developed over decades, based on regulatory requirements, input from Project stakeholders, regional partners, environmental groups, and in coordination with CPW staff members. 4.1.1 Regulatory Mitigation Categories Mitigation described in this FWMEP falls into one of the following three regulatory mitigation categories (defined in the Key Terminology section): avoidance, minimization, and compensatory mitigation. Additionally, Fort Collins has developed enhancement measures that go above and beyond mitigation requirements and demonstrate Fort Collins’ commitment to improving existing environmental conditions. Enhancement measures are described in Section 5. Avoidance and minimization measures have been, and will continue to be, implemented during all Halligan Project stages, including planning and design, construction, and operations. Avoidance and minimization measures are described in Section 4.2. Compensatory mitigation measures will generally begin before or concurrently with the correlating impacts. Compensatory mitigation measures are described in Section 4.3. Early compensatory mitigation was completed through preservation of habitat at Roberts Ranch, as described in Section 4.3.1. 4.1.2 Changes from DEIS Conceptual Mitigation Plan This FWMEP builds upon, updates, and/or replaces many of the aquatic life, terrestrial wildlife, and recreational components of the draft CMP presented in the DEIS (City of Fort Collins 2019c). In response to comments on the CMP, Fort Collins has provided the following additional information in this FWMEP, or has finalized decisions about items that were not final when the CMP was issued: •Specific details about how the flow-related operational measures will be implemented, including when they could be curtailed (refer to Section 4.2.1) •Fort Collins’ commitment to attempt to protect their releases from the enlarged portion of Halligan Reservoir to prevent that water from being diverted by exchange or otherwise (refer to Section 4.2.1) EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 422 Item 15. • Recreation will not be pursued at the enlarged Halligan Reservoir as part of the Halligan Project at this time because of the reasons described in Sections 3.9.2 and 3.9.3 • Baseline monitoring of environmental conditions (water quality, temperature, riparian habitat, raptors and bats) was augmented in 2020 and 2021 • Conceptual sediment management measures have been developed to manage sediment both during construction and long-term operations • A summary of preliminary best management practices (BMPs; that is, control measures) has been developed to manage and control stormwater and pollutants (refer to Section 4.2.3.7) • Stream restoration on the North Fork as an enhancement for aquatic resources (refer to Section 5.1.1) • Updated measures to mitigate anticipated water quality or temperature effects, or to enhance existing conditions • Removal of alphanumeric codes: the CMP used a unique system of abbreviations to reference specific mitigation measures (for example, “SF1” for stream flow measure 1, the Winter Release Plan); this FWMEP uses descriptive names for each measure rather than abbreviations The following mitigation measures, originally detailed in the draft CMP, are no longer viable based on new information obtained during Project development and design, and are no longer proposed as mitigation or enhancement measures: Greenback Cutthroat Trout Reclamation and Diversion Structures Modification for Reintroduction—In the draft CMP, Fort Collins proposed the option of stocking an experimental population of native pure- strain greenback cutthroat trout to the 6-mile segment of the North Fork between Halligan Dam and the North Poudre Canal Diversion. Along with the proposed restocking effort, Fort Collins proposed creation of fish barriers at the North Poudre Canal and Calloway Diversions to maintain a genetically pure and isolated greenback cutthroat trout population. However, further analysis of temperature data, and a feasibility assessment by Fort Collins, in consultation with CPW staff, related to costs and sustainability associated with screening the outlet works and spillway, have determined the proposed Greenback reintroduction concept to be cost prohibitive and ultimately unsustainable in the long term. Fort Collins is, therefore, proposing to proceed with Option A described in the draft CMP: reconnecting larger habitat segments of the North Fork by providing fish passage around the North Poudre Canal Diversion and removing or modifying the Calloway Diversion to improve fish passage. This improved river connectivity will benefit a wide range of riverine aquatic species, with a primary focus on small-bodied native species. Revegetation of Existing Tailings and Spoil Piles and Previously Disturbed Areas—In the draft CMP, Fort Collins proposed revegetating spoil piles left in place near the existing Halligan Dam as a result of construction of the dam in 1909. However, the Halligan Project now includes constructing a replacement dam downstream of the existing dam, which would result in inundation of the spoil piles and would eliminate the benefits of this previously proposed measure. Fish population and aquatic habitat surveys—In the draft CMP, Fort Collins proposed working with CPW to conduct additional population surveys and field surveys of the amount and quality of available physical habitat for fish species in representative reaches of the North Fork between Halligan Dam and Seaman Reservoir. Following the draft CMP, Fort Collins evaluated existing aquatic habitat conditions in the North Fork (GEI 2019a, 2019b), and CPW has historic and recent fish population data as described in Section 3.5.1 of this FWMEP. EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 423 Item 15. 4.2 Avoidance and Minimization Fort Collins has incorporated many elements into the Halligan Project to avoid and minimize environmental impacts. The Halligan Project is the culmination of decades of planning and balances Fort Collins’ water supply needs with opportunities to minimize environmental impacts and improve existing conditions on the North Fork below Halligan Reservoir. Appendix B provides a summary of each mitigation or enhancement measure and each measure’s primary focus and secondary benefits. 4.2.1 Flow-related Operational Measures Several flow-related operational measures will be included with the Halligan Project to collectively avoid and minimize impacts on stream functions while also improving certain stream functions that are currently degraded. These flow-related operational measures will re-establish perennial flow of 3 cfs to 5 cfs or more to the North Fork below the enlarged Halligan Reservoir, minimize abrupt changes to flows from the enlarged reservoir operations, and allow for peak flows to bypass the enlarged reservoir when Fort Collins could otherwise be diverting water to storage. The proposed flow-related operational measures include the following: •Winter Release Plan •Summer Low-flow Plan •Ramping Rate Limitations •Peak Flow Bypass Program •End of Summer Flushing Event The combined environmental benefits provided by these flow-related operational measures to the North Fork below the enlarged Halligan Reservoir are described in more detail in Section 4.2.1. These flow-related operational measures would have varying beneficial effects on the approximately 22 miles of the North Fork from the replacement Halligan Dam to Seaman Reservoir. They would result in moderate seasonal beneficial effects on aquatic resources from Halligan Reservoir downstream to the North Poudre Canal return structure (approximately 8 miles) on the North Fork (DEIS Section 4.8.3.4.1.2) with major beneficial effects from the North Poudre Canal return flow down to Rabbit Creek (approximately 2 miles; DEIS Section 4.8.3.4.1.3), and minor benefits extending from Rabbit Creek down to Seaman Reservoir (approximately 12 miles; DEIS Section 4.8.3.4.1.2). The Halligan Project would increase stream flows in winter and other traditionally low-flow periods, improve river connectivity during low-flow periods, and increase downstream areas of riffle and pool complexes (DEIS Section 4.8.3.4.1.3). The enlarged reservoir operations would eliminate almost all14 zero-flow days at frequent dry-up points and minimize extreme flow fluctuations from Fort Collins’ use of the enlargement. Therefore, compensatory mitigation is not proposed for offsetting impacts on stream functions or stream flow because the Halligan Project’s predicted impacts on stream functions and stream flow are sufficiently avoided and minimized through the operational measures. Nevertheless, in addition to the flow-related operational measures described in Section 4.2.1, Fort Collins has also committed to additional enhancement measures to improve current stream function and stream flow, which are described in Section 5.1. To further benefit aquatic and other wildlife, circumstances may exist when, in consultation with CPW, Fort Collins will deviate slightly from the planned flow-related operational measures. Such modifications 14 See potential exceptions at end of this Section 4.2.1.1 Winter Release Plan “Curtailment of the Winter Release Plan” and Section 4.2.1.2 Summer Low- flow Plan “Curtailment of the Summer Low-flow Plan.” EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 424 Item 15. of timing, duration, and quantity of flow could occur, provided that any such modifications do not affect Fort Collins’ storage and yield from the enlarged Halligan Reservoir and are consistent with all applicable permits and approvals, agreements, and decrees. This flexibility is needed to periodically modify flows, if necessary and when conditions are favorable, for the potential benefit of aquatic wildlife, as suggested by CPW. For example, per CPW’s request, in certain years Fort Collins may change the period of the Summer Release Plan such that flows are decreased in October to help manage brown trout. In addition to the operational flow measures mentioned in this section, Fort Collins will consider ways to make releases that complement a natural hydrograph to reduce potential effects to the river system for other releases it makes from its portion of the enlarged Halligan Reservoir. For example, during a severe drought, Fort Collins will try to avoid short duration, large releases in the fall, in favor of longer, lower- duration releases, to avoid or reduce impacts to fish below Halligan Reservoir. Large fall releases are unlikely to occur since Fort Collins’ water demands are lower in the fall and there will likely be other water rights that can be taken that reduce the need for Halligan releases. Also, Fort Collins does not have other significant storage capacity below Halligan Reservoir to which its releases could be moved. If, in the future, Fort Collins needs to make a large release, Fort Collins may notify CPW in advance to consider ways to make releases that avoid or minimize impacts to aquatic life. 4.2.1.1 Winter Release Plan As part of Halligan Project operations, Fort Collins will provide continuous releases of 3 cfs from its water stored in the enlarged Halligan Reservoir to the North Fork from October 1 through April 30 each year. Fort Collins will implement the Winter Release Plan the first winter after the new Halligan Dam has been approved to store water by the DWR and Fort Collins’ portion of the enlarged reservoir has at least 3,000 acre-feet of water. This Winter Release Plan will be a means for Fort Collins to meet wintertime return flow obligations while providing a concurrent benefit to the aquatic environment. Based on analyses during the permitting process (GEI, 2016, 2018; Miller, 2017; WEST, 2017a, 2017b; City of Fort Collins, 2017; Pioneer, 2016a, 2016b, 2017b), it is projected that the Winter Release Plan will provide the following benefits: • Eliminate almost all15 zero-flow days on the North Fork (in combination with the Summer Low-flow Plan [Section 4.2.1.2]). • Result in beneficial effects on the North Fork for small-bodied native fish, in the form of a continuous, more longitudinally connected aquatic corridor compared to the existing zero-flow conditions. 15 See potential exceptions at end of this section “Curtailment of the Winter Release Plan.” EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 425 Item 15. •Create additional wetted channel area that will benefit small-bodied native fish, trout, and macroinvertebrates (these benefits vary along the North Fork, with benefits expected to be greatest in the Phantom Canyon below the North Poudre Canal Diversion structure). •Re-establish basic habitat requirements for aquatic species through the reintroduction of perennial flow. The Winter Release Plan includes reconstructing the North Poudre Canal Diversion similar to its current configuration, but to allow the bypass of Fort Collins’ releases from the enlarged Halligan Reservoir so that the water remains in the North Fork. Currently, the North Poudre Canal Diversion does not allow for such flow bypasses. The Winter Release Plan will also result in benefits that will offset the impact resulting from the inundation of approximately 0.75 mile of the CWCB’s instream flow water right (Water Court Case 1985CW430) on the North Fork above Halligan Reservoir (as discussed further in this section). Figure 4-1 shows a zero-flow condition that is common in Phantom Canyon below the North Poudre Canal Diversion under current operations of the existing reservoir. This flow condition will be significantly improved by implementing the Winter Release Plan. Operation of the Winter Release Plan Fort Collins will release a minimum of 3 cfs from its share of water stored in the enlarged Halligan Reservoir from October 1 through April 30 every year (winter releases). Instrumentation will be installed at the dam and at or near the reconstructed North Poudre Canal Diversion to monitor the winter releases bypass of the North Poudre Canal Diversion. The Winter Release Plan will not prevent Fort Collins from releasing more than 3 cfs during this time period as may be needed to meet demands or for other operational, mitigation, or enhancement needs. However, such additional releases are not planned. Additional releases will be subject to ramping rates as discussed in Section 4.2.1.2. The winter releases will be delivered down the North Fork to its confluence with the Main Stem and either “exchanged up” to the Fort Collins Intake(s) on the Main Stem or delivered downstream for other purposes. If the winter releases are exchanged, Fort Collins will divert a like amount of water at one of the Fort Collins’ Intakes. The amount of water diverted at Fort Collins’ Intake(s) will be the amount released from the enlarged Halligan Reservoir reduced by the administrative transit loss assessed by DWR. In certain rare conditions when inadequate flows exist in the Main Stem for Fort Collins to perform an exchange to its intake(s), Fort Collins may find an entity willing to accept the winter releases in exchange for transferring other water to Fort Collins. These trades will require an agreement between Fort Collins and the other entity, and such an agreement will be reached in the future. Greeley may potentially divert and store the winter releases in Seaman Reservoir using its own exchange water rights. In these situations, Greeley would divert and store the winter releases and deliver a like amount of water to the Main Stem at some point above the downstream calling water right. Figure 4-1. North Fork, Zero-Flow in Phantom Canyon, May 2002 Source: Miller 2017 EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 426 Item 15. CPW has expressed concerns about anchor ice forming in the Exchange Reach between Fort Collins’ intakes and the confluence of the North Fork and Main Stem. Fort Collins operational staff has not experienced or heard of past instances of anchor ice forming in the lower part of the Poudre River canyon, because most icing issues occur in the upper reaches of the river. If the formation of anchor ice occurs in the Exchange Reach in the future during times when Halligan exchanges are made, Fort Collins agrees to consult with CPW to consider ways to avoid the issue such as, but not limited to, temporary curtailment of making those exchanges. Protection of the Winter Releases NPIC cannot divert the winter releases into the North Poudre Canal pursuant to an existing agreement with Fort Collins. Additionally, Fort Collins will attempt to protect the winter releases from Halligan Dam to Seaman Reservoir using the “Protected Mitigation Release” statute (CRS Section 37-92-102[8]). To acquire protection for these releases under this protection mechanism, Fort Collins will need to both reach an agreement with the CWCB and acquire a decree from the Water Court. Fort Collins will undertake a good faith effort to protect the winter releases under the Protected Mitigation Release statute; however, success is not guaranteed because it will depend on factors outside of Fort Collins’ control. Per the statute, the protected mitigation releases will need “to reasonably avoid, minimize, or mitigate the impacts of the new reservoir capacity on fish and wildlife resources within the qualifying stream reach in accordance with a fish and wildlife mitigation plan.” Fort Collins will need to redivert and use the protected mitigation releases after they flow through the protected “qualifying stream reach.” Because the protection of the winter releases (and release from the Summer Low-flow Plan as discussed below in Section 4.2.1.2) under the Protected Mitigation Release statute relies on other entities’ and the Water Court’s discretion beyond Fort Collins’ control, Fort Collins cannot guarantee a particular result. If Fort Collins does not successfully acquire a Water Court decree to protect the winter and summer releases, the releases will not be protected from diversion under approved augmentation plans, substitutions, and exchanges, similar to Greeley’s potential diversion of the winter releases into the Seaman Reservoir as previously discussed. However, such diversions of the winter and summer releases will be unlikely for several reasons, including (1) they cannot be diverted into the North Poudre Canal pursuant to Fort Collins’ agreement with NPIC, (2) there are no other substantial diversion locations on the North Fork above Seaman Reservoir, (3) the entire area is very remote and difficult to access to divert water and to convey water that has been diverted, (4) there are numerous conservation easements in the area that make development difficult, and (5) there are few sources of augmentation and replacement water on the Main Stem and North Fork above the Phantom Canyon mouth. If Fort Collins fails to acquire a Water Court decree to protect Halligan Releases under the Protected Mitigation Release statute, or its agreement with NPIC changes such that Halligan Releases can be diverted into the North Poudre Canal, Fort Collins will consult with CPW in good faith to evaluate how Halligan Releases can be protected. Curtailment of the Winter Release Plan The Winter Release Plan will occur from October 1 through April 30 every year except during emergency situations, maintenance occurrences, or when severe water restrictions that prohibit all lawn watering are in place for Fort Collins’ water customers, as described further in Section 4.2.1.7. EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 427 Item 15. 4.2.1.2 Summer Low-flow Plan As part of Halligan Project operations and to minimize impacts, Fort Collins will implement the Summer Low-flow Plan, which adjusts reservoir operations by forgoing diversions and/or releasing its water stored in the enlarged Halligan Reservoir to maintain a minimum continuous 5 cfs flow in the approximately 22 miles of the North Fork between the replacement Halligan Dam and Seaman Reservoir (as measured at three gaging stations along the North Fork, as described below) from May 1 to September 30 each year (summer releases). The minimum target of 5 cfs for the Summer Low-flow Plan was identified by Fort Collins as the amount of flow that could be maintained in the North Fork below the enlarged Halligan Reservoir without increasing the size of the reservoir. Fort Collins will implement the Summer Low-flow Plan the first summer after the new Halligan Dam has been approved to store water by the DWR and Fort Collins’ portion of the enlarged reservoir has at least 3,000 acre-feet of water. Based on analyses during the permitting process (GEI, 2016, 2018; Miller, 2017; WEST, 2017a, 2017b; City of Fort Collins, 2017; Pioneer, 2016a, 2016b, 2017b), it is projected that the Summer Low- flow Plan will produce the following results: • Eliminate almost all16 zero-flow days on the North Fork (in combination with the Winter Release Plan, Section 4.2.1.1) which avoids and minimizes potential impacts on the aquatic ecosystem including stream temperature from the Halligan Project. • Anticipation of stream temperature benefits for the North Fork, at times, are based on recognition that the Summer Low-flow Plan would increase flow rates on the North Fork in summer months at the times of the lowest current flow rates. A more thorough understanding of anticipated temperature effects of the Halligan Project on the North Fork will be developed through temperature modeling planned for the CWA Section 401 water quality certification application. • Result in beneficial effects to the North Fork for small-bodied native fish in the form of a more longitudinally connected aquatic corridor compared to existing zero-flow conditions. • Create additional wetted channel area that will benefit small-bodied fish, trout, and macroinvertebrates (these benefits vary along the North Fork per Table 3-3). • Re-establish basic habitat requirements for aquatic species through the reintroduction of perennial flow. 16 See potential exceptions at end of this section 4.2.1.1 Winter Release Plan “Curtailment of the Winter Release Plan” and section 4.2.1.2 Summer Low- flow Plan “Curtailment of the Summer Low-flow Plan”. EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 428 Item 15. The Summer Low-flow Plan involves bypassing the North Poudre Canal Diversion through a reconstructed North Poudre Canal Diversion so that the water remains in the North Fork. Currently, the North Poudre Canal Diversion does not allow for such flow bypasses. The Summer Low-flow Plan will also result in benefits that will offset the impact resulting from the inundation of approximately 0.75 mile of the CWCB’s instream flow water right (Water Court Case 1985CW430) on the North Fork above Halligan Reservoir (as discussed further in Section 3.3.2.3). Figure 4-2 shows a zero-flow condition that is common near the mouth of Phantom Canyon during certain times of the year, which will be improved through the Winter Release Plan and Summer Low-flow Plan. Operation of the Summer Low- flow Plan Fort Collins will forgo diversions into and/or release water from its share of storage in the enlarged Halligan Reservoir to maintain a minimum continuous flow of 5 cfs in the North Fork between the replacement Halligan Dam and Seaman Reservoir from May 1 through September 30 every year. Fort Collins will install new instrumentation and continue to monitor flows at specific locations on the North Fork between the replacement Halligan Dam and Seaman Reservoir. Flow will be measured at the following three specific locations: • The existing gage or new instrumentation at or below the replacement Halligan Dam • A new gage in and/or slightly downstream of the bypass structure for the reconstructed North Poudre Canal Diversion • The existing gage where West County Road 74E crosses the North Fork near Livermore If the flows at any of the three gages drop below 5 cfs from May 1 through September 30, Fort Collins will modify flow operations to forgo diversions into and/or make releases from its portion of the enlarged Halligan Reservoir to increase the flow to at least 5 cfs at each of the three gages. The amount of time required for these minor adjustments will depend on the system installed. The intention during design will be to react within at least an hour or so, but if possible, sooner. Fort Collins understands that maintaining 5 cfs at the gages may require releases greater than 5 cfs to compensate for potential losses in the North Fork. Based on Commission and public feedback, Fort Collins will also perform preconstruction surveys of the pre-Halligan Reservoir enlargement flows on the reach of the North Fork between the existing Livermore gage and the upstream end of Seaman Reservoir (that is, the Livermore-to-Seaman Reach) in different seasons and hydrologic regimes (particularly dry conditions) to determine if there are flow Figure 4-2. North Fork, Zero-Flow Conditions below Calloway Diversion, August 2018 Source: CPW EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 429 Item 15. losses in this stretch. Details of the preconstruction surveys, including an agreement on methods and standards to be used to define whether there are flow losses, will be included in an intergovernmental agreement between Fort Collins and CPW. If the preconstruction survey demonstrates that the Livermore-to-Seaman Reach is a neutral or gaining reach, then another gage below the existing Livermore gage will not be needed. If the preconstruction survey demonstrates that the Livermore-to- Seaman Reach is a losing reach, Fort Collins will coordinate with CPW on next steps which could include the installation of a fourth gage or increased Halligan Project flows to the Livermore gage to offset such losses toward ensuring that the Summer Low-flow Plan benefits all 22 miles of river. If, in the future, another diversion structure is constructed in the Livermore-to-Seaman Reach, Fort Collins will commit to work with the owner of this diversion structure toward assuring passage of Fort Collins’ flows. The commitment with the future diversion structure owner could include a written agreement, installation of other gages, and/or other means of assuring that Fort Collins can meet its Summer Low-flow Plan measure. Exchange of the Summer Releases – May through June Similar to the winter releases, from May 1 to June 30, the Summer Low-flow Plan releases will be delivered down the North Fork to the confluence with the Main Stem and either “exchanged up” to Fort Collins’ Intake(s) on the Main Stem or delivered downstream for other purposes. If the summer releases are exchanged, when the releases reach the confluence of the Main Stem and the North Fork, Fort Collins will divert a like amount of water at one of the Fort Collins’ Intakes. The amount of water diverted at the Fort Collins’ Intake(s) will be the amount released from the enlarged Halligan Reservoir reduced by the administrative transit loss assessed by DWR. In certain rare conditions when inadequate flows exist in the Main Stem for Fort Collins to perform an exchange to its intake(s), Fort Collins may find an entity willing to accept the summer releases in exchange for transferring other water to Fort Collins. These trades will require an agreement between Fort Collins and the other entity, and such an agreement will be reached in the future. Greeley may potentially divert and store the summer releases in Seaman Reservoir using its own exchange water rights. In these situations, Greeley would divert and store the summer releases and deliver a like amount of water to the Main Stem at some point above the downstream calling water right. Diversion and storage of Halligan summer releases by Greeley in Seaman Reservoir at times would occasionally interrupt the temperature benefits of the Summer Low-flow Plan in the approximately 1 river mile reach of the North Fork below Seaman Reservoir. To maximize the extent of this benefit for the North Fork, an operational agreement is being pursued with Greeley (discussed further in Section 4.2.1.3). Modified Summer Release Exchange Plan – July through September Fort Collins will not exchange Summer Low-flow Plan releases (up to 5 cfs) from Halligan Reservoir up to either of the Fort Collins Intakes. This hiatus on exchanges will occur each year from July 1 to September 30. This action will leave more water in the Main Stem upstream of the North Fork confluence and downstream to below the Hansen Supply Canal during times of the most critical temperature concern (July to September), minimizing Halligan Project temperature impacts in this critical season. Protection of the Summer Releases NPIC cannot divert the summer flows into the North Poudre Canal pursuant to an existing agreement with Fort Collins. Additionally, Fort Collins will undertake a good faith effort to protect the summer releases from Halligan Reservoir to Seaman Reservoir using the Protected Mitigation Release statute EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 430 Item 15. (per CRS Section 37-92-102[8]) in the same manner and subject to the same limitations as described for the winter releases (Section 4.2.1.1). Curtailment of the Summer Low-flow Plan The Summer Low-flow Plan will not be operated during emergency situations, maintenance occurrences, and when water restrictions are in place for Fort Collins’ water customers, as described further in Section 4.2.1.7. 4.2.1.3 Operational Agreement with Greeley/Seaman Reservoir Outlet Works Reconstruction If the diversion and storage of Halligan Project summer releases by Greeley in Seaman Reservoir could be avoided, the river temperature benefits of the Summer Low-flow Plan could be extended to the approximately 1 river mile reach of the North Fork below Seaman Reservoir. To maximize the extent of this benefit on the North Fork, Fort Collins is pursuing an operational agreement with Greeley. The agreement would specify the need for Greeley to pass Halligan Releases, including the Winter Release and Summer Low-flow Plan of 3 cfs and up to 5 cfs directly through Seaman Reservoir. For this to be possible, upgraded outlet works may be needed in Seaman Reservoir. Greeley is currently in the process of upgrading their outlet works with support from federal funding. As part of the potential agreement, Fort Collins may provide additional funding support for further refinement of the new outlet works design for Seaman Reservoir. The goal of this additional funding would be to give the new outlet works the functionality and operational control to pass even the small Summer Low-flow Plan releases through Seaman Reservoir (that is, the refined new outlet works should allow for fine-scale management of releases on the order of 1 to 5 cfs). In the event that Fort Collins cannot reach an agreement with Greeley to pass Fort Collins’ Halligan Winter and Summer Low-flow Plan releases of 3 cfs and up to 5 cfs below Seaman Reservoir, and the CWA Section 401 water quality certification process determines that the Halligan Project has potential for occasional adverse temperature impacts on the North Fork below Seaman Reservoir that requires mitigation, Fort Collins commits to mitigating the identified temperature impacts attributable to the Halligan Project through stream restoration or other measures in a manner agreed to by Fort Collins, CDPHE, and CPW. If reasonably practicable, Fort Collins will mitigate the identified impacts along the river reach from Seaman Reservoir to the confluence with the Main Stem commensurate with Fort Collins identified impacts. If not reasonably practicable in the reach below Seaman Reservoir, Fort Collins will work with CDPHE and CPW to find other mitigation commensurate with the Halligan Projects identified impacts. 4.2.1.4 Ramping Rate Limitations By applying ramping rate limitations, Fort Collins will seek to constrain existing and potential dramatic decreases and increases in the rate of discharge from Fort Collins’ portion of the enlarged Halligan Reservoir to avoid and minimize impacts on aquatic species, particularly small-bodied native fish and rainbow trout. Such dramatic decreases and increases in the discharge of water below Halligan Dam resulting from Fort Collins’ operation of its portion of the enlarged Halligan Reservoir could occur because of (1) the rate at which Fort Collins diverts water into the enlarged reservoir (thus affecting the amount of water flowing past the dam), and (2) the rate at which Fort Collins releases water from its portion of an enlarged Halligan Reservoir that Fort Collins previously stored. Fort Collins will seek to implement the ramping rate limitations by managing both such aspects of its operations. The ramping rate limitations described in this section are intended to protect aquatic life, as well as people recreating (for example, fishing) downstream. Tempering sudden flow changes is consistent with EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 431 Item 15. The Nature Conservancy’s (TNC’s) environmental flow recommendations for the North Fork (TNC 2008). The ramping rate limitations will also help maintain a more natural descending limb of the North Fork hydrograph following peak flows by incorporating a more gradual decrease in outflow and establishing a lag time before returning the stream to a base flow level. The ramping rate limitations are based on an evaluation of operations at the existing Halligan Dam and, in part, on the statistical analysis of natural ramping rates that are anticipated on the North Fork. The following ramping rate limitations (summarized) were developed in consideration of the following factors: 1) Needs of Fort Collins’ customers and additional legal obligations of Fort Collins 2) Operational compatibility 3) Mimicking natural hydrologic conditions to the extent feasible 4) Protecting small-bodied native fish and rainbow trout Operation of the Ramping Rate Limitations Fort Collins will limit dramatic decreases and increases in the discharge rate resulting from Fort Collins’ operation of its portion of the enlarged Halligan Reservoir as described in this section. Ramping rate limitations would take effect as soon as the new Halligan Dam has been approved to store water by the DWR. Ramping Rate Limitations to Decreasing Discharge Rates–The limitations on decreasing discharge rates resulting from Fort Collins’ operation of its portion of the enlarged Halligan Reservoir are intended to be protective of small-bodied native fish and rainbow trout that are susceptible to being stranded in discrete areas within the North Fork with sudden decreases in flow. According to the Ramping Rate Limitations for decreasing discharge rates resulting from Fort Collins’ operation of its portion of the enlarged Halligan Reservoir, the maximum allowable decrease in discharge rate is dependent on the starting discharge rate, which will be measured at the outlet works of the replacement Halligan Dam and/or the immediate downstream gage. The maximum allowable decrease to the discharge rate resulting from Fort Collins’ operation of its portion of the enlarged Halligan Reservoir, according to the Ramping Rate Limitations, is summarized in Table 4-1. Table 4-1. Ramping Rate Limitations for Decreasing Releases from Fort Collins’ Portion of an Enlarged Halligan Reservoir[a] Starting Discharge Rate[b] Maximum Down-ramp (Decrease) per Hour Greater than 200 cfs 10% of starting discharge rate Between 100 and 200 cfs 10% of starting discharge rate (maximum of 20 cfs) Less than 100 cfs 10% of starting discharge rate (maximum of 10 cfs) [a] The replacement Halligan Dam will include an outlet works with a maximum capacity of 800 cfs; therefore, the maximum release flow is 800 cfs if the reservoir is not full. [b] The “starting discharge rate” is the discharge rate from the outlet works before any decrease in flow. The following are example descriptions of how the ramping rate limitations will be implemented for decreasing discharge rates resulting from Fort Collins’ operation of its portion of the enlarged Halligan Reservoir: • Example 1: Decreasing discharge rate from 800 cfs to 50 cfs (for example, after the Peak Flow Bypass Program)–The discharges from the enlarged Halligan Reservoir will decrease or be “ramped down” at a rate of 10 percent of 800 cfs per hour (cfs/hour) (80 cfs/hour), until a discharge rate of EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 432 Item 15. approximately 200 cfs is reached. This will be accomplished by managing how Fort Collins diverts water into storage in the enlarged Halligan Reservoir. At that point, a “reset” will occur and discharges from the reservoir will continue to decrease or “ramp down” at a maximum rate of 10 percent of 200 cfs (20 cfs/hour). As the discharges continue to decrease, another reset will occur at 100 cfs, and the discharge rate will decrease or be ramped down at a maximum of 10 percent of 100 cfs (10 cfs/hour) until the final discharge rate is reached (50 cfs). The total duration of this ramping event will be approximately 18 hours. • Example 2: Decreasing discharge rate from 90 cfs to 5 cfs–The releases from Halligan Reservoir will decrease or be ramped down at a rate of 10 percent of 90 cfs per hour (9 cfs/hour) until the final discharge rate is reached. Again, this will be accomplished by managing how Fort Collins diverts water into storage in the enlarged Halligan Reservoir and how Fort Collins is making releases of water it previously stored in its portion of an enlarged Halligan Reservoir. The total duration of this ramping event will be approximately 10 hours. Ramping Rate Limitations to Increasing Discharge Rates–The limitations to increasing discharge rates is intended to protect fish that could be swept downstream and to lower the risk to people recreating on the North Fork who could be exposed to rapid water level rises without the limitation in place. According to the ramping rate limitations for increasing discharge rates, Fort Collins will limit changes to the rate at which reservoir discharges increase resulting from Fort Collins’ operation of its portion of the enlarged Halligan Reservoir. Increasing discharge rates from the reservoir will be evenly distributed over a 4-hour period to more closely match hydrographic data above Halligan Reservoir and other unmanaged systems with similar precipitation and runoff regimes. The following is an example description of how the ramping rate limitations will be implemented for increasing discharge rates resulting from Fort Collins’ operation of its portion of the enlarged Halligan Reservoir: • Example: Increasing discharge rate from 5 cfs to 100 cfs–The discharges from Halligan Reservoir will be increased or ramped up at a rate that is evenly distributed over a 4-hour period. In this case, the releases from the reservoir will be increased at 24 cfs/hour. Exclusions to the Ramping Rate Limitations The ramping rate limitations will not apply to water that is naturally spilling over the spillway of Halligan Dam because Fort Collins cannot control this amount of flow. Likewise, the ramping rate limitations will not apply to NPIC’s diversion, storage, and releases of water in its portion of the enlarged Halligan Reservoir. NPIC can, and likely will, continue to operate its portion of the enlarged Halligan Reservoir as it does currently. Nevertheless, after construction of the Halligan Project, Fort Collins will attempt to reach an operational agreement with NPIC to operate all diversions to and releases from the enlarged Halligan Reservoir (both Fort Collins and NPIC’s) to meet the ramping rate limitations (Section 5.1.1.5). The NPIC has indicated a preference to wait until after the enlarged Halligan Reservoir has been operational for a few years before considering such an agreement. Occasionally, Fort Collins may be required by others or by maintenance exercises to deviate from the ramping rate limitations. Two such example scenarios when the ramping rate limitations might not be implemented are described as follows: • DWR currently allows some flexibility in water rights administration that would allow ramping rates to occur at times when Fort Collins does not have the right to store water (DWR 2016). However, if DWR guidance changes in the future, Fort Collins could be directed to cease diverting water into its EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 433 Item 15. portion of the enlarged Halligan Reservoir for water rights administration or other reasons. To the extent legal Fort Collins will ramp diversions as described in this plan. • Consistent with best practices, Fort Collins annually exercises the outlet valves to ensure full range of operation. These activities will likely occur annually during the spring runoff when water is spilling over the spillway. In these instances, the valves will be fully opened for several minutes and then reduced back to the operational level. Curtailment of the Ramping Rate Limitations The ramping rate limitations apply only to discharges affected by Fort Collins’ operation of its portion of the enlarged Halligan Reservoir and not to changes in the discharge rate from other factors. The ramping rate limitations will not be operated during emergency situations, maintenance occurrences, and when water restrictions are in place for Fort Collins’ water customers, as described further in Section 4.2.1.7. As discussed above in “Exclusions to the Ramping Rate Limitations,” the ramping rate limitations may also be curtailed as required by the Division of Water Resources in its administration of water rights and regulation of Halligan Dam safety. 4.2.1.5 Peak Flow Bypass Program Fort Collins will forgo all diversions into its portion of the enlarged Halligan Reservoir for 3 days coinciding as closely as practicable with the annual forecasted peak (runoff) flow event for the North Fork. The ramping rate limitations (Section 4.2.1.4) will be implemented on both sides of this 3-day Peak Flow Bypass Program, extending the bypass beyond 3 days. The Peak Flow Bypass Program would take effect as soon as the new Halligan Dam has been approved store water by DWR. The Peak Flow Bypass Program will avoid and minimize impacts on the aquatic ecosystem from the Halligan Project by maintaining some of the historical, pre-enlargement peak flows past the enlarged Halligan Reservoir. The Peak Flow Bypass Program will allow 3 days (in addition to ramping) of peak flows during times when Fort Collins could be diverting water into storage in the enlarged Halligan Reservoir. This Peak Flow Bypass Program is intended to mimic a natural, pre-enlargement stream flow for this 3-day period to support riverine and ecological processes in the North Fork, such as the following: • Providing phenological cues to aquatic and riparian organisms for emergence of aquatic insects, spawning, the timing of flowering, and seed dispersal • Facilitating natural seasonal sediment transport, channel shaping, and channel scour • Recruiting and transporting woody debris and other organic materials • Providing overbank flooding to maintain wetland and riparian habitat function, including seed transport and propagation of native cottonwood and willow species, sediment transport, formation and maintenance of aquatic habitat, and riparian area diversity and structure Operation of the Peak Flow Bypass Program Fort Collins will monitor the stream gage installed above the enlarged Halligan Reservoir (United States Geological Survey gage 06751145 on the North Fork), along with snowpack levels and weather conditions, to estimate when a peak flow of runoff above the enlarged Halligan Reservoir will occur. When the forecast peak flow has been estimated to within a few days, Fort Collins will forgo diverting water into storage into its portion of the enlarged Halligan Reservoir for 3 consecutive days. The ramping rate limitations described in Section 4.2.1 will be implemented on both the increasing and EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 434 Item 15. decreasing of flows for the 3-day bypass. The replacement Halligan Dam will include an outlet works with a maximum capacity of 800 cfs, which will allow operational passing of the full magnitude of the incoming peak flow via the outlet works, spillway, or a combination of each, in most years. Operation of the Peak Flow Bypass Program will be limited to the snowpack-driven annual peak, which typically occurs during runoff between mid-May to early June (Natural Resources Conservation Service [NRCS] n.d.). Fort Collins will notify CPW in advance of the estimated peak flow bypass each year. If the annual peak flow above Halligan Reservoir occurs when NPIC is filling its portion of the enlarged Halligan Reservoir, Fort Collins will wait to operate the Peak Flow Bypass Program until directly after NPIC fills its portion (that is, Fort Collins will bypass flows for 3 days, plus the ramping rate limitations on both increasing and decreasing bypass flows, before starting to fill its portion of the enlarged Halligan Reservoir). Conditions may be such that Fort Collins will be able to divert water to storage in its portion of the enlarged Halligan Reservoir before the peak flow occurs. In this scenario, Fort Collins will temporarily cease filling its portion of the enlarged reservoir during the estimated 3-day peak flow bypass period. Circumstances may exist when, in consultation with CPW, Fort Collins will deviate slightly from the Peak Flow Bypass Program described herein, provided that any such modifications will not affect Fort Collins’ storage and yield from the enlarged Halligan Reservoir and are consistent with all applicable permits and approvals, agreements, and decrees. These potential deviations could include changes to the timing or quantity of flow to manage sediment buildup in Halligan Reservoir following a wildfire event; changes to the timing or quantity of flow in a wet year to minimize predicted excessive spilling over the Halligan Dam; other modifications of timing, duration, and quantity of flow needed for emergency response; periodic maintenance; or for the benefit of the aquatic environment as determined in coordination with CPW. Limitations of the Peak Flow Bypass Program Fort Collins will not have any dominion or control over the bypassed water because it will not have been previously diverted or stored by Fort Collins. Therefore, as occurred historically, the peak flows will be available for diversion by NPIC at the North Poudre Canal Diversion or by Greeley at Seaman Reservoir under their respective water rights. Fort Collins understands that NPIC currently has rights to divert up to approximately 350 cfs at the North Poudre Canal Diversion, although current infrastructure may limit diversions to less than approximately 200 cfs.17 Peak flows greater than the amount that NPIC can legally and physically divert at the North Poudre Canal Diversion will flow past the North Poudre Canal Diversion. Because estimating peak flow can be difficult given unpredictable weather conditions beyond Fort Collins’ control (for example, hot, dry, or windy conditions that quickly evaporate snowpack; cool or wet conditions that create gradual runoff with no distinct peak; or unpredictable rain on snow events), the actual peak flow above the enlarged Halligan Reservoir might not be the same as the predicted peak flow used for this program. If in a particular year the peak flow is difficult to estimate given unpredictable or changing weather conditions, and is accidentally missed, the incoming flows will be passed through the enlarged Halligan Reservoir as soon as this condition is identified. If the peak flow bypass is operated prematurely, Fort Collins will not operate the Peak Flow Bypass Program again that year. To minimize these circumstances, Fort Collins will monitor its Peak Flow Bypass Program actions each year to evaluate how closely the estimated and bypassed peak coincides with the actual peak that 17 Design criteria for reconstruction of the North Poudre Canal Diversion as part of the Halligan Project are expected to support diversions of 350 cfs. EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 435 Item 15. occurred in a given year. This annual review will provide information to optimize the Peak Flow Bypass Program operations over time. If for some reason Fort Collins does not accurately anticipate the peak flow, Fort Collins will consult with CPW or other parties on methods to improve its forecasting of peak flows on the North Fork, which will be paid for by Fort Collins. Curtailment of the Peak Flow Bypass Program The Peak Flow Bypass Program will not be operated during emergency situations, maintenance occurrences, and when water restrictions are in place for Fort Collins’ water customers, as described further in Section 4.2.1.7. 4.2.1.6 End of Summer Flushing Event An end of summer flushing event (flushing event) will be conducted following fall turnover of Halligan Reservoir each year that a turnover event occurs (turnover is anticipated to occur in all years of normal Halligan Project operations) to address potential iron coatings on river materials. The first flushing event would occur after the new Halligan Dam has been approved to store water by DWR and Fort Collins’ portion of the reservoir has filled and there has been a reservoir turnover, as described above. The flushing event would be a release of a maximum of 30 acre-feet of water from Fort Collins’ water in the Halligan Reservoir Enlargement to the North Fork over a short time duration. In years when releases occur for other reasons (for example, NPIC releases) that yield similar flow rates/durations following turnover, these flushing event releases by Fort Collins would not be needed and would not occur. Like other flow-related operational measures (Section 4.2.1), the flushing event will not be operated during emergency situations, maintenance occurrences, and when water restrictions are in place for Fort Collins’ water customers as discussed in Section 4.2.1.7. The intention of the flushing event would be to flush seasonal iron deposition (if it occurs) from sediment surfaces below the dam to minimize the potential adverse effects of such deposition, which is most likely to occur in late summer, if it were to occur. The goal is to release a maximum of 30 acre-feet of water at the lowest discharge rate from the outlet of the enlarged Halligan Reservoir that is practicable to successfully mobilize the iron deposits. Targeting lower effective flow rates is desirable to avoid unintended adverse consequences on small-bodied fish and inadvertent sediment release. For example, a possible release schedule would be to release about 80 cfs for 4 hours. To avoid unintended adverse effects on small-bodied native fish and sediment, Fort Collins will seek CPW input regarding the planned rate, ramping, and timing of the release each year. Fort Collins would also monitor iron and habitat conditions immediately below the enlarged reservoir for 5 years to determine if this flushing event is effective and/or necessary. This monitoring will consist of visual checks for iron deposition on sediment in the vicinity of the NBH sampling station (and photographic records of any observed deposition) as well as continued sampling at NBH for dissolved and total iron. However, if it is determined at the end of the first five flushing events (in consultation with CPW) that this operation is no longer needed, then the releases and special monitoring (observations of iron deposition) will end. 4.2.1.7 Water Supply Shortage Events and Curtailment of Measures To balance the protection of fish and wildlife that benefit from the flow-related operational measures described in Chapter 4, with the health and safety of the customers who rely on Fort Collins to provide high-quality, reliable drinking water, the flow-related operational measures described Sections 4.2.1 and 5.1.1.1 can be curtailed during certain instances that threaten Fort Collins’ ability to provide that water. Curtailment can occur during emergency situations, maintenance occurrences, and when water restrictions are in place for Fort Collins’ water customers, as described below. When appropriate in EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 436 Item 15. limited instances like planned maintenance, Fort Collins will notify CPW of curtailment events to consider potential timing to limit impacts on aquatic resources. Emergency Situations Curtailment of the flow-related operational measures described in Chapter 4 can occur, at Fort Collins’ discretion, during emergency situations, such as flooding, wildfires, infrastructure failures or other limitations, or other instances that threaten the ability of Fort Collins to deliver high-quality drinking water safely to its customers. The frequency of anticipated curtailment for emergency situations is difficult to define because these situations are outside of Fort Collins’ control. However, over the past 20 years, temporary curtailment due to an emergency likely would have occurred only for approximately 2 months coinciding with the 2012 High Park Fire. In contrast, certain emergency situations likely will not require curtailment of the flow-related operational measures described above. For example, the 2020–2021 Cameron Peak Fire and associated water use restrictions likely would not have required curtailment of Fort Collins’ operations of its portion of the enlarged Halligan Reservoir because of the time of year that it occurred. Curtailment of the measures due to emergencies is anticipated to be infrequent and short in duration. Maintenance Occurrences Curtailment of the flow-related operational measures described in Chapter 4 can occur, at Fort Collins’s discretion, during maintenance events such as inspections, repairs, or planned maintenance of the Halligan Dam infrastructure and related appurtenances. The number and extent of these occurrences will generally be minimized by advanced planning, including consultation with CPW to limit impacts on wildlife if any operational or mitigation commitments need to be modified. Maintenance activities will inherently be short in duration because they will likely disrupt Fort Collins’ and NPIC’s ability to deliver water to their customers and shareholders. Therefore, curtailment that occurs because of maintenance activities is also anticipated to be infrequent and short in duration. In addition, for non-emergency maintenance activities, the ramping rates limitations (Section 4.2.1.4) will be implemented. Watering Restrictions Curtailment of the flow-related operational measures could occur, at Fort Collins’ discretion, during periods when a water shortage is projected and Fort Collins’ water customers are required to restrict their landscape watering through mandatory water restrictions to 2 days a week or fewer. This would balance the benefits provided to the aquatic environment from the flow-related operational measures, with the ability to reliably provide water to Fort Collins’ customers. Such curtailment corresponding with customers limiting landscape watering to 2 days per week or fewer is consistent with the Level 1 action level described in the Water Shortage Action Plan (City of Fort Collins 2020b). Although changes to future Fort Collins policy may influence changes to future mandatory water restriction levels, curtailment of the flow-related operational measures described previously will be independent of those future planning criteria and will instead be tied to the restrictions currently associated with a Level 1 action level in the 2020 plan (City of Fort Collins 2020b). For example, if future planning incorporates a new description of a Level 1 water restriction that is 3 days per week, curtailment of the flow-related operational measures will occur only when water restrictions limit watering to 2 days per week or fewer. The Winter Release Plan would continue to operate through restriction levels that allow lawn watering but may be curtailed when customers are not allowed to water lawns, which is currently Level 3 of the Water Shortage Action Plan. EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 437 Item 15. The water needs of Fort Collins and its customers have and will continue to change over time due to impacts from climate change, continued conservation, economics, and other factors. Fort Collins is currently working on future water resources and demand planning and modeling that will consider these potential factors and the impacts to its water system. Fort Collins is committed to incorporating this planning and modeling data about the potential of operations that will include continuing the Summer Low-flow Plan even during greater water restriction levels. If appropriate and approved by the City Council, Fort Collins will incorporate into future policies that the Summer Low-flow Plan operations continue at some level even during greater water restriction levels (particularly during restriction levels that allow lawn watering). Fort Collins will coordinate with CPW on potential changes to these curtailment measures. The frequency of such curtailment is expected to depend primarily on the occurrence of drought in the region. Common technical platform (CDM and DiNatale 2013) modeling indicates that mandatory restrictions will be required infrequently (mandatory restrictions occurred twice in an 86-year modeling period). Fort Collins’ actual adoption of mandatory restrictions also occurs infrequently; recent information indicates that mandatory restrictions have been required about once every 7 to 10 years (three times in the last 20 years) and ranged in duration from 2 to 18 months. The voluntary watch level of restrictions implemented by Fort Collins in summer 2021 to address uncertainty about the availability and quality of Poudre River source water following the 2020 Cameron Peak Fire, likely would not have resulted in a curtailment of the flow-related operational measures. 4.2.1.8 Combined Environmental Effects of Flow-related Operational Measures Overall, the Halligan Project and proposed ramping rate strategy discussed in this FWMEP include operational flow measures and peak flow bypass that will minimize negative effects of current Halligan Reservoir operations, including dry-up conditions and current significant temperature fluctuations below Halligan Reservoir dam (thermal shock). The operational flow measures will allow both perennial flows and peak flows. The peak flows are needed to help maintain a more natural stream morphology and overbank connectivity. These measures have been designed to collectively improve connectivity and function to portions of the North Fork below the enlarged Halligan Reservoir that currently have little to no flow during certain times of the year. The measures will provide perennial flows, minimize abrupt changes in flows resulting from operations of the enlarged Halligan Reservoir, and maintain flows that help support critical stream functions. Numerous analyses have been conducted to evaluate the potential effects of the Halligan Project on the North Fork and its associated aquatic and biological communities, including but not limited to analysis of flows and aquatic habitat availability under various flow scenarios (GEI 2016, 2018; Miller 2017; WEST 2017a, 2017b; City of Fort Collins 2017; Pioneer 2016a, 2016b, 2017b). The analyses show that implementing the minimization measures is anticipated to have an overall (net) benefit to North Fork aquatic resources, including increased ecological function of the stream system and associated riparian zone of the North Fork. The minimization measures include the following: •Combination of the Winter Release Plan and the Summer Low-flow Plan - Eliminate nearly all zero- flow days on the North Fork between the enlarged the Halligan Reservoir and Seaman Reservoir and restore continuous flow to approximately 5.8 to 12.118 acres of riffle and pool complex area (Corps 2019). The combined Winter Release Plan and Summer Low-flow Plan will improve the transport of nutrients, organic material, and native seed through the stream system while also providing a net increase of at least 2.3 acres of riffle and pool habitat (the difference between the 18 Varying calculations have been used to determine the area of restored riffle pool complexes downstream of the North Poudre Canal Diversion (Reach NF4, also known as Segment 2a). The larger area considers the entire length of NF4, and the smaller area considers only the 1.9-mile segment of NF4 above the North Poudre Canal return flow (refer to Corps, 2019 for more information). EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 438 Item 15. minimum 5.8-acre gain and 3.5-acre loss because of inundation), in the stretch of the North Fork between the enlarged Halligan Reservoir and Seaman Reservoir. The Summer Low-flow Plan will also provide a stream temperature benefit on the North Fork during the lowest summer flow rates, which often correspond to the times of current stream temperature standard exceedances (especially July through September). Further, the Modified Summer Release Plan will extend some of the avoidance benefits of the Summer Low-flow Plan to Segment 10a of the Main Stem. •Ramping Rate Limitations - Limit abrupt changes to discharges resulting from Fort Collins’ operation of its portion of the enlarged Halligan Reservoir to minimize the potential for stranding or flushing of small-bodied native fish and rainbow trout and to more closely mimic natural changes to the hydrography. •Peak Flow Bypass Program - Allow for a period of high flows to pass the enlarged Halligan Reservoir to provide important functions for the maintenance of aquatic and riparian habitats, including those discussed in Section 4.2.1.5. In whole, the flow-related operational measures described in this section (in addition to other measures described in Sections 4 and 5 of this FWMEP), could minimize impacts from the Halligan Project to current conditions in the North Fork below Halligan Reservoir and may provide some beneficial and long-term improvements (“functional lift”) to the aquatic resources when compared to existing conditions. To quantify and assess the functional lift and long-term benefits of the Project at this time and into the future is difficult without an in-depth analysis of current and future conditions and a project monitoring plan. 4.2.2 Infrastructure Design Measures Numerous aspects of the design of the replacement Halligan Dam and associated Project infrastructure provide opportunities to improve current operations for environmental benefit, avoid and minimize Project impacts, and allow mitigation measures such as the flow- and sediment-related operational measures described in this FWMEP. One key measure incorporated into the design of the outlet works is inclusion of a two-outlet system, a primary and an auxiliary outlet. A series of gates will be located at the intake on the upstream side of the replacement Halligan Dam and at the valve house located on the downstream side of the dam. This design ensures redundancy in operational function and will allow the gates to be closed from multiple locations in the event one gate becomes inoperable, particularly in an emergency. Gate redundancy also allows for maintenance work, structural inspections, or emergency work at the replacement Halligan Dam or outlet works to be conducted without drawing down the reservoir pool elevation. Although this design was not developed specifically as a Project mitigation measure, it is a key improvement over the existing dam that will avoid potential sediment releases associated with drawing down the reservoir for regular inspections and maintenance. 4.2.2.1 Multilevel Outlet Structure A multilevel outlet works (MLOW) for Halligan Reservoir that would allow water to be released from one or more elevation higher than the bottom has been discussed since the CMP was put forth in the DEIS. An MLOW is a tool that can, in some cases, allow for beneficial additional management controls on the quality of water released from a reservoir, particularly at times of stratification. At this time, however, an MLOW is not expected to be necessary from the perspective of aquatic life mitigation efforts. Therefore, based on CPW comment, the MLOW is not a commitment in the FWMEP, but the need for an MLOW may be revisited through the CWA Section 401 water quality certification process. During the 401 Certification process modeling and analysis findings will be reviewed to assess whether such a structure would provide effective and practical water-quality management options for mitigating EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 439 Item 15. anticipated Project water-quality impacts. Currently anticipated decision factors regarding “effective and practical water-quality management options” include consideration of reservoir stratification, concentration gradients, operations, and net benefit to aquatic resources. For example, model results will be evaluated to determine whether operational flexibility to release water from the epilimnion in summer months will provide adequate water quality benefit when weighed against any additional stress on aquatic life because of the release of warmer water from the top of the reservoir. CWA Section 401 water quality certification model findings will be shared, and CPW and CDPHE will be consulted on this decision, as part of the CWA Section 401 water quality certification process. 4.2.2.2 Outlet Conduit Sizing To allow for the peak flow bypass mitigation measure (Section 4.2.1.5), Fort Collins incorporated an enlarged outlet conduit, which is larger than necessary to meet demand-based releases. The enlarged outlet will be constructed to release up to 800 cfs. Streamflow gage measurements and Project modeling indicate inflows into Halligan Reservoir rarely get above 800 cfs, with only 0.46 percent of days being higher and most of these days the enlarged reservoir will be full and spilling. 4.2.3 Construction-related Measures Fort Collins will implement multiple measures to avoid and minimize impacts on fish and wildlife related to construction of the Halligan Project. 4.2.3.1 Big Game Interference Minimization Fort Collins aims to avoid and minimize the Halligan Project’s potential impacts on wildlife within the Halligan Project Area when feasible. Figure 4-3 shows an elk herd foraging in the Livermore area. The Halligan Project includes many construction- related measures designed to avoid and minimize impacts on big game, including the following measures that are described elsewhere in this report: • Construction scheduling to ensure efficient Project delivery, to limit temporal impacts and number of seasons during which habitat is disturbed (Section 4.2.3.13) • Construction carpooling (Section 4.2.3.11) • Management of fugitive dust during construction (Section 4.2.3.7) • Minimizing construction disturbance areas and the number and footprint of construction access roads (Sections 4.2.3.9, 4.2.3.10, and 4.2.3.14) • Reclamation and revegetation of temporarily disturbed areas (Section 4.2.3.9) • Implementation of a noxious and invasive weed management plan for construction and reclamation activities (Section 4.2.3.15) Compensatory mitigation and enhancement measures specific to bighorn sheep are described in Sections 4.3.3 and 5.2.3. Figure 4-3. Foraging Elk Herd Source: CPW EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 440 Item 15. 4.2.3.2 Preconstruction Botanical Surveys Previous botanical surveys have not located Ute ladies’-tresses orchid (Figure 4-4) in the area of Halligan Reservoir (WEST 2016b; Jacobs 2021). To further minimize the possibility of Project impacts on this federally threatened plant, botanical surveys will be conducted at a minimum of a year before construction. Surveys will focus on areas that will likely be disturbed by the Halligan Project and that could support the orchid, and be performed during the growing season (July and August). Results of preconstruction surveys will be submitted to USFWS as required by the ESA; CPW will be provided a courtesy copy of results. If Ute ladies’-tresses orchid is found during preconstruction surveys, Fort Collins will develop a plan to avoid the plants and the habitat or remove and relocate the plants before construction disturbance. 4.2.3.3 Preconstruction Bat Surveys Visual and auditory detection surveys for bats (Figure 4-5) were conducted in the area of Halligan Dam and up to 0.5 mile downstream of Halligan Dam in 2021 (Jacobs 2021). Several lone bats were detected during the surveys, but no large concentrations of bats were identified. The scattered occurrence of lone bat detections suggests that the area below Halligan Dam is used for foraging, but evidence of a bat colony or identification of roosting locations was not observed during this brief presence/absence survey. To minimize the possibility of Project impacts on bats, additional surveys are warranted, including a survey for roosting sites near the dam. This additional bat survey work will be conducted in the year before construction commences for the Halligan Project. Surveys will focus on areas that will likely be disturbed by Halligan Project construction activities. If surveys indicate the presence of an active bat roost near the Halligan Dam, Fort Collins will consult with CPW on appropriate mitigation measures. Figure 4-4. Ute Ladies’-tresses Orchid Source: P. Hickey Figure 4-5. Townsend’s Big-Eared Bat Source: CPW EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 441 Item 15. 4.2.3.4 Migratory Bird and Raptors Surveys Nest surveys were conducted in the area of Halligan Dam and along access roads in 2021 (Jacobs 2021). Additional monitoring for migratory birds and raptors will be performed every other year before construction, the year before the start of construction, and annually during construction with a focus on areas of suitable habitat within planned or proposed disturbance areas in the immediate Halligan Project Area. Before and during construction activities, Fort Collins may use bird nesting deterrents during nesting season to reduce the risk of nesting activities during construction. Deterrent measures may include modifying or removing attractive nesting habitat (for example, trees, shrubs, tall grass) within potential disturbance areas during inactive periods to reduce the potential for construction- related impacts during active nesting periods. Before Project implementation, Fort Collins will provide CPW an opportunity to review and comment on Project specifications related to migratory bird and raptor nesting avoidance and minimization. If eagle or other raptor nests are identified, Fort Collins will consult with CPW and their buffer guidelines for nesting raptors to determine measures to minimize the potential adverse impacts of the construction activity. If avoidance and minimization techniques are unsuccessful and a taking is necessary, Fort Collins will follow any applicable permit and mitigation requirements at the time of the taking. 4.2.3.5 Raptor Nesting or Roosting Platforms Fort Collins will include nesting or roosting platforms (Figure 4-6) near Halligan Reservoir to encourage eagles and other raptors, such as osprey, to use the reservoir. The platforms will also minimize any temporary loss of perching locations from the inundation of shoreline trees while new shoreline habitat becomes established. The final design and location of nesting or roosting platforms will be developed in coordination with CPW. The nesting or roosting platforms will be installed as part of the project construction. At this time the exacting timing is not known. However, the nesting or roosting platforms will be installed before inundation of the enlarged Halligan Reservoir begins. 4.2.3.6 Stormwater Management Plan Fort Collins will develop a stormwater management plan in compliance with local and state requirements and as required by the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System, Construction General Permit, COR400000, before construction, which will include all necessary stormwater management controls and best practices, temporary sediment and erosion control during construction, and medium-term sediment and erosion control during vegetation re-establishment. Targeted planning and successful execution of the stormwater management plan will reduce the potential for water quality degradation of the North Fork and its associated aquatic ecosystem. Additionally, a non-stormwater discharge permit and monitoring plan will be prepared, if required, before the start of construction. 4.2.3.7 Best Management Practices Fort Collins proposes to employ standard construction BMPs (also called control measures) typically included in federal, state, and local permit requirements to reduce potential construction-related impacts on upland and aquatic habitats, fish, and water quality. BMPs will be implemented at Project Figure 4-6. Raptor Nesting Platform in Laporte, Colorado Source: Colorado Department of Transportation EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 442 Item 15. construction areas, including dam construction and staging/stockpile areas, along access roads, the North Poudre Canal Diversion structure, and mitigation or enhancement sites that involve Fort Collins- led construction. At a minimum, standard dust and erosion control measures, sediment control measures, aquatic nuisance species measures, and the application of non-stormwater-related control measures will be implemented. The following sections list and briefly describe some of the BMPs that may be implemented during construction to control erosion and sedimentation. Additional measures may be incorporated if those described differ from permit conditions defined in the CWA Section 401 water quality certification and CWA Section 404 permit, or if site conditions warrant them. Erosion Control Measures Erosion control or soil stabilization includes measures that are designed to prevent soil particles from detaching and becoming transported in stormwater runoff. Erosion control BMPs protect the soil surface by covering and/or binding soil particles. The following practices will be implemented to provide temporary and/or final erosion control during construction: • Preserve existing vegetation where practicable • Control the area of soil-disturbing operations to the extent practicable to limits shown on plans • Control erosion in concentrated flow paths by applying erosion control blankets, check dams, erosion control seeding, or alternate methods • Apply permanent erosion control to the remaining disturbed soil areas before the completion of construction The following temporary erosion control BMPs may be implemented to control erosion on the construction site: • Preservation of existing vegetation, when practicable, through barrier fencing • Hydraulic mulching or hydroseeding of disturbed areas, and reseeding and revegetating with native vegetation following construction • Application of soil binders to aid in minimizing wind and rain erosion • Covering of soil stockpiles, exposed areas, or inactive areas with geotextiles, mats, soil binders, or linear erosion controls to prevent erosion from wind or rain events • Earthen berms, drainage swales, or slope drains constructed to direct stormwater away from disturbed areas • Velocity dissipation and/or streambank stabilization measures to prevent scour in discharge areas • Soil roughening to minimize erosion and allow for moisture retention and aid in seed germination and vegetative growth • Soil stabilization measures such as wood chips, rip rap, rock, or gravel to stabilize soil and prevent erosion EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 443 Item 15. Sediment Control Measures The following temporary sediment control BMPs may be implemented to control sediment on the construction site: • A silt fence, wattle, fiber roll, gravel bags, or other type of perimeter control may be installed around the limits of construction • Sediment basins and/or traps will be used to remove sediment before releasing water back to the river or reservoir at a controlled rate • Check dams constructed of fiber roll, gravel bags, or rock may be used in combination with swales to control velocity of flows through the swales • Passive treatment may be used to allow settlement of suspended sediment and potential passive treatment through a media filter, before discharge • Measures may be installed on roads and at construction exit points to reduce sediment track-out by construction vehicles and equipment, including water bars, rock material, and reusable rockless track-out control mats • Stabilized construction roads may be constructed through the site to minimize dust and erosion and help contain vehicle traffic to designated drive areas Dust Suppression Measures A plan for controlling fugitive dust will be developed and implemented to minimize fugitive construction dust generated from the use of access roads and construction areas. Water and/or EPA-approved drinking water and wildlife-safe dust palliatives will be used to stabilize construction roadways, reduce fugitive dust emissions, and control and suppress dust in construction and access road areas. To reduce the potential for wildlife conflicts on construction roads, magnesium chloride will not be used because it can attract big game, such as bighorn sheep. Non-stormwater Controls and Waste and Materials Management The following non-stormwater control BMPs may be implemented to control sediment on the construction site: • Water conservation practices will be used during construction in a manner that avoids causing erosion and the transport of pollutants offsite. • Dewatering operations related to water captured from construction areas will comply with applicable local and Project-specific permits and regulations. Water from dewatering operations will meet all discharge requirements and water quality certification before water is allowed to leave the site. • Temporary stream crossings will be constructed to prevent construction equipment from tracking sediment and other pollutants into the stream. Temporary stream crossings will be constructed in a way to minimize impacts on stream banks and stream bottom substrate. It may be necessary to install blankets between the existing substrate and temporary fill or to use clean gravel material to construct a crossing. • Clear water diversions will be used to intercept clear surface water runoff upstream of the construction area and transport it around the work area to a discharge location downstream with minimal water quality degradation. Clear water diversions used may include diversion ditches, EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 444 Item 15. berms, slope drains, K-rails, rock bags, gravel bags, sandbags, wood, geotextile and rubber bladders, earthen cofferdams, filter fabric, turbidity curtains, swales, pipes, or flumes along with numerous proprietary designs. The selection of which diversion or isolation technique to use will depend upon the type of work involved, physical characteristics of the site, and the volume of water flowing through the Halligan Project during each construction milestone. • Washing of construction vehicles and equipment onsite will be done in a manner that captures wash water, not allowing it to discharge to Halligan Reservoir or the North Fork. Containment of wash water will minimize any potential release of contaminated wash water. • To prevent the potential spread of invasive aquatic species in Halligan Reservoir, the North Fork, or the Main Stem, contractors will follow State of Colorado requirements for inspections and decontamination. If heavy equipment used for the Halligan Project was previously used in another stream, river, lake, pond, or wetland, a specific procedure will be implemented to ensure that all mud and debris is removed from equipment prior to entering the construction site (for example, tracks, turrets, buckets, drags, teeth). Additional discussion of aquatic nuisance species and decontamination to avoid their spread is in Section 4.2.3.16. • Fueling activities will be done by a mobile fueling service within the specified fueling areas for the construction site, which will be located away from wetlands, drainages, and riparian areas which are also associated with higher quality wildlife habitat for a variety of species. • Construction vehicle maintenance and repair will be conducted in an area with minimal potential to discharge to receiving waters. Repairs may be conducted in the active construction areas, if necessary, but soil in the area will be protected before any maintenance work. Contamination of stormwater or construction water during the concrete curing process will be prevented. Weather will be monitored before concrete pours to avoid potential rain events that may wash fresh concrete into waterways. Proper perimeter controls and washout procedures will be used during the concrete finishing process. For example, chemical curing or wet blanket or similar method will be used that maintains moisture while minimizing the discharge. • Chemicals and waste material will be stored properly to avoid non-stormwater discharge. • Construction operations will occur near Halligan Reservoir and the North Fork. Therefore, care with materials and equipment will be observed to ensure that equipment and/or materials do not enter these waters. • Demolition of existing structures will occur near Halligan Reservoir and the North Fork. Care with trash and equipment will be observed to avoid and minimize potential for demolished materials to enter these waters. • Because of the remote location and need for concrete processing, a temporary batch plant will be placed onsite for concrete activities. The plant will be contained to minimize the release of any pollutants. Perimeter controls will be placed around the batch plant, and raw materials will be stored in a manner to minimize the release of materials from rain or wind events. • If a temporary aggregate plant is needed, water used in the processing of aggregates will be stored in ponds and recycled. Ponds will also capture sediments from stockpiles. Pond levels will be managed so that they do not result in non-stormwater discharge. Stormwater run-on will be minimized and diverted around the aggregate processing area. EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 445 Item 15. Materials Management and Waste Management Materials management control practices include implementing procedural and structural BMPs for handling, storing, and using construction materials to prevent the release of those materials into stormwater discharges. The amount and type of construction materials to be used at the site and waste materials generated will be identified as the site development plan progresses. Waste management includes implementing procedural and structural BMPs for handling, storing, and ensuring proper disposal of wastes to prevent the release of those wastes into waterways. Materials and waste management pollution control BMPs will be implemented to minimize stormwater contact with construction materials and wastes and to prevent materials and wastes from being discharged offsite. The following BMPs may be implemented to handle materials and control construction site wastes associated with construction activities: • Materials will be stored at designated areas and in a manner that prevents the release of pollutants, such as metals, chemicals, or organic matter. • Workers on the site will be informed about the materials stored onsite and their various health and safety properties. Procedures for improving the effectiveness of material use while lowering inherent environmental risks will be developed and implemented. • Stockpiles will be located in an area where environmental impacts are minimized. Perimeter controls will be put in place to prevent the migration of stockpiled materials. Stockpiles will be stabilized for wind and covered if rainfall is anticipated. • Plans and/or practices will be developed and implemented specific to the following: – Spill prevention – Materials handling – Solid waste management – Hazardous waste management – Contaminated soil management – Concrete waste management – Sanitary waste management – Liquid waste management – Revegetation plan  CPW will have an opportunity to review and comment on the revegetation plan. 4.2.3.8 Existing Dam for Construction Sediment Control Leaving the original dam in place during construction to act as a coffer dam provides strong control of sediment to allow for avoidance of an inadvertent major release of sediment during construction. The existing dam will continue to function normally during the entire time the replacement dam is being constructed; therefore, drawdown of the reservoir will not be necessary during construction. Once the replacement dam is complete, Fort Collins anticipates that a coffer dam will be put in place around the existing dam during the brief (a few months or less) demolition period. Fort Collins is exploring whether to fully or partially remove the existing dam. The determination of full versus partial demolition will consider demolition methods and their potential direct and indirect resource impacts. If full demolition is not pursued, certain elements of the existing dam may be retained following construction of the replacement Halligan Dam and would generally be submerged following filling of the enlarged reservoir. Design of the existing dam elements, if retained, would incorporate features to maintain reservoir mixing and avoid or minimize potential impacts on water quality, such as notching the existing dam to EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 446 Item 15. the reservoir bottom and removing the upper portion of the existing dam. At this time, details on the extent, methods, and impacts related to dam demolition are not known. Fort Collins will consult with CPW as needed on the dam demolition. 4.2.3.9 Construction Disturbance Minimization and Reclamation Fort Collins will reclaim temporarily disturbed areas following construction completion. Materials stockpile and borrow areas created on Fort Collins’ property may be left in place for long-term operations and maintenance of the enlarged Halligan Reservoir. Reclaiming disturbed areas to their current condition will reduce the permanent footprint of the Halligan Project and reduce the potential for long-term ecological degradation. Revegetation and monitoring is described in Sections 4.2.3.7 and 4.2.3.15. 4.2.3.10 Access Road Minimization and Reclamation To construct the Halligan Project, and to implement some of the mitigation measures described herein, construction equipment access to the site features will be required. Access roads are shown in the detailed Project Area maps presented in Appendix A. To minimize disturbance to local residents, wildlife, and undisturbed lands, Fort Collins proposes using existing roads whenever possible. To accommodate larger vehicles and equipment necessary to construct the Halligan Project, existing roads will require some or all of the following: temporary widening to accommodate two-way truck traffic in some locations, placement of new culverts at drainage crossings, grade modifications, and road stabilization. Fort Collins proposes to reclaim access roads to their current condition following construction completion. Widened roads and turnouts created on Fort Collins property may be left in place for long-term operations and maintenance of the enlarged Halligan Reservoir; widened roads may be left in place on private property if requested by the landowner. Using existing roadways and reclaiming widened roadways to their current condition will reduce the permanent footprint of the Halligan Project and reduce the potential for long-term ecological degradation. 4.2.3.11 Traffic Impact Minimization The Halligan Project is in a relatively remote location that is inaccessible to public traffic. Traffic impacts on residents will be limited to predominant ingress and egress from Highway 287, with less ingress and egress from Larimer County Road 80C (Cherokee Park Road). To minimize impacts on traffic on Highway 287, Fort Collins will construct a temporary or permanent turn lane and/or an acceleration lane. This minimization measure will be designed and implemented in coordination with the Colorado Department of Transportation and Larimer County. Given the complexity of construction activities associated with the Halligan Project, large amounts of staff will be required to access the construction zone throughout Project construction. When appropriate and feasible, such as during shift changes, Fort Collins will incorporate carpooling of staff to and from construction areas. Carpooling of staff will reduce traffic on access roads and minimize air quality impacts, greenhouse gas emissions, potential wildlife and vehicle collisions, and fugitive dust during construction. Fort Collins’ efforts to minimize traffic impacts on wildlife as noted here, as well as Sections 4.2.3.1, 4.2.3.7, and 4.2.3.9, will minimize impacts on wildlife by using existing roads, reducing traffic-related equipment emissions and noise, reducing fugitive dust, reducing the potential for wildlife vehicle collisions, and reducing displacement and disturbance of habitats adjacent to construction activities and access roads. Construction of a temporary river crossing on the North Fork below the replacement dam will minimize traffic along County Road 80C by allowing direct access to the west side of Halligan Dam during construction (Section 4.2.3.14). EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 447 Item 15. 4.2.3.12 Construction Impact Minimization that will Benefit Wildlife Construction of certain elements of the Halligan Project are anticipated to occur throughout all hours of the day or night during certain construction milestones. However, Fort Collins proposes to minimize nighttime construction activities that have the potential to generate increased noise levels, such as blasting, and will proactively respond to noise complaints. Lighting impacts associated with Halligan Project nighttime construction activities will be minimized in consideration of both local residents and wildlife. Lighting during construction will be limited to what is necessary for safety and security on the Project site during construction. Lighting will be angled and shielded to avoid light pollution and impacts on neighbors and wildlife. Noise will be minimized to the extent practicable during construction; Fort Collins plans to fit equipment with mufflers and apply construction standard practices for noise construction (the specific practices will depend on equipment used). Fort Collins’ contractors will comply with Larimer County ordinances or approved variance requests through the county that may include noise shielding and reduction of after-hours activities. 4.2.3.13 Construction Timing Restrictions at the North Poudre Canal and Calloway Diversions To minimize potential construction-related disturbance to bighorn sheep spring and fall movements, Fort Collins and CPW have agreed to implement a 1-year construction window for both the North Poudre Canal and Calloway Diversions. During the 1-year construction window, Fort Collins will perform work in two phases. During the first phase, work on the access road construction, and staging equipment and materials at the North Poudre Canal and Calloway Diversions will occur in July and August. Then during the second phase, both the North Poudre Canal and Calloway Diversions construction work will commence in November and conclude in March before spring movements by bighorn sheep through the mapped linkage area (Figures 3-3 and 4-8) between the two diversion structures. To the extent reasonably possible, all work will be completed within one construction season beginning in November and ending the following end of March (Figure 4-7). In the unlikely event of an unforeseen occurrence such as extreme snow, Fort Collins will coordinate with CPW to develop a revised schedule. In addition, Fort Collins has not yet come to an agreement with landowners to complete channel improvements and modifications of the Calloway Diversion. Should a delay occur that affects the proposed timing restriction schedule, Fort Collins will coordinate with CPW and landowners to discuss an alternative timeline to avoid or minimize impacts to bighorn sheep as discussed in Sections 4.2.3.17, 4.2.3.19, and 5.1.1.4. Figure 4-7. Proposed Construction Schedule to Avoid and Minimize Bighorn Sheep Disturbance at North Poudre Canal and Calloway Diversions EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 448 Item 15. 4.2.3.14 Limited Use of Western Access Road Following completion of the temporary construction access crossing of the North Fork below the Halligan Dam, which is planned in the first year of construction, use of the western access road (Figure 1-3) intersecting Larimer County Road 80C (Cherokee Park Road) will be reduced to only occasional or as-needed access from April to July in the second and subsequent years of construction to reduce construction vehicle disturbance to wildlife in the area. Occasional use of the access road may be required for construction access and material deliveries during certain construction milestones. 4.2.3.15 Noxious and Invasive Weed Control and Revegetation Fort Collins will develop a noxious and invasive weed management plan for construction activities, in coordination with the Larimer County Weed District. No domestic sheep or goats will be used for weed control on City owned property or easements Fort Collins grants to others in the vicinity of Halligan Reservoir. Noxious weed BMPs, including chemical, cultural, and mechanical measures, will be implemented during all construction phases for all Halligan Project disturbance areas, including access roads and buffers. Equipment will be cleaned so that it is free of accumulated soils that may carry noxious and invasive weed seeds to the Halligan Project Area. Restoration and revegetation will be completed for all temporarily disturbed areas using native plants. These disturbance areas will be monitored after construction to ensure successful re-establishment of vegetation in accordance with Construction General Permit requirement to stabilize all disturbed soil areas (Section 4.2.3.9) before completion of the Halligan Project. Specific revegetation/restoration details will be identified following final design. 4.2.3.16 Aquatic Nuisance Species Fort Collins will take a proactive approach to preventing the introduction of aquatic nuisance species into Halligan Reservoir, the North Fork, and the Main Stem. Non-native species and invasive species pose a threat to ecosystems, and Fort Collins will minimize the risk of spreading aquatic nuisance species through implementation of BMPs to prevent the potential spread of these species in Halligan Reservoir and in the rivers. Fort Collins will implement specific procedures to ensure that all equipment is cleaned of mud and debris (for example, tracks, turrets, buckets, drags, teeth), and inspected to confirm they are free of aquatic nuisance species. Specific decontamination measures for equipment or materials that were used in any stream, river, lake, pond, or wetland within 14 days of the start of the Project to prevent the spread of New Zealand mudsnails (Potamopyrgus antipodarum), zebra mussels (Dreissena polymorpha), quagga mussels (Dreissena bugensis), invasive plant species, and other aquatic nuisance species will follow the most current guidance from CPW and are expected to include one or more of the following methods: (1) Remove all mud and debris from equipment (tracks, turrets, buckets, drags, and teeth) and spray/soak in a 1:15 solution of Quat 4 or Super HDQ Neutral institutional cleaners and water. Keep equipment moist with the solution for at least 10 minutes, or (2) remove all mud and debris from equipment (tracks, turrets, buckets, drags, and teeth) and continuously spray/soak equipment with water that is hotter than 140 degrees Fahrenheit for at least 10 minutes. Hand tools, boots, and any other equipment that will be used in the water will be cleaned, as well. 4.2.3.17 Bighorn Sheep Habitat and Collaring Measures Fort Collins developed bighorn sheep mitigation measures in consultation with CPW to mitigate potential direct and indirect effects of the Halligan Project within the Lone Pine herd range. The goals of Fort Collins’ bighorn sheep mitigation package include the following: • Avoid potential impacts by improving bighorn sheep habitat opportunities and water access in areas away from Project construction, as described in this section EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 449 Item 15. • Monitor movements of the Lone Pine herd before, during, and after construction to fill a data gap around herd habits and to support implementation of other bighorn sheep mitigation measures through a collaring study, as described in this section • Avoid and minimize construction-related direct and indirect impacts through a set of BMPs (Section 4.2.3.7) and construction timing restrictions (Section 4.2.3.13) • If, despite the forgoing measures, the Project results in one or more mortalities of a bighorn sheep in the Lone Pine herd, financially compensate CPW for that unavoidable resource loss (Section 4.3.3) As discussed in Section 3.8.4.1, comingling with domestic sheep and goats is the largest anticipated threat to bighorn sheep. Fort Collins has explored numerous options to either permanently or temporarily remove domestic sheep and goat grazing from the area around Halligan Reservoir. To date, Fort Collins’ attempts have been unsuccessful, as discussed with CPW in multiple meetings in 2021 and 2022. Fort Collins is willing to continue exploring opportunities toward that goal of removing domestic sheep from around Halligan Reservoir; however, a specific implementable mitigation measure has not been identified. 4.2.3.18 Bighorn Sheep Habitat Improvements To improve bighorn sheep habitat opportunities and water access on the Cherokee SWA, Fort Collins will provide CPW with $250,000 for chemical treatment to abate invasive cheatgrass over at least 500 acres, along with installation of two remote passive water sources. Fort Collins intends to provide to CPW enough funding to complete a minimum of one round of cheatgrass treatment over 500 acres and other habitat improvements that may include the installation of up to two water features at least 2 years before the start of Project construction in an effort to entice bighorn sheep away from construction areas and areas at times used for the grazing of domestic sheep. Any remaining monies up to the $250,000 earmarked for vegetation and habitat restoration could be used by CPW for habitat treatment on additional acreages within the Cherokee SWA. CPW has identified several areas within the Cherokee SWA that would provide the largest benefit to bighorn sheep habitat and foraging through cheatgrass mitigation. Trail cameras will be deployed during and after treatment to identify how well the treatment worked. The habitat treatment targets cheatgrass seed germination, allowing for higher quality native forage to grow, which, in turn, may keep the Lone Pine herd within the boundaries of Cherokee SWA longer and away from domestic sheep during the April to July grazing period. The treatment should not alter normal migration routes, habitat range use, or lambing areas. The objective is to begin the cheatgrass mitigation treatments on a minimum of 500 acres commencing at least 2 years before the start of the Halligan Project and continue as needed through construction and up to 2 years postconstruction. CPW will consider installing one or two water features in high-use bighorn sheep areas within or near the area(s) treated to control cheatgrass. If additional water features are appropriate for the area, Fort Collins anticipates that CPW will install either two water guzzlers for precipitation capture or one water guzzler and one stock-tank type structure that uses water from a spring that CPW holds rights to develop. CPW will also consider location and design elements that would exclude domestic ruminants from using the water sources, such as wildlife friendly fencing, to minimize the potential for pathogen transmission. These features will passively (that is, external power source not needed) provide water sources away from Halligan Project disturbances and are expected to provide benefit before, during, and after construction. The water features will be used to enhance bighorn sheep habitat in areas that may be underused due to lack of water resources and within a reasonable distance of the priority habitat restoration area noted previously. EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 450 Item 15. 4.2.3.19 Bighorn Sheep Collaring Study Fort Collins will provide CPW additional funding of up to $120,000 to support global positioning system (GPS) collaring and disease testing of bighorn sheep from the Lone Pine herd to track their movements before, during, and immediately after Halligan Project construction. GPS collaring study results will support evaluation of whether construction may influence herd habits, in particular with respect to interactions with domestic sheep and/or other bighorn herds. CPW will implement the collaring study and disease testing. Disease testing will occur in conjunction with every collar application throughout the collaring study. GPS collar monitoring studies are needed to assess disease risk and habitat restoration needs for the Lone Pine herd by gathering data on herd landscape use (habitat, spatial, and temporal), recruitment, and overall health. Depending upon the Lone Pine herd size, up to a maximum of 15 GPS collars and disease testing may be deployed. The preconstruction portion of the GPS collaring study will begin no less than 2 years before the anticipated start of the Halligan Project construction. GPS collars are expected to have a 2-year life and collect data approximately every 4 hours. Preconstruction collaring data will be considered viable for 5 years. Should construction be pushed beyond that initial 5-year window, a second GPS collar study would start 1 year from the start of construction. The intent of the second preconstruction GPS collar study is to have accurate and recent data on the Lone Pine herd’s movements before construction. The Lone Pine herd will be fitted with GPS collars during all of the construction with collars having an anticipated 2-year battery life. The final phase will be a 2-year postconstruction GPS collaring event to evaluate postconstruction movement and habitat use. CPW may euthanize bighorn sheep to prevent disease spread in the Lone Pine herd and/or adjacent herds. As discussed in Section 4.3.3, Compensatory Mitigation for Halligan Project Impacts on Bighorn Sheep, Fort Collins will provide a monetary compensation for any bighorn sheep culls from the Lone Pine herd. 4.2.4 Overhead Power Line and Pole Relocation The Halligan Project will require the relocation of approximately 27 overhead power poles and lines from the southwest end of the existing reservoir to the new dam since the old power poles would be inundated during the Halligan enlargement. The existing poles and line are too old to be reused safely. The new poles and line will be constructed and energized prior to removal of old poles and line. Installation and removal of overhead power line and poles will result in temporary disturbance of vegetation due to vehicles driving off-road. At this time, a formal access road is not being proposed for installation or removal of the overhead power lines and poles. Some vegetation will be permanently removed for placement of the new poles. Fort Collins will work with Poudre Valley Rural Electric Authority to perform raptor and migratory nesting bird surveys (Section 4.2.3.4, Migratory Bird and Raptor Surveys) prior to construction. In addition, construction BMPs (Section 4.2.3.7, Best Management Practices) including sediment control and aquatic nuisance species measures (Section 4.2.3.16, Aquatic Nuisance Species), and construction disturbance minimization and reclamation measures (Section 4.2.3.9, Construction Disturbance Minimization and Reclamation) will be implemented. Installation and removal of the overhead power lines and poles will be prohibited between December 1 and April 30. The overhead power lines and poles will follow design guidelines similar to those used by the Avian Power Line Interaction Committee, and will have bird diverters. 4.2.5 Halligan Reservoir Sediment Management Plan A sediment management plan will be developed for Halligan Reservoir that will provide guidelines for postconstruction reservoir operations (including low water level operations) to avoid adverse sediment release events. Operating the reservoir, particularly at low water levels, in accordance with a plan developed by sediment experts is intended to avoid adverse sediment release events like the one in EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 451 Item 15. 1996 (described in Section C3.4). CPW will be given an opportunity to comment on the draft sediment management plan. 4.3 Compensatory Mitigation Measures The goal of mitigation is to avoid and minimize adverse impacts of a project, and then compensate for any unavoidable impacts that remain. Fort Collins proposes a robust set of measures described in Section 4.2 that will not only avoid and minimize adverse effects from the Halligan Project but also will result in a net improvement of the aquatic ecosystem in the North Fork. However, because of the nature and scope of the Halligan Project, some unavoidable impacts are expected and will be offset through compensatory mitigation. Fort Collins, in consultation with CPW, CDPHE’s WQCD, cooperating agencies, and other stakeholders, has developed the compensatory mitigation measures described herein to compensate for impacts from the Halligan Project that cannot be avoided or minimized. This section presents compensatory mitigation measures specific to fish and wildlife resources, organized by general resource category. The natural resource mitigation measures are highly interrelated and typically serve to mitigate impacts on several ecological functions through one measure. Some of these connections (or overlaps) of mitigated functions are explained with each measure. The table in Appendix B summarizes each avoidance, minimization, and compensatory mitigation measure. Throughout Project planning and mitigation proposal development, Fort Collins’ focus for compensation has been to mitigate as close to the location of Halligan Project impact as practicable. Compensatory mitigation for fish and wildlife will occur near the Halligan Project Area or in the North Fork watershed. 4.3.1 Preservation as Early Compensatory Mitigation Measure In 2003 to 2004, as an act of early mitigation in anticipation of the Halligan Project, Fort Collins led the purchase and preservation of a permanent conservation easement of a 4,557-acre property known as Roberts Ranch, which comprises several disconnected parcels (Figure 4-8) in the Livermore Valley. The preservation of the Roberts Ranch property was the first step in Fort Collins’ compensatory mitigation approach for the Halligan Project. According to the CPW species activity mapping data (CPW 2020b), all parcels are within the overall ranges of several of the state-listed species and other Tier 1 and Tier 2 species. Specifically the conservation area provides potential habitat for bald eagle, black-tailed prairie dog, Townsend’s big-eared bat, common garter snake, and northern leopard frog, all of which are state- listed species. Fort Collins acquired an undivided 60 percent interest in the conservation easement by funding 60 percent (or $1.8 million) of the $3 million cost in partnership with Larimer County, Great Outdoors Colorado, TNC, and the Roberts family. The easement covers 4,557 acres of high-quality wildlife habitat and rangelands near Halligan Reservoir and is also adjacent to 14,000 acres of other state and locally protected lands (Figure 4-8). This early conservation effort provides the following benefits: • Direct and indirect ecological benefit to wildlife resources affected by the Halligan Project, including long-term preservation of suitable habitat for big game ungulates, as well as the federally and state threatened Preble’s meadow jumping mouse and the federally threatened Ute ladies’-tresses orchid • Land preservation and conservation in perpetuity of habitat for wildlife and rare and native plants, and conservation of the diverse forest, shrubland, meadow, and riparian vegetative communities • Approximately 2 decades of land preservation before disturbance from the Halligan Project construction activities EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 452 Item 15. • Preservation of areas within the linkage area for the Lone Pine bighorn sheep herd where individual rams have been observed annually by local residents from approximately March to October on parcels of Roberts Ranch east of Highway 287 (Thode, pers. comm. 2021), and limitations on grazing such that species other than cattle or horses cannot be grazed on the property unless approved by TNC in areas where use of cattle or horses is impractical • Conservation of more than 8.8 miles of perennial streams • Direct connectivity to 14,000 acres of adjacent state and locally protected lands In addition to these benefits, this early mitigation effort removed 4,557 acres of property from future development, which equates to approximately 120 to 250 residential units based on Larimer County Rural Open Development standards (Larimer County 2021), and eliminated the potential to increase agricultural development within the area. To preserve this land at today’s market rates, the cost to Fort Collins will be approximately $2.6 million. By protecting the Roberts Ranch property in 2004, Fort Collins commenced mitigation efforts early, which has already preserved a threatened ecosystem and the ecological functions it provides for almost 2 decades. EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 453 Item 15. Figure 4-8. Land Ownership and Mitigation Areas around Halligan Reservoir EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 454 Item 15. 4.3.2 Fish Passage at the Fort Collins Intake at Gateway Park Fort Collins will construct fish passage around the Fort Collins Intake diversion structure at Gateway Park (Figure 4-9) to increase connectivity for trout and other large-bodied fish species on the Main Stem and to compensate for impacts on Main Stem fisheries associated with flow changes as a result of the Halligan Project. The fish passage will be designed, in consultation with CPW, and to CPW’s Research and Design Guidelines, Fish Passage and River Structures (CPW n.d.) to provide reliable upstream fish passage and will help to provide additional connectivity upstream of the Fort Collins Intake, and Fort Collins will consult with CPW on the design of the structure. The majority of diversions related to the Halligan Project will take place at the Fort Collins’ Intake at Gateway Park on the Main Stem. This diversion structure is located approximately 0.5 mile upstream of the confluence with the North Fork. The diversion structure currently acts as a barrier to fish movement, preventing the migration of fish past the structure. With this action, Fort Collins will compensate for reduction of flows on the Main Stem in the Exchange Reach between the Fort Collins Intake(s) and the North Fork confluence. Construction of this project will be completed prior to Fort Collins beginning Halligan operations that involve exchanges on the Main Stem or on an alternate timeline that is agreed upon between CPW and Fort Collins. 4.3.3 Compensatory Mitigation for Halligan Project Impacts on Bighorn Sheep Fort Collins will avoid and minimize potential Project effects on bighorn sheep through the habitat improvements and movement tracking collaring study described in Sections 4.2.3.17, 4.2.3.18, 4.2.3.19 and through construction timing restrictions described in Section 4.2.3.13. Additional construction- related measures to avoid and minimize impacts on terrestrial wildlife, including bighorn sheep, are described in Section 4.2.3.7. If, despite these efforts, construction of the Halligan Project causes mortality directly, through euthanasia or otherwise, to bighorn sheep in the Lone Pine herd, Fort Collins will offset this unavoidable impact through monetary compensation to CPW. Fort Collins will provide monetary compensation of $7,300 per sheep to CPW for any Lone Pine herd bighorn sheep that experience mortality during Project construction and 2 years postconstruction. Although not all mortality experience during the construction period is anticipated to be caused by the Project, as a conservative approach Fort Collins is willing to assume that mortalities during the construction period and 2 years postconstruction will be compensated. Additionally, if Lone Pine herd mortalities are observed in the 2 years following the end of construction, Fort Collins will compensate CPW $7,300 per sheep. CPW has concerns that the Halligan Project construction may cause Lone Pine herd sheep to change movement patterns such that they act as a vector for disease transmission from domestic sheep to the Figure 4-9. Fort Collins Intake at Gateway Park Source: City of Fort Collins EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 455 Item 15. Lower Poudre herd. Fort Collins will work with CPW to develop an adaptive management approach to monitoring bighorn sheep movements to assess disease transmission, and will compensate CPW for Lower Poudre herd bighorn sheep that were exposed to respiratory disease because of the Halligan Project during and 2 years after construction. 4.3.4 Compensatory Mitigation for Halligan Project Impacts on Stream Temperature Fort Collins will commit $200,000 of funding for stream restoration efforts along the Main Stem, or North Fork, within or near the Halligan Project Area, including the North Fork above Halligan Reservoir to compensate for potential Project-related temperature increases. Note that this commitment is separate from the $200,000 enhancement commitment for the North Fork described in Section 5.1.1.6; however, these funding commitments may be combined or used independently. The restoration will be focused on either enhancing aquatic life habitat or funding a fish passage project, or both. This money is committed as a compensatory mitigation for unavoidable temperature impacts on the Main Stem. If the money is used toward fish passage at the Munroe Diversion, this would allow for more natural fish behavior and the opportunity to seek spawning habitat upstream of the diversion. Combined with the Gateway Park Diversion fish passage, this would link more than 20 miles of upstream fish habitat year- round. Funding of a future stream restoration project is another example of adherence to Fort Collins’ guiding principles of mitigation (refer to Section 5.1.1.6), focusing on the improvement of degraded resources, focusing on improving whole systems and benefiting multiple (aquatic) resources, and working in partnership with those who have common goals. Fort Collins and CPW will have final approval authority on any use of funds and will be used for the public benefit. 4.3.5 Compensatory Mitigation for Halligan Project Impacts on Wetlands Compensatory mitigation and monitoring for wetlands will be described in a separate mitigation plan yet to be developed for approval by the Corps. Wetland mitigation for Halligan Project impacts may include restoration, mitigation banking, or other measures that benefit fish and wildlife. Wetland mitigation measures are not detailed in this FWMEP or the accompanying appendix table. 4.3.6 Special-status Species Potential impacts of the Halligan Project on special-status species, including federally and state-listed species, are described in Section 3.8. Fort Collins seeks to avoid and minimize any adverse impacts on any special-status species. Halligan Project mitigation measures, such as the preservation of Roberts Ranch (Section 4.3.1), and the numerous avoidance and minimization measures (Section 4.2) will adequately mitigate potential Halligan Project effects on state-listed species; therefore, no additional species-specific compensatory mitigation measures have been proposed. 4.3.6.1 Preble’s Meadow Jumping Mouse Mitigation and monitoring of Halligan Project impacts on Preble’s are being developed in consultation with USFWS and are described in the Halligan Water Supply Project Preble’s Meadow Jumping Mouse Mitigation Plan (Jacobs 2022). 4.3.6.2 Ute Ladies’-tresses Orchid Because the Ute ladies’-tresses orchid is not anticipated to occur within the Halligan Project Area (refer to Section 3.8.3.2), Fort Collins does not propose compensatory mitigation. Avoidance and minimization measures described in Section 4.2 will be implemented, including preconstruction botanical surveys (Section 4.2.3.2). Furthermore, indirect benefits to potential habitat are anticipated with the EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 456 Item 15. implementation of wetland and riparian mitigation and enhancements associated with the Halligan Project. 4.3.6.3 Platte River Species Fort Collins participates in the SPWRAP, which outlines a programmatic approach for USFWS Section 7 consultation that is described in the Platte River Recovery Implementation Program. Currently, mitigation is not expected to be needed for South Platte River depletions. If additional mitigation measures are identified during this programmatic approach or based on USFWS consultation, they will be incorporated into the mitigation strategy for the Halligan Project. 4.3.6.4 State-listed Species Fort Collins seeks to avoid and minimize any adverse impacts on any state species of concern, which were described in Section 4.2.3. Effects on state-listed and other species of concern from Fort Collins’ Proposed Action may include temporary displacement because of noise disturbance from construction activities, transportation of people and materials, and increased human activity in the area of Halligan Reservoir. In addition, vehicle and equipment emissions and fugitive dust may also displace state-listed or species of concern. This displacement and disturbance of state-listed or species of concern may result in additional stress on individuals which could lead to mortality of individuals. Some species, such as those dependent on riparian communities, will likely experience a beneficial effect from the Halligan Project as a result of the flow-related operational measures that will be implemented downstream of the enlarged Halligan Reservoir. The Halligan Project will use numerous avoidance and minimization measures described in Section 4.2, including preconstruction bat surveys (Section 4.2.3.3) and migratory bird and raptor surveys (Section 0). If preconstruction avian and bat surveys determine that the Project will likely adversely affect a state-listed species avian and or bat, then Fort Collins will consult with CPW on timing, temporary habitat modification, and other measures that may help to further avoid or minimize site- and species-specific adverse effects. Avoidance and minimization measures, as well as the preservation of Roberts Ranch will adequately mitigate potential Halligan Project effects on state-listed avian and bat species and their habitats. As described in Section 4.3.1. the conservation easement on the Roberts Ranch encompasses 4,557 acres over 10 discrete parcels (Figure 1-1). According to the CPW species activity mapping data (CPW 2020b). In addition all 10 parcels provide vegetative communities that support the life cycle of one or more state species including: wetlands, stream, riparian zones, rock outcroppings, and short grass prairie communities Therefore, no additional species- habitat specific compensatory mitigation measures other than those mentioned in the FWMEP have been proposed. 4.3.7 Recreational Resources Anticipated Halligan Project impacts on recreational resources are described in Section 3.9.2. Because the surface of Halligan Reservoir is not open to the public for recreational use, the Halligan Project will not change the public’s ability to recreate on the reservoir. The LAPCR’s private access to the Halligan Reservoir (refer to Section 3.9.1) will be minimally affected during construction and will be limited to specific times when the reservoir level will be drawn down near the end of construction for partial or total demolition of the existing dam. The enlarged Halligan Reservoir will inundate approximately a 0.75-mile reach of the North Fork upstream of the existing Halligan Reservoir, resulting in the loss of approximately 20 acres of potential hunting lands and river fishing along a 0.4-mile stretch of this reach, as described in Section 3.9.2. Fort Collins is proposing the following mitigation related to recreation. EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 457 Item 15. 4.3.7.1 Reconciliation of Title Chain Confusion As discussed in Section 3.9, in recent years, Fort Collins discovered that approximately 39 acres of land in the eastern half of Section 29 and in the northeastern quarter of Section 32 that were thought to be owned by CPW are owned by Fort Collins and a private party (Figure 3-4). Upper portions of the enlarged Halligan Reservoir will be located on portions of these lands. For the most part, these lands are surrounded by the Cherokee SWA–Middle Unit and according to CPW, these lands have been accessed by the public for over 50 years19. Fort Collins intends to acquire these privately owned lands for the enlarged Halligan Reservoir. After acquiring these privately owned lands, Fort Collins will seek an agreement with CPW to convey an easement to CPW across the Fort Collins-owned lands, approximately 39 acres (as described previously), for public use, including river and shoreline access, provided that the surface of the enlarged reservoir will not be opened to public access at this time. Any such agreement and conveyance will be subject to applicable laws, including statutes applicable to CPW, and the Fort Collins Municipal Code Chapter 23 (Public Property), Article IV (Disposition of Property), Division 2 (Real Property). As discussed in Section 3.9.3, Evaluation of Future Public Use of the Enlarged Halligan Reservoir, if, separate from the current processes to enlarge Halligan Reservoir, the reservoir is opened to public recreation at a point in the future, any recreation plan proposed by Fort Collins that will affect the Cherokee SWA will be developed in conjunction with CPW and will consider impacts on fish and wildlife habitat, including impacts on any access through the Cherokee SWA. The recreation plan will also compensate for the resource needs for CPW to stock and manage Halligan Reservoir for public angling access, if CPW determines it will maintain a public fishery. 4.3.7.2 Funding of Public Access Lease with Roberts Ranch Fort Collins will contribute funding to CPW to support a lease of the Krause Field parcel of Roberts Ranch. The Krause Field parcel is located north of Halligan Reservoir and the Cherokee SWA, as shown on Figure 4-8. The Krause Field parcel was conserved as a part of the Roberts Ranch conservation easement secured by Fort Collins and partners in 2003 and 2004 (refer to Section 4.3.1). CPW has been pursuing a lease allowing primitive foot access for hunting and fishing on the Krause Field parcel. Fort Collins understands that this lease will provide public access to over 2,200 acres of hunting and approximately 1 mile of river access and fishing, which includes the North Fork and potentially stretches of its tributaries, Dale Creek and Bull Creek. Fort Collins agrees to a one-time reimbursement in the amount of $135,000 for CPW to pursue a long- term lease (in process) of the Krause Field parcel. 4.3.7.3 Parking Area Establishment of State Wildlife Area A primitive parking area used to provide public access to the adjacent SWA is located on Fort Collins’ property in the northeast quarter of Section 32. The parking area falls within an area previously thought to be owned by CPW. This parking area will be inundated by the enlarged Halligan Reservoir. Fort Collins will provide CPW with $30,000 to create a new parking area in kind on CPW land outside of the inundation area, to provide comparable access to this general location (Figure 3-4). The new parking area will be primitive and similar in form to the existing parking area. 19 Fort Collins is evaluating if and the extent to which the public has accessed this part of the inundation area and makes no representations on this issue. EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 458 Item 15. 4.3.8 Instream Water Rights The enlarged Halligan Reservoir will inundate approximately 0.75 mile of the North Fork upstream of the current reservoir where the CWCB holds an instream flow water right, as described in Section 3.3.2.2. Because of the additional stream flow that will be provided downstream, Fort Collins’ commitment to protect those associated releases from Halligan Reservoir for approximately 22 miles downstream using the Protected Mitigation Release statute (CRS Section 37-92-102[8]), and the aquatic resource enhancements described in Section 5, no additional compensatory mitigation is proposed for impacts on the CWCB’s instream flow water rights as part of this FWMEP. 4.4 Mitigation Costs and Schedule Estimated costs and schedule for the mitigation components of this FWMEP follow in Appendix B. This FWMEP includes a comprehensive description of all of Fort Collins’ planned mitigation and enhancement measures for the Halligan Project that are related to fish and wildlife. Appendix B presents Fort Collins’ total estimated mitigation and enhancement costs for all measures and denotes those that CPW staff believe are attributable to the Commission’s recommendations pursuant to CRS Section 37-60-122.2 via separate cost columns. Appendix B includes notes describing the mitigation commitments in the table being at a summary level and the text of this report shall take precedent over any discrepancies between the table and the FWMEP text. Also, capitalized costs in the table are the sum of the capital cost plus any annual operations and maintenance costs capitalized over the life of the commitment, or 50 years for those commitments that are perpetual. In addition, some of the costs in the table are firm not-to-exceed monetary commitments and the amounts are presented in 2022 dollars and will be increased in the amount of the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics Consumer Price Index for Denver-Aurora-Lakewood from January 1, 2023 to the date of final payment under the FWMEP obligation. EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 459 Item 15. 5 Proposed Fish and Wildlife Enhancement Plan This chapter constitutes the proposed enhancement plan for fish and wildlife resources in the general Halligan Project area. Enhancement measures were developed based on comments received on the DEIS, discussions with CPW staff, and discussions with other Halligan Project stakeholders. The enhancements described in this chapter will improve both existing and future anticipated conditions of the aquatic and terrestrial environment without regard to causation. These measures integrate with Fort Collins’ vision and overarching goals for the Halligan Project and demonstrate Fort Collins’ ongoing commitment to improve existing conditions in the Poudre River watershed. Chapter 4 of this FWMEP describes the approach used to identify and develop mitigation and enhancement measures. This enhancement plan updates, builds upon, and/or replaces some of the measures presented in the draft CMP (City of Fort Collins 2019c) released with the DEIS (Corps 2019). The measures described in this enhancement plan have been updated since the development of the CMP. Some enhancement measures are similar to or directly replace measures described in the CMP. New enhancement measures have also been developed and described herein that were not presented in the draft CMP. All measures included in this FWMEP are summarized in the table contained in Appendix B. 5.1 Enhancement Measures Fort Collins is committed to incorporating the voluntary enhancements described in the following sections into the Halligan Project. These enhancement measures are not required to meet regulatory mitigation requirements, and are above and beyond the measures presented in Chapter 4 that Fort Collins will undertake to avoid, minimize, or compensate for impacts resulting from the Halligan Project. 5.1.1 Aquatic Resources Enhancements 5.1.1.1 Temporary Environmental Pool Between the time that Halligan Reservoir is enlarged and the time when Fort Collins grows into its future demand levels associated with the Halligan Project, Fort Collins will dedicate an annually variable storage volume in the enlarged Halligan Reservoir to release for environmental benefits downstream. This annually variable volume of water dedicated for environmental benefits is referred to as the temporary environmental pool (TEP). The purpose of the TEP is to enhance the environmental benefit, or functional lift, of the flow-related operational measures described in Section 4.2.1. The primary objective of the TEP is to positively affect stream health in the North Fork from the replacement Halligan Dam to Seaman Reservoir. In general, the TEP will be used to benefit whole stream health, with the ability to focus on specific river functions, or single-species management in select years. Use of the TEP will be informed by first principles of river ecology. Operation of the Temporary Environmental Pool Fort Collins will determine the volume of water available for the TEP each year. Volumes in the range of 500 to 1,000 acre-feet are expected to be available; however, the actual volume available could increase or decrease after information is gained from the first several years of operation of the enlarged Halligan Reservoir. The annual volume of water available is expected to be reduced or eliminated over time, as water demand for Fort Collins’ water customers increases. The TEP is currently anticipated to be operated through 2065, although it could occur sooner or later than that depending on when Fort Collins grows into its future demand levels associated with the Halligan Project. EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 460 Item 15. Fort Collins will determine the volume of water available to be dedicated on an annual basis based on water demand and water supply outlook. The volume and targeted window for releases will be determined before July 1 each year. The window for releases will typically be from July 1 to the following April 30. The ramping rate limitations described previously will apply to such releases. The releases will be operated and used pursuant to Fort Collins’ water rights decrees. Releases from the TEP will be made from the enlarged Halligan Reservoir and conveyed down the North Fork. The TEP releases will be made only if Fort Collins can place them to decreed beneficial uses for the releases under Fort Collins’ water rights. Fort Collins will determine the water right(s) to which the TEP releases are attributed. This may include uses further downstream on the Poudre River (for example, to Rigden Reservoir) that could potentially provide secondary benefits to the river. Fort Collins will not redivert the TEP releases until after they have reached the confluence with the Main Stem. Decisions regarding the volume of water allocated each year will be made by Fort Collins. The primary stakeholders for the TEP will be Fort Collins and CPW; however, a small group of technical advisers, resource experts, and/or other stakeholders may be developed to guide decisions related to the best use of the TEP. The best use of this water will be determined based on decreed beneficial uses of the water rights and current conditions at that point in time and the greatest ecological concerns or issues, with one of the priorities being management of small-bodied native fish species downstream of Halligan Reservoir. Operational targets for use of the TEP could be set for several years at a time to address multiple ecological priorities. If CPW or another entity identifies additional water rights for storage in the enlarged Halligan Reservoir and allocated to the TEP, Fort Collins will consider specific proposals in good faith, after all required permits have been issued for the Halligan Project. Protection of the Temporary Environmental Pool Releases NPIC cannot divert the TEP releases into the North Poudre Canal pursuant to an existing agreement with Fort Collins. Additionally, Fort Collins will attempt to protect the TEP releases from Halligan Reservoir to Seaman Reservoir using the Protected Mitigation Release statute (CRS Section 37-92-102[8]) in the same manner as described here for the Winter Releases Plan (Section 4.2.1.1). Fort Collins will undertake a good faith effort to protect the TEP releases under the Protected Mitigation Release statute. However, success is not guaranteed because it will depend on factors outside of Fort Collins’ control. Curtailment of the Temporary Environmental Pool Fort Collins may need to curtail or stop TEP releases in the event of maintenance, drought, or emergency situations. Fort Collins may also modify the release schedule if another water resource need develops within the Fort Collins’ water system. As such, the storage volume of the TEP may vary significantly each year, and it will not be operated during water supply shortages (refer to Section 4.2.1.7). Again, the annual volume of water available is expected to be reduced or eliminated over time, as water demand for Fort Collins’ water customers increases. Fort Collins may need to curtail or stop TEP releases in the event of maintenance, drought, or emergency situations. Fort Collins may also modify the release schedule if another water resource need develops within the Fort Collins’ water system. As such, the storage volume of the TEP may vary significantly each year, and it will not be operated during water supply shortages (refer to Section 4.2.1.7). Again, the annual volume of water available is expected to be reduced or eliminated over time, as water demand for Fort Collins’ water customers increases. EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 461 Item 15. 5.1.1.2 Joint Operations Fort Collins will continue to entertain opportunities for operational synergies with other managed water deliveries in the Poudre River watershed in order to potentially provide targeted benefits to the watershed. For example, Fort Collins might consider a temporary (that is, 1 year) water trade with an irrigation company or another municipal water provider that temporarily increases releases from the Halligan enlargement in exchange for other water sources that can be used by Fort Collins. Joint operations will not compromise the commitments in the FWMEP. Fort Collins may consider engaging CPW in these discussions when appropriate. 5.1.1.3 Fish Passage at the Reconstructed North Poudre Canal Diversion The North Poudre Canal Diversion (Figure 5-1) is located in Phantom Canyon, approximately 6 river miles downstream of Halligan Reservoir on the North Fork. The structure currently acts as a barrier to upstream fish passage, preventing the migration of fish past the structure. As part of the Halligan Project, Fort Collins will reconstruct the North Poudre Canal Diversion so that Fort Collins’ releases (refer to Section 4.2.1) can be bypassed by that structure and remain in the North Fork. To provide increased connectivity for small-bodied native species and trout in the North Fork, Fort Collins will incorporate fish passage into or around the reconstructed North Poudre Canal Diversion, in the form of a fish ladder, bypass channel, or other infrastructure. Fish passage will be designed, in consultation with CPW, and to CPW’s Research and Design Guidelines, Fish Passage and River Structures (CPW n.d.) to provide reliable fish passage at the North Poudre Canal Diversion and connect an extensive reach of the North Fork. Fish passage construction will happen concurrently with reconstruction of the North Poudre Canal Diversion, in accordance with the timeline listed in Figure 4-7, will be completed by the time Fort Collins begins storing water in the enlarge Halligan Reservoir or an alternate timeline that is agreed upon between CPW and Fort Collins. 5.1.1.4 Channel Improvements and Modification of the Calloway Diversion The Calloway Diversion (Figure 5-2) is located on the North Fork at the mouth of Phantom Canyon, approximately 7.5 river miles downstream of Halligan Reservoir. The diversion is no longer used. Although water passes the structure, it acts as a barrier to fish passage, preventing the migration of fish past the structure. As an additional measure to further enhance the fisheries of small-bodied native fish on the North Fork, Fort Collins will seek to Figure 5-1. North Poudre Canal Diversion Structure Source: Jacobs EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 462 Item 15. modify and/or partially remove the diversion structure in collaboration and agreement with the landowners, CPW, and other stakeholders. Proposed plans should follow CPW’s Research and Design Guidelines, Fish Passage and River Structures (CPW n.d.). The current concept that Fort Collins has developed for the area around the Calloway Diversion, in collaboration with landowners, CPW, and other stakeholders, includes removal of the center portion of the structure, while leaving the sidewalls of the structure in place. This modification will allow for full river connectivity while maintaining a portion of the historical structure. Over time, this portion of the channel will heal and be re-established to a more natural condition while enhancing river connectivity for aquatic organisms, including macroinvertebrates, small- bodied native fish, and trout. This action is also considered a voluntary enhancement measure for North Fork temperature. The action will remove an existing large, sediment-trapping pool that increases residence time and warming at low flow rates. Removal of the center portion of the existing diversion will also remove the barrier to fish passage, allowing more natural fish behavior, including the potential to seek thermal refuge upstream. Further, the channel improvements will result in a more natural thalweg, including pools that can serve as areas of thermal refuge in times of low flow and adult holding and overwinter habitat. Fort Collins will pursue an agreement in good faith with the landowners and other stakeholders to complete this Project. This project will be constructed in accordance with the timeline listed in Figure 4-7 and will be completed by the time Fort Collins begins storing water in the Halligan Reservoir Expansion or an alternate timeline that is agreed upon between CPW and Fort Collins. If Fort Collins is unable to come to an agreement with the landowners to complete channel improvements and modifications of the Calloway Diversion within the timeline that aligns with the reconstruction of the North Poudre Canal Diversion discussed in Section 5.1.1.3, Fort Collins will coordinate with CPW and the landowners to discuss an alternative timeline to avoid or minimize impacts to bighorn sheep as discussed in Sections 4.2.3.13, 4.2.3.17, and 4.2.3.19. Terrestrial Improvements Improvements at the Calloway Diversion Structure will have the largest impact on aquatic habitat; however, improvements will also benefit terrestrial species, specifically Preble’s. USFWS considers the Calloway Diversion to be a habitat filter to Preble’s movement. Removing the diversion will reconnect Preble’s habitat. 5.1.1.5 Ramping Rate Limitations for NPIC’s Pool in an Enlarged Halligan Reservoir The ramping rate limitations described in Section 4.2.1.4 apply only to Fort Collins’ operation of its portion of the enlarged Halligan Reservoir; they do not apply to operation of NPIC’s portion of the reservoir. Therefore, Fort Collins will commit to making a good faith effort to reach an agreement with NPIC to adhere to the same ramping rate limitations. Previous discussions with NPIC indicate that it would prefer to explore any such commitments after the enlarged reservoir is operational for several years. At that time, Fort Collins will re-engage in discussions with NPIC about ramping their diversions and releases to match those rates Fort Collins has committed to. Figure 5-2. Calloway Diversion Structure Source: Jacobs EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 463 Item 15. 5.1.1.6 North Fork Stream Restoration Fort Collins will commit $200,000 of funding for stream restoration efforts along the North Fork, or Main Stem, within or near the Halligan Project Area, including the North Fork above Halligan Reservoir. The restoration will be focused on either enhancing habitat for small-bodied native fish or salmonids. Funding a future stream restoration project is another example of adherence to Fort Collins’ guiding principles of mitigation (refer to Section 4), such as focusing on the improvement of degraded resources, focusing on improving whole systems and benefiting multiple (aquatic) resources, and working in partnership with those who have common goals. Note that this commitment is separate from the $200,000 mitigation commitment for the Main Stem described in Section 4.3.4; these funds may be combined or used independently. Fort Collins and CPW will have final approval authority on any use of funds, and will be used for the public benefit. 5.2 Surface Water Quality Enhancement 5.2.1 Sediment-related Operational Measures In addition to the Peak Flow Bypass Program described in Section 4.2.1.5, and the sediment management plan described in Section 4.2.4, the following sediment-related operational measures are planned for Halligan Reservoir to avoid future adverse sediment release events. 5.2.1.1 Bottom Release from Halligan Reservoir when Spilling Water will be released from Halligan Reservoir through the bottom outlets at times when the reservoir is spilling over the dam. This should allow for reduced retention of sediment in Halligan Reservoir, allowing for appropriate sediment transport downstream to the North Fork (as directed by the total maximum daily load [TMDL]). Avoiding buildup of sediment behind the dam should, in part, help avoid an adverse sediment release event like the one that occurred because of operations in 1996. This measure is also considered a voluntary enhancement in terms of river temperature for its parallel benefits in reducing the risk of thermal shock below the Halligan Reservoir dam. As described in Section 3.4.2, thermal shock can occur below the Halligan Reservoir dam under current Halligan Reservoir dam operations. The Halligan Project has an inherent benefit of reducing the current frequency of thermal shock below Halligan Reservoir dam because no spilling is anticipated (per DEIS flow modeling) to occur in summer or fall months (that is, at times when the reservoir is thermally stratified). Bottom releases during spilling would provide further enhancement in terms of further reducing the risk of thermal shock because such releases would serve to blend top and bottom temperatures, minimizing the sharp temperature change in releases, in the unanticipated event that the reservoir does spill at a time of thermal stratification with the Halligan Project. 5.2.2 Passive Aeration in Outlet Structure Fort Collins will incorporate design measures for the replacement Halligan Dam that include passive physical aeration. This will increase DO concentrations in water released to the North Fork, enhancing conditions for aquatic life immediately below the reservoir. As described in Section 3.4.2.3, DO concentrations at levels of concern to aquatic life are not anticipated below Halligan Reservoir; however, there is the potential for small decreases in DO in the Halligan Reservoir hypolimnion in the latter part of the summer. Because adverse impacts on aquatic life are not anticipated in terms of oxygen below Halligan Reservoir, inclusion of passive aeration in the outlet structure is considered to be a voluntary enhancement, as opposed to mitigation. Design measures are being evaluated that would increase DO include an updated stilling basin, a stepped spillway, and a turbulent discharge area with EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 464 Item 15. energy dissipation. This aeration will be applied to releases from both Fort Collins’ and NPIC’s portion of the enlarged Halligan Reservoir. 5.2.3 Terrestrial Resources Enhancements 5.2.3.1 Prohibition of Domestic Sheep and Goat Grazing on City Owned Lands Near Halligan Reservoir An existing and ongoing challenge in CPW’s management of the Lone Pine bighorn sheep herd is the known proximity of bighorn sheep to domestic sheep grazing (CPW 2021b). Several land managers within the Lone Pine herd-occupied range along or near key components of the Halligan Project use domestic sheep to control larkspur (Delphinium species), which are toxic to cattle. Although domestic sheep can be an effective vegetation management tool, this practice increases the chances of commingling between the Lone Pine herd and domestic sheep. The greatest concern of such commingling is the transmission of deadly pathogens between domestic sheep and goat populations and the Lone Pine herd. Therefore, to help reduce the long-term risk of disease transmission, and as soon as this FWMEP is approved, Fort Collins will: • Permanently stop grazing domestic sheep or goats for weed control or other purposes on any Fort Collins-owned lands around Halligan Reservoir • Will not enter into grazing leases that would authorize others to graze domestic sheep or goats on any Fort Collins-owned lands around Halligan Reservoir • Will not grant licenses or convey easements authorizing domestic sheep or goats to graze on any Fort Collins-owned lands around Halligan Reservoir 5.2.3.2 Advocate for Cessation of Domestic Sheep and Goat Grazing on Private Lands Near Halligan Reservoir Landowners near the Halligan Project Area periodically allow domestic sheep and goat grazing on their property to control larkspur, which are toxic to cattle and horses. Comingling of domestic sheep and goats with bighorn sheep is linked to disease transmission to bighorn sheep, which can result in bighorn sheep mortality. Fort Collins will engage with local landowners to advocate for both the temporary cessation of domestic sheep and goat grazing during construction, as well as for the permanent cessation of domestic sheep and goat grazing near the Halligan Project Area. Ceasing domestic sheep and goat grazing on private property around the Halligan Project Area will avoid the potential for disease transmission from domestic sheep and goats to bighorn sheep. 5.3 Fort Collins Ecological Resource Monitoring 5.3.1 Streamflow Monitoring As part of Halligan Project operations, Fort Collins has already installed one of two new North Fork streamflow gages associated with the Halligan Project. The first gage, located above the future inlet of the enlarged Halligan Reservoir, was installed by Fort Collins in fall 2020 in coordination with the United States Geological Survey. An existing stream gage is located below the Halligan Dam that will remain in the future. The second gage will be installed by Fort Collins at or below the bypass structure for the reconstructed North Poudre Canal Diversion to monitor streamflow and inform North Poudre Canal Diversion and Halligan Reservoir operations. In addition, Fort Collins will also rely on the existing Livermore gage located where the North Fork crosses West County Road 74E. Streamflow monitoring data will enhance the existing dataset that is available for public use and will also be used by Fort Collins to help inform operational decisions for the enlarged Halligan Reservoir. EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 465 Item 15. 5.3.2 Sediment, Macroinvertebrates, and Water Quality Monitoring Sampling for sediment (percent fines and salmonid spawning habitat) and macroinvertebrates (TIVSED), downstream of Halligan Reservoir will be conducted following protocols in WQCD Policy 98-1 (in agreement with Policy Statement 10-1, Aquatic Life Use Attainment, Methodology to Determine Use Attainment for Rivers and Streams). This sediment sampling will continue for a period of 5 years following the build out of Halligan Project operations, after which time the need to continue sampling will be reconsidered in coordination with CPW and WQCD. This sampling will help monitor sediment relative to standards and identify any new impairment or worsening conditions. This information can be used to determine appropriate response actions per the sediment management plan (Section 5.2.1.1), as needed. Additionally, real-time oxygen and temperature data from multiple elevations in Halligan Reservoir during summer months will be needed to support operational decision-making for the MLOW, if an MLOW is installed (as discussed in Section 4.2.2.1). Real-time oxygen and temperature data from multiple elevations in Halligan Reservoir during summer months would be used to help manage water quality of releases to the North Fork with an MLOW. As such, this monitoring will be conducted as a critical component of the MLOW mitigation element, if an MLOW is installed. Fort Collins will also monitor iron immediately below the enlarged reservoir for 5 years to determine if the flushing event (described in Section 4.2.1.6) is effective and/or necessary. This monitoring will consist of visual checks for iron deposition on sediment in the vicinity of the NBH sampling station (and photographic records of any observed deposition) as well as continued sampling at NBH for dissolved and total iron. However, if it is determined at the end of the first 5 flushing events (in consultation with CPW) that this operation is no longer needed, then the releases and special monitoring (observations of iron deposition) will end. 5.3.3 Bighorn Sheep Collaring Study Collaring and tracking of the Lone Pine herd will be conducted before, during, and after the Halligan Project construction as part of the avoidance and minimization mitigation measures described in Section 4.2.3.18 and the compensatory mitigation measure described in Section 4.3.3. 5.4 Enhancement Costs and Schedule Estimated costs and schedule for the mitigation components of this FWMEP follow in Appendix B. This FWMEP includes a comprehensive description of all of Fort Collins’ planned mitigation and enhancement measures for the Halligan Project that are related to fish and wildlife. Appendix B presents Fort Collins’ total estimated mitigation and enhancement costs for all measures and denotes those that CPW staff believe are attributable to the Commission’s recommendations pursuant to CRS Section 37-60-122.2 via separate cost columns. Appendix B includes notes describing the mitigation commitments in the table being at a summary level and the text of this report shall take precedent over any discrepancies between the table and the FWMEP text. Also, capitalized costs in the table are the sum of the capital cost plus any annual operations and maintenance costs capitalized over the life of the commitment, or 50 years for those commitments that are perpetual. In addition, some of the costs in the table are firm not-to-exceed monetary commitments and the amounts are presented in 2022 dollars and will be increased in the amount of the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics Consumer Price Index for Denver-Aurora-Lakewood from January 1, 2023 to the date of final payment under the FWMEP obligation. EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 466 Item 15. 6 References Armstrong, D. M., J. P. Fitzgerald, and C. A. Meaney. 2011. Mammals of Colorado. University Press of Colorado. Denver, Colorado. Armstrong, Karlyn. 2020. Memorandum from Water Resources Engineer and Water Project Mitigation Coordinator to the Colorado Parks and Wildlife Commissioners; Overview of Fish and Wildlife Mitigation Plan Process. March 5. Bartholow, J. M. 1991. A Modeling Assessment of the Thermal Regime for an Urban Sport Fishery. Environmental Management. Vol. 15, No. 6. pp 833–845. Battige, K. 2018. 8/23/2018: North Fork Poudre River Below Seaman Reservoir Fish Kill Investigation. Report prepared by CPW Aquatic Biologist. Beardsley, M., J. B. Johnson, and J. Doran. 2015. FACStream 1.0: Functional Assessment of Colorado Streams. Report submitted to U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. https://www.fcgov.com/poudrereportcard/pdf/river-health-assessment-methods2019.pdf. Bestgen, K., N. L. Poff, D. Baker, B. Bledsoe, D. Merritt, M. Lorie, G. Auble, J. Sanderson, and B. Kondratieff. 2019. “Designing flows to enhance ecosystem functioning in heavily altered rivers.” Ecological Applications. Vol. 30, Issue 1. Ecological Society of America: Wiley Periodicals, Inc., Washington, D.C. September 18. https://doi.org/10.1002/eap.2005. Cadmus, P., S. F. Brinkman, and M. K. May. 2018. “Chronic Toxicity of Ferric Iron for North American Aquatic Organisms: Derivation of a Chronic Water Quality Criterion Using Single Species and Mesocosm Data.” Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. ISSN 0090-4341. Vol, 74, No. 4. May. CDM Smith and DiNatale Water Consultants (CDM and DiNatale). 2013. Northern Integrated Supply Project Environmental Impact Statement Common Technical Platform Hydrologic Modeling Report. Prepared for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Omaha District. CDM Smith (CDM). 2017. Draft Surface Water Quality Technical Report for the Halligan Water Supply Project Environmental Impact Statement. October. Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment and Colorado Department of Natural Resources (CDPHE and CDNR). 2017. Memorandum of Understanding for Water Supply Projects between the Colorado Department of Health and Environment and the Colorado Department of Natural Resources. June. Colorado Division of Water Resources (DWR). 2016. General Administrative Guidelines for Reservoirs. February. Originally issued October 2011. https://dnrweblink.state.co.us/dwr/DocView.aspx?id=3579805&dbid=0&cr=1. City of Fort Collins. n.d. Climate Action Plan. Accessed 2021. https://www.fcgov.com/climateaction/. City of Fort Collins. 2011. Cache La Poudre River Natural Areas Management Plan Update. June 10. https://www.fcgov.com/naturalareas/pdf/poudre-management-plan2011.pdf. City of Fort Collins. 2014. Poudre River Downtown Master Plan. October. https://www.fcgov.com/ poudre-downtown/pdf/final-plan.pdf. City of Fort Collins. 2015a. City of Fort Collins 2015 Water Efficiency Plan. https://www.fcgov.com/ utilities/img/site_specific/uploads/WEP_2015-17_FullDraft_NoWaterMark_v9.pdf?1640792992. EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 467 Item 15. City of Fort Collins. 2015b. Cache la Poudre River: River Health Assessment Framework. August 26. https://www.fcgov.com/naturalareas/pdf/river-health-report-final-appendix.pdf. City of Fort Collins. 2017. State of the Poudre: A River Health Assessment. May 24. https://www.fcgov.com/poudrereportcard/pdf/sopr2016.pdf. City of Fort Collins. 2019a. Fort Collins Utilities Water Supply Vulnerability Study Draft Report. June. City of Fort Collins. 2019b. Cache la Poudre River: River Health Assessment Framework, 2019 Methods and Applications. https://www.fcgov.com/poudrereportcard/pdf/river-health-assessment- methods2019.pdf?1595449775. City of Fort Collins. 2019c. Halligan Water Supply Project Conceptual Mitigation Plan. Draft Report. October. https://usace.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/p16021coll7/id/12793. City of Fort Collins. 2020a. 2020 Strategic Plan. https://www.fcgov.com/citymanager/files/20-22326- 2020-strategic-plan-document_final.pdf. City of Fort Collins. 2020b. Water Shortage Action Plan. As adopted by Fort Collins City Council April 2020, as referenced in Section 26-167(a) of the Code of Fort Collins. https://www.fcgov.com/ utilities/img/site_specific/uploads/final-wsap-effective-may-1-2020.pdf?1604940044. City of Fort Collins. 2021a. 2020 Water Conservation Annual Report. https://www.fcgov.com/utilities/ img/site_specific/uploads/21-23060-water-conservation-annual-report-v5.pdf?1621375599. City of Fort Collins. 2021b. Draft Cameron Peak Wildfire Water Quality Monitoring Recovery Plan. April 7. https://www.fcgov.com/utilities/img/site_specific/uploads/cameron-peak-water- quality-monitoring-recovery-plan.pdf?1650308076. Colorado Natural Heritage Program. 2015. Query results for Element Occurrences within two-mile buffer of the Halligan EIS project alternatives. Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW). n.d. Research and Design Guidelines, Fish Passage at River Structures. https://cpw.state.co.us/Documents/Research/Aquatic/pdf/Fish-Passage-River- Structures_Research-Guidelines.pdf. Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW). 2015. State Wildlife Action Plan. https://cpw.state.co.us/aboutus/ Pages/StateWildlifeActionPlan.aspx. Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW). 2018. North Fork Poudre River–Phantom Canyon: 2017 Fishery Sampling Survey Summary. Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW). 2020a. North Fork Poudre River Fish Survey Sampling Data. Unpublished data for 1960 through 2020. Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW). 2020b. CPW Public SAM (Species Activity Maps) Data. December 8. CPW GIS Unit. Colorado Parks and Wildlife - Species Data 2020. Bald Eagle. https://cpw.state.co.us/learn/Pages/Maps.aspx. Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW). 2021a. January 11, 2021 Memorandum: Halligan Reservoir Expansion Project Bighorn Sheep Impacts and Mitigation. Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW). 2021b. Draft Halligan Reservoir Mitigation Plan for S40: Lone Pine Rocky Mountain Bighorn Sheep Herd. September 15. Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW). n.d. “Species Profiles.” http://cpw.state.co.us/learn/Pages/ SpeciesProfiles.aspx. EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 468 Item 15. Colorado State University (CSU). 2020. Poudre Runs Through It Study/Action Work Group. A Guiding Document. Colorado State University, Colorado Water Center, Fort Collins, Colorado. Revised September 28. https://watercenter.colostate.edu/prti/. Colorado Water Conservation Board (CWCB). 1984. Fish and Wildlife Resources. Colorado Revised Statute Title 37, Section 37-60-122.2. Colorado Department of Natural Resources, Colorado Water Conservation Board. Colorado Water Conservation Board (CWCB) n.d. Rules Concerning the Colorado Instream Flow and Natural Lake Level Program. Rule 7. Colorado Revised Statute Title 2, Section 408-2. Colorado Department of Natural Resources, Colorado Water Conservation Board. GEI Consultants, Inc. (GEI). 2016. Aquatic Biological Resources North Fork Cache La Poudre River for the Halligan Water Supply Project Environmental Impact Statement. Final draft, Baseline Technical Report. GEI Consultants, Inc. (GEI). 2018. Draft Aquatic Biological Resources Effects Technical Report for the Halligan Water Supply Project Environmental Impact Statement. October. GEI Consultants, Inc. (GEI). 2019a. Baseline Technical Report Aquatic Biological Resources North Fork Cache La Poudre River. Prepared for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Omaha District. May. GEI Consultants, Inc. (GEI). 2019b. Aquatic Biological Resources Effects Technical Report for the Halligan Water Supply Project Environmental Impact Statement. Prepared for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Omaha District. November. Harman, W., R. Starr, M. Carter, K. Tweedy, M. Clemmons, K. Suggs, C. Miller. 2012. A Function-Based Framework for Stream Assessment and Restoration Projects. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds, Washington, DC. EPA 843-K-12-006. Hawley, C., J. M. Boyer, T. Adams, A. Stone, and L. Daugherty. 2014. Stream Temperature and Dissolved Oxygen Analysis for NISP Supplemental Draft EIS. Summary of Current Conditions and Qualitative Anticipated Effects of NISP Alternatives. Prepared by Hydros Consulting for ERO Resources Corporation. December 12. Hydros Consulting Inc. (Hydros). 2015. Water-Quality Modeling of the Cache la Poudre River – Concepts, Approach, and Scope of Work to Support Development of the NISP Final EIS. Prepared for ERO Resources Corporation by Hydros Consulting. June 25. Hydros Consulting Inc. (Hydros). 2020. Halligan Reservoir Water-Quality Model: Conceptual Understanding of Water-Quality Dynamics. Technical Memorandum from J.M. Boyer (Hydros) to E. Dornfest (City of Fort Collins). March 17. Hydros Consulting Inc. (Hydros). 2021a. Background Conceptual Understanding to Support Additional Stream Modeling for Halligan 401 Certification Application. Technical Memorandum from C. Hawley (Hydros) to E. Dornfest (City of Fort Collins). December 20. Hydros Consulting Inc. (Hydros). 2021b. Halligan Water Supply Project 401 Certification Analysis – North Fork and Seaman Reservoir Conceptual Understanding and Recommended Approaches for Water Quality. Technical Memorandum from K. Bierlein (Hydros) to E. Dornfest (City of Fort Collins). December 21. Hydros. 2021c. Halligan Water Supply Project 401 Certification Analysis – Poudre River Water-Quality Conceptual Understanding and Approach. Technical Memorandum from K. Bierlein (Hydros) to E. Dornfest (City of Fort Collins). December 22. EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 469 Item 15. Hydros Consulting Inc. (Hydros). 2021d. Understanding of River Temperature in the North Fork and Poudre River Main Stem. Technical Memorandum from C. Hawley (Hydros) to E. Dornfest (City of Fort Collins). December 23. Hydros Consulting Inc. (Hydros). 2022a. HWSP FWMEP Development – Responses to CPW Questions. Technical Memo to M. May (CPW) from C. Hawley (Hydros Consulting Inc.). March 17, 2022. Hydros. 2022b. HWSP Effects on Proportional Contribution of NF Flow to Poudre Mainstem. Technical Memo to A. Conovitz (City of Fort Collins) from T. Adams (Hydros Consulting Inc.). August 17. Hydros Consulting Inc. (Hydros). 2022c. HWSP FWMEP Development – Documentation of Key Discussions with CPW. Technical Memo to M. May (CPW) from C. Hawley (Hydros Consulting Inc.). December 15, 2022. Interagency Grizzly Bear Committee Public Lands Wildlife Linkage Task Force. 2004. Identifying and Managing Wildlife Linkage Approach Areas on Public Lands; A Report to the Interagency Grizzly Bear Committee. June 17. Interagency Visitor Use Management Council. 2016. Visitor Use Management Framework, A Guide to Providing Sustainable Outdoor Recreation. Edition One. July. Jacobs. 2021. Preconstruction Survey Memo (Birds, Bats, and Orchids). November 29. Jacobs. 2022. Halligan Water Supply Project Preble’s Meadow Jumping Mouse Mitigation Plan. April. JW Associates, Inc. 2017. Upper Poudre Resilience Watershed Plan Final. Coalition for the Poudre River Watershed. January. https://www.poudrewatershed.org/plan/. Larimer County Planning Department. 2021. Land Use Code. https://www.larimer.org/planning/land- use-code. Law Insider. n.d. “Ecological function definition.” https://www.lawinsider.com/dictionary/ecological- function. Lorie, M., J. Sanderson, B. Werick. 2010. Halligan-Seaman Shared Vision Planning; An Experiment in Collaborating for Regulatory Decisions. Unpublished report. July 9. http://www.conservationgateway.org/ConservationByGeography/NorthAmerica/UnitedStates/ Colorado/Documents/Lorie%20et%20al.%202010%20Halligan_Seaman_Shared_Vision_Planning _Report_Jul_12_2010.pdf. Miller Ecological Consultants (Miller). 2009. Aquatic Resource Existing Conditions Halligan-Seaman Water Management Project. Prepared for the City of Fort Collins and the City of Greeley. Miller Ecological Consultants, Inc. (Miller). 2017. Comparison of North Fork Cache La Poudre aquatic habitat between baseline and proposed the Halligan Project operations. Memorandum to City of Fort Collins. October 20. Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). n.d. Black Mountain Snotel Site, United States Department of Agriculture, NRCS National Water and Climate Center. Accessed January 2, 2021. https://wcc.sc.egov.usda.gov/nwcc/site?sitenum=1161. Pioneer Environmental Services (Pioneer). 2016a. Aquatic Resource Inventory Report. Draft. Halligan Reservoir, Larimer County, Colorado. July 29. Pioneer Environmental Services (Pioneer). 2016b. Aquatic Resources Associated with the New Proposed Ordinary High Water Mark. Supplement to the ARI Report for the Halligan Reservoir (Appendix E). July 28. EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 470 Item 15. Pioneer Environmental Services (Pioneer). 2017a. Revised Report, Impacts on Aquatic Biological Resources for the Halligan Water Supply Project. November 3. Pioneer Environmental Services (Pioneer). 2017b. Revised Report, Impacts on Aquatic Species of Concern and Water Based Recreation for the Halligan Water Supply Project. November 3. Risenhoover, K. L. and J. A. Bailey. 1985. Foraging ecology of mountain sheep: Implications for habitat management. Journal of Wildlife Management. Vol. 49, No. 3. pp. 797-804. TetraTech. 2018. Milton Seaman Reservoir Hydrodynamic and Water Quality Model. Revised draft. Prepared for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the City of Greeley, Colorado. April. The Nature Conservancy (TNC). 2008. Environmental Flows for the North Fork of the Cache la Poudre River. Provided as Appendix 3 of the Halligan-Seaman Shared Vision Planning document. January 4. Thode, Zach, Land Manager, Roberts Ranch. 2021. Personal communication (telephone conversation) with Alice Conovitz, City of Fort Collins Utilities Permit Coordinator. December 3. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps). 2019. Environmental Impact Statement Halligan Water Supply Project. Draft. Prepared by U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Omaha District, Omaha, Nebraska. November. https://www.nwo.usace.army.mil/Missions/Regulatory-Program/Colorado/EIS- Halligan/. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps). 2020. Colorado Mitigation Procedures. Version 2.0. Prepared by U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Albuquerque, Omaha, and Sacramento Districts. https://www.nwo.usace.army.mil/Missions/Regulatory-Program/Colorado/Mitigation/. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 1990. Memorandum of Agreement between the Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of the Army Concerning the Determination of Mitigation Under the Clean Water Act Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines. https://www.epa.gov/cwa-404/memorandum-agreement-regarding-mitigation-under-cwa- section-404b1-guidelines-text. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps). 2008. Compensatory Mitigation for Losses of Aquatic Resources. Final Rule. Code of Federal Regulations Title 33, Parts 325 and 332. Published in the Federal Register on April 10, 2008. https://www.epa.gov/cwa-404/compensatory-mitigation-losses-aquatic-resources-final-rule. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2018. Recovery Plan Preble’s Meadow Jumping Mouse (Zapus hudsonius preblei). August 28. https://www.fws.gov/mountain-prairie/es/species/mammals/ preble/RECOVERY%20PLAN/Sept2018FinalRecoveryPlan.pdf. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2019. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Removing Oenothera coloradensis (Colorado Butterfly Plant) From the Federal List of Endangered and Threatened Plants. 84 FR 59570. https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2019/11/05/2019-24124/endangered-and- threatened-wildlife-and-plants-removing-oenothera-coloradensis-colorado-butterfly. Water Quality Control Division (WQCD). 2002. Total Maximum Daily Load Assessment, Sediment, North Fork Cache La Poudre River, Segment 7. Water Quality Control Division, Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment. March 15. EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 471 Item 15. Western EcoSystems Technologies Inc. (WEST). 2016a. Wildlife Resources Technical Report for the Halligan Water Supply Project Environmental Impact Statement. October. Western EcoSystems Technologies Inc. (WEST). 2016b. Vegetation Resources Technical Report for the Halligan Water Supply Project Environmental Impact Statement. October. Western EcoSystems Technologies Inc. (WEST). 2017a. Species of Concern Technical Report for the Halligan Water Supply Project Environmental Impact Statement. January. Western EcoSystems Technologies Inc. (WEST). 2017b. Technical Report on the Effects of Altered Flows on Wetland and Riparian Resources for the Halligan Water Supply Project Environmental Impact Statement. February. Woodling, John. 1985. Colorado’s Little Fish; A Guide to the Minnows and Other Lesser Known Fishes in the State of Colorado. Published by the Colorado Department of Natural Resources, Division of Wildlife. Water Quality Control Commission (WQCC). 2020. Regulation 31: The Basic Standards and Methodologies for Surface Water. 5 CCR 1002-31. Effective June 30, 2020. Water Quality Control Commission (WQCC). 2021a. Regulation No. 38 – Classifications and Numeric Standards for South Platte River Basin, Laramie River Basin, Republican River Basin, Smoky Hill River Basin. 5 CCR 1002-38. Effective January 1, 2021. Water Quality Control Commission (WQCC). 2021b. Regulation No. 93 – Colorado’s Section 303(D) List of Impaired Waters and Monitoring and Evaluation List. 5 CCR 1002-93. Effective August 14, 2021. EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 472 Item 15. Appendix A Mapbook EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 473 Item 15. LAS \\dc1vs01\gisproj\C\CityOfFortCollins\HalliganDam\MapFiles\Halligan_ProjectAreas_Mitigation_MBOverview.mxd 4/5/2023 VICINITY MAP £¤287 Livermore ¬«14 North Poudre Can al Diversion Structure Callow ay Diversion Structure Halligan Dam USGS Stream Gauge – NF Livermore USGS Stream Gauge – NF Below Halligan Reservoir Home PlaceParcel North Poudre Can al (a.k.a. Livermore Can al) Fort Collin s In take Con fluen ce of th e North Fork an d th e Main stem of th e Poudre River North Poudre Supply Can al (Mun roe Division ) USGS Stream Gauge – NF Above Halligan Reservoir Bath Tub Sprin gs Sprin g Gulch North Sprin g Gulch South Rufn er Camp Cache la P o u d r e R i v e r Sto n e w a l l C r e e k Meadow Cree k Six m i l e C r e e k Lone Pine Creek Te n m i l e C r e e k Da l e C r e e k Lo n e t r e e C r e e k Pa r k C r e e k Rabbit Creek Krause Field Home PlaceParcel Ten mileParcel Sprin g HillParcel Boxelder Bull PastureParcel CherokeePark Rd Map 1 Map 2 Map 3 Map 4 Map 5 Map 6 MiltonSeamanReservoir HalliganReservoir Joe W righ t Reservoir Halligan Reservoir Seaman Reservoir Fort Collin s Ch eyen n e Lon gmon t Greeley Halligan W ater Supply ProjectVicin ity Map LEGEND Access Road Project Area Mitigation Area Existing Ordinary High Water Mark Proposed Ordinary High Water Mark Roberts Ranch Conservation Easement Stream Canal Roads State Wildlife Area (SWA) State Land Trust US Forest Service Eagle's Nest Open Space (Larimer County) Phantom Canyon Preserve (TNC) BLM CSU State Land Board $0 2.1 Miles EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 474 Item 15. LAS \\dc1vs01\gisproj\C\CityOfFortCollins\HalliganDam\MapFiles\Halligan_ProjectAreas_Mitigation_MB.mxd 4/5/2023 USGS Stream Gauge – NF Above Halligan Reservoir Meadow Cree k Da l e C r e e k Krause Field Cherokee Park HalliganReservoir Halligan Water Supply ProjectDetailed Map LEGEND Access Road Project Area Mitigation Area Existing Ordinary High Water Mark Proposed Ordinary High Water MarkNorth Fork Reaches North Fork Above Halligan Reservoir Current Halligan Reservoir Roberts Ranch Conservation Easement Stream Roads State Wildlife Area (SWA) State Land Trust US Forest Service Phantom Canyon Preserve (TNC) $0 3,000 Feet EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 475 Item 15. LAS \\dc1vs01\gisproj\C\CityOfFortCollins\HalliganDam\MapFiles\Halligan_ProjectAreas_Mitigation_MB.mxd 4/5/2023 North Poudre Canal Diversion Structure Calloway Diversion Structure Halligan Dam USGS Stream Gauge – NF Below Halligan Reservoir North Poudre Canal (a.k.a. Livermore Canal) Lo n e t r e e C r e e k CherokeePark HalliganReservoir Halligan Water Sup p ly ProjectDetailed Map LEGEND Access Road Project Area Mitigation Area Existing Ordinary High Water Mark Proposed Ordinary High Water MarkNorth Fork Reaches Current Halligan Reservoir Upper Phantom Canyon Lower Phantom Canyon Livermore Valley above Rabbit Creek Stream Canal Roads State Wildlife Area (SWA) State Land Trust Phantom Canyon Preserve (TNC) $0 3,000 Feet EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 476 Item 15. LAS \\dc1vs01\gisproj\C\CityOfFortCollins\HalliganDam\MapFiles\Halligan_ProjectAreas_Mitigation_MB.mxd 4/5/2023 North Poudre Canal Diversion Structure Calloway Diversion Structure Home PlaceParcel North Poudre Canal (a.k.a. Livermore Canal) Bath Tub Springs Sto n e w a l l C r e e k Lone Pine Creek Rabbit Creek Home PlaceParcel TenmileParcel Spring HillParcel Cherokee Park Halligan Water Supply ProjectDetailed Map LEGEND Access Road Project Area Mitigation AreaNorth Fork Reaches Upper Phantom Canyon Lower Phantom Canyon Livermore Valley above Rabbit Creek Livermore Valley below Rabbit Creek Roberts Ranch Conservation Easement Stream Canal Roads State Wildlife Area (SWA) State Land Trust Phantom Canyon Preserve (TNC) $0 3,000 Feet EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 477 Item 15. LAS \\dc1vs01\gisproj\C\CityOfFortCollins\HalliganDam\MapFiles\Halligan_ProjectAreas_Mitigation_MB.mxd 4/5/2023 Spring Gulch North Spring Gulch South Rufner Camp Pa r k C r e e k Boxelder Halligan Water Supply ProjectDetailed Map LEGEND Mitigation Area Roberts Ranch Conservation Easement Stream $0 3,000 Feet EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 478 Item 15. LAS \\dc1vs01\gisproj\C\CityOfFortCollins\HalliganDam\MapFiles\Halligan_ProjectAreas_Mitigation_MB.mxd 4/5/2023 £¤287 Livermore USGS Stream Gauge – NF Livermore Home PlaceParcel Spring Gulch North Spring Gulch South Sto n e w a l l C r e e k Home PlaceParcel Spring HillParcel Bull PastureParcel Halligan Water Supply ProjectDetailed Map LEGEND Mitigation AreaNorth Fork Reaches Livermore Valley below Rabbit Creek Eagles Nest Roberts Ranch Conservation Easement Stream US Forest Service Eagle's Nest Open Space (Larimer County) $0 3,000 Feet EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 479 Item 15. LAS \\dc1vs01\gisproj\C\CityOfFortCollins\HalliganDam\MapFiles\Halligan_ProjectAreas_Mitigation_MB.mxd 4/5/2023 Fort Collins Intake Confluence of the North Fork and the Mainstem of the Poudre River North Poudre Supply Canal (Munroe)Cache la P o u d r e R i v e r MiltonSeamanReservoir Halligan Water Supply ProjectDetailed Map LEGEND Mitigation AreaNorth Fork Reaches Eagles Nest Seaman Reservoir Below Seaman Reservoir Reach Stream Canal State Wildlife Area (SWA) State Land Trust US Forest Service $0 3,000 Feet EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 480 Item 15. Appendix B Summary of Mitigation Measures EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 481 Item 15. Appendix B. Summary of Mitigation Measures Table B-1. FWMEP Measures and Costs Measurement Type Mitigation, Monitoring, and Enhancement Measure FWMEP Section Purpose for Measure Description of the Commitment[a] Fort Collins Total Capitalized Cost[b] FWMEP Capitalized Cost[b] Avoidance and Minimization Mitigation Measures Winter Release Plan 4.2.1.1 As part of Halligan Project operations, Fort Collins will provide continuous releases of 3 cfs from its water stored in the enlarged Halligan Reservoir to the North Fork from October 1 through April 30 each year. NPIC cannot divert the winter releases into the North Poudre Canal pursuant to an existing agreement with Fort Collins. The Halligan Project involves reconstructing the North Poudre Canal Diversion similar to its current configuration but to allow the bypass of Fort Collins’ releases from the enlarged Halligan Reservoir so that the water remains in the North Fork. The Winter Release Plan will result in benefits to the North Fork by eliminating almost all zero-flow days on the North Fork (in combination with the Summer Low-flow Plan [Section 4.2.1.2]). Provide a continuous, more longitudinally connected aquatic corridor compared to the existing zero-flow conditions, create additional wetted channel area that will benefit small-bodied native fish, trout, and macroinvertebrates, and re-establish basic habitat requirements for aquatic species through the reintroduction of perennial flow. The Winter Release Plan will also result in benefits that will offset the impact resulting from the inundation of approximately 0.75 mile of the CWCB’s instream flow water right (Water Court Case 1985CW430) on the North Fork above Halligan Reservoir. Fort Collins will implement the Winter Release Plan the first winter after the new Halligan Dam has been approved to store water by the DWR and Fort Collins’ portion of the enlarged reservoir has at least 3,000 acre-feet of water. $1,654,375 $0 EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 482 Item 15. Measurement Type Mitigation, Monitoring, and Enhancement Measure FWMEP Section Purpose for Measure Description of the Commitment[a] Fort Collins Total Capitalized Cost[b] FWMEP Capitalized Cost[b] Avoidance and Minimization Mitigation Measures Summer Low-Flow Plan 4.2.1.2 Fort Collins will implement the Summer Low-Flow Plan, which adjusts reservoir operations by forgoing diversions and/or releasing its water stored in the enlarged Halligan Reservoir to maintain a minimum continuous 5 cfs flow in the approximately 22 miles of the North Fork between the replacement Halligan Dam and Seaman Reservoir (as measured at three gaging stations along the North Fork) from May 1 to September 30 each year (summer releases). NPIC cannot divert the winter releases into the North Poudre Canal pursuant to an existing agreement with Fort Collins. The Halligan Project involves reconstructing the North Poudre Canal Diversion similar to its current configuration but to allow the bypass of Fort Collins’ releases from the enlarged Halligan Reservoir so that the water remains in the North Fork. The Summer Low-Flow Plan will result in benefits to the North Fork by eliminating almost all zero-flow days on the North Fork (in combination with the Winter Release Plan, Section 4.2.1.1), which avoids and minimizes potential impacts on the aquatic ecosystem, including stream temperature from the Halligan Project. The Summer Low-flow Plan would increase flow rates on the North Fork in summer months at the times of the lowest current flow rates with anticipation of stream temperature benefits for the North Fork. Provide a continuous, more longitudinally connected aquatic corridor compared to the existing zero-flow conditions, create additional wetted channel area that will benefit small-bodied native fish, trout, and macroinvertebrates, and re-establish basic habitat requirements for aquatic species through the reintroduction of perennial flow. The Summer Low-Flow Plan will also result in benefits that will offset the impact resulting from the inundation of approximately 0.75 mile of the CWCB’s instream flow water right (Water Court Case 1985CW430) on the North Fork above Halligan Reservoir. Based on Commission and public feedback, Fort Collins will also perform preconstruction surveys of the pre-Halligan Reservoir enlargement flows on the reach of the North Fork between the existing Livermore gage and the upstream end of Seaman Reservoir (that is, the Livermore-to-Seaman Reach) in different seasons and hydrologic regimes (particularly dry conditions) to determine if there are flow losses in this stretch. Details of the preconstruction surveys, including an agreement on methods and standards to be used to define whether there are flow losses will be included in an intergovernmental agreement between Fort Collins and CPW. If the preconstruction survey demonstrates that the Livermore-to-Seaman Reach is a neutral or gaining reach, then another gage below the existing Livermore gage will not be needed. If the preconstruction survey demonstrates that the Livermore-to-Seaman Reach is a losing reach, Fort Collins will coordinate with CPW on next steps which could include the installation of a fourth gage or increased Halligan Project flows to the Livermore gage to offset such losses toward ensuring that the Summer Low-flow Plan benefits all 22 miles of river. If, in the future, another diversion structure is constructed in the Livermore-to-Seaman Reach, Fort Collins will commit to work with the owner of this diversion structure toward assuring passage of Fort Collins' flows. The commitment with the future diversion structure owner could include a written agreement, installation of other gages, and/or other means of assuring that Fort Collins can meet its Summer Low-flow Plan measure. $830,875 $0 EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 483 Item 15. Measurement Type Mitigation, Monitoring, and Enhancement Measure FWMEP Section Purpose for Measure Description of the Commitment[a] Fort Collins Total Capitalized Cost[b] FWMEP Capitalized Cost[b] Avoidance and Minimization Mitigation Measures Modified Summer Release Exchange Program 4.2.1.2 Fort Collins will not exchange Summer Low-flow Plan releases (up to 5 cfs) from Halligan Reservoir up to either of the Fort Collins Intakes. This hiatus on exchanges will occur each year from July 1 to September 30. This action will leave more water in the Main Stem upstream of the North Fork confluence and downstream to below the Hansen Supply Canal during times of the most critical temperature concern (July to September), minimizing Halligan Project temperature impacts in this critical season. $645,000 $0 Avoidance and Minimization Mitigation Measures Operational Agreement with Greeley 4.2.1.3 Fort Collins is pursuing an operational agreement with Greeley. The agreement would specify the need for Greeley to pass Halligan Releases, including the Winter Release and Summer Low-flow Plan of 3 cfs and up to 5 cfs directly through Seaman Reservoir. For this to be possible, upgraded outlet works may be needed in Seaman Reservoir. Greeley is currently in the process of upgrading their outlet works with support from federal funding. As part of the potential agreement, Fort Collins may provide additional funding support for further refinement of the new outlet works design for Seaman Reservoir. The goal of this additional funding would be to give the new outlet works the functionality and operational control to pass even the small Summer Low-flow Plan releases through Seaman Reservoir (that is, the refined new outlet works should allow for fine-scale management of releases on the order of 1 to 5 cfs). Fort Collins is pursuing the Greeley Agreement because, if the diversion and storage of Halligan Project summer releases by Greeley in Seaman Reservoir could be avoided, the river temperature benefits of the Summer Low-flow Plan could be extended to the approximately 1 river mile reach of the North Fork below Seaman Reservoir. In the event that Fort Collins cannot reach an agreement with Greeley to pass Fort Collins’ Halligan Winter and Summer Low-flow Plan releases of 3 cfs and up to 5 cfs below Seaman Reservoir, and the CWA Section 401 water quality certification process determines that the Halligan Project has potential for occasional adverse temperature impacts on the North Fork below Seaman Reservoir that requires mitigation, Fort Collins commits to mitigating the identified temperature impacts attributable to the Halligan Project through stream restoration or other measures in a manner agreed to by Fort Collins, CDPHE, and CPW. If reasonably practicable, Fort Collins will mitigate the identified impacts along the river reach from Seaman Reservoir to the confluence with the Main Stem commensurate with Fort Collins identified impacts. If not reasonably practicable in the reach below Seaman Reservoir, Fort Collins will work with CDPHE and CPW to find other mitigation commensurate with the Halligan Projects identified impacts. $1,150,000 $0 Avoidance and Minimization Mitigation Measures Ramping Rates Limitations 4.2.1.4 By applying ramping rate limitations, Fort Collins will seek to constrain existing and potential dramatic decreases and increases in the rate of discharge from Fort Collins’ portion of the enlarged Halligan Reservoir to avoid and minimize impacts on aquatic species, particularly small- bodied native fish and rainbow trout. The ramping rate limitations will also help maintain a more natural descending limb of the North Fork hydrograph following peak flows by incorporating a more gradual decrease in outflow and establishing a lag time before returning the stream to a base flow level. Ramping Rate limitations would take effect as soon as the new Halligan Dam has been approved to store water by DWR. The ramping rate limitations are intended to protect aquatic life, as well as people recreating (for example, fishing) downstream, minimizing Fort Collins' impacts to aquatic ecosystems. Fort Collins will limit dramatic decreases and increases in the discharge rate resulting from Fort Collins’ operation of its portion of the enlarged Halligan Reservoir. The details of ramping rate limitations to decreasing discharge rates and increasing discharge rates are described in Section 4.2.1.4 of the FWMEP. $625,000 $625,000 EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 484 Item 15. Measurement Type Mitigation, Monitoring, and Enhancement Measure FWMEP Section Purpose for Measure Description of the Commitment[a] Fort Collins Total Capitalized Cost[b] FWMEP Capitalized Cost[b] Avoidance and Minimization Mitigation Measures Peak-Flow Bypass Program 4.2.1.5 When the forecast peak flow has been estimated to within a few days, Fort Collins will forgo all diversions into its portion of the enlarged Halligan Reservoir for three days coinciding as closely as practicable, as detailed below, with the annual forecasted peak (runoff) flow event for the North Fork. The Peak Flow Bypass Program will allow 3 days (in addition to ramping rate limits Section 4.2.14) of peak flows during times when Fort Collins could be diverting water into storage in the enlarged Halligan Reservoir. The Peak flow bypass program would take effect as soon as the new Halligan Dam has been approved store water by DWR. The Peak Flow Bypass Program will avoid and minimize impacts on the aquatic ecosystem from the Halligan Project by maintaining some of the historical, pre-enlargement peak flows past the enlarged Halligan Reservoir. This Peak Flow Bypass Program is intended to mimic a natural, pre-enlargement stream flow for this 3-day period (in addition to ramping) to support riverine and ecological processes in the North Fork, such as the following:  Providing phenological cues to aquatic and riparian organisms for emergence of aquatic insects, spawning, the timing of flowering, and seed dispersal  Facilitating natural seasonal sediment transport, channel shaping, and channel scour  Recruiting and transporting woody debris and other organic materials  Providing overbank flooding to maintain wetland and riparian habitat function, including seed transport and propagation of native cottonwood and willow species, sediment transport, formation and maintenance of aquatic habitat, and riparian area diversity and structure $765,000 $0 Avoidance and Minimization Mitigation Measures End of Summer Flushing Event 4.2.1.6 An end of summer flushing event (flushing event) will be conducted following fall turnover of Halligan Reservoir each year that a turnover event occurs (turnover is anticipated to occur in all years of normal Halligan Project operations) to address potential iron coatings on river materials. The intention of the flushing event would be to flush seasonal iron deposition (if it occurs) from sediment surfaces below the dam to minimize the potential adverse effects of such deposition, which is most likely to occur in late summer, if it were to occur. The goal of the end of summer flushing event is to release a maximum of 30 acre-feet of water at the lowest discharge rate from the outlet of the enlarged Halligan Reservoir that is practicable to successfully mobilize the iron deposits. Targeting lower effective flow rates is desirable to avoid unintended adverse consequences on small-bodied fish and inadvertent sediment release. The first flushing event would occur after the new Halligan Dam has been approved to store water by DWR and Fort Collins’ portion of the reservoir has filled and there has been a reservoir turnover, as described in Section 4.2.1.6. To avoid unintended adverse effects on small-bodied native fish and sediment, Fort Collins will seek CPW input regarding the planned rate, ramping, and timing of the release each year. Fort Collins would also monitor iron and habitat conditions immediately below the enlarged reservoir for 5 years to determine if this flushing event is effective and/or necessary. This monitoring will consist of visual checks for iron deposition on sediment in the vicinity of the NBH sampling station (and photographic records of any observed deposition) as well as continued sampling at NBH for dissolved and total iron. However, if it is determined at the end of the first five flushing events following construction (in consultation with CPW) that this operation is no longer needed, then the releases and special monitoring (observations of iron deposition) will end. $7,650 $0 EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 485 Item 15. Measurement Type Mitigation, Monitoring, and Enhancement Measure FWMEP Section Purpose for Measure Description of the Commitment[a] Fort Collins Total Capitalized Cost[b] FWMEP Capitalized Cost[b] Avoidance and Minimization Mitigation Measures Legal Protection of Flows 4.2.1.1., 4.2.1.2, and 4.3.8 Through the Flow-related operational measures (Winter Release Plan, Summer Low-Flow Plan, Peak Flow Bypass) and Temporary Environmental Pool enhancement, Fort Collins will provide additional stream flow. NPIC cannot divert these flows into the North Poudre Canal pursuant to an existing agreement with Fort Collins. Additionally, Fort Collins will undertake a good faith effort to protect the Summer Releases from Halligan Reservoir to Seaman Reservoir using the “Protected Mitigation Release” statute (CRS 37-92-102[8]) in the same manner and subject to the same limitations as described for the Winter Release Plan. Avoid/minimize impacts to aquatic species by protecting Halligan release from being removed between Halligan and the Mainstem of the Poudre. If Fort Collins fails to acquire a Water Court decree to protect Halligan Releases under the Protected Mitigation Release statute, or its agreement with NPIC changes such that Halligan Releases can be diverted into the North Poudre Canal, Fort Collins will consult with CPW in good faith to evaluate how Halligan Releases can be protected. $250,000 $250,000 Avoidance and Minimization Mitigation Measures Multi-Level Outlet Structure 4.2.2.1 A multilevel outlet works (MLOW) for Halligan Reservoir that would allow water to be released from one or more elevation higher than the bottom has been discussed since the CMP was put forth in the DEIS. An MLOW is a tool that can, in some cases, allow for beneficial additional management controls on the quality of water released from a reservoir, particularly at times of stratification. At this time, however, an MLOW is not expected to be necessary from the perspective of aquatic life mitigation efforts. Therefore, based on CPW comment, the MLOW is not a commitment in the FWMEP, but the need for an MLOW may be revisited through the 401 certification process. During the 401 Certification process modeling and analysis findings will be reviewed to assess whether such a structure would provide effective and practical water-quality management options for mitigating anticipated project water-quality impacts. CWA Section 401 water quality certification model findings will be shared, and CPW and CDPHE will be consulted on this decision, as part of the CWA Section 401 water quality certification process. $0 $0 Avoidance and Minimization Mitigation Measures Outlet Conduit Sizing 4.2.2.2 To allow for the peak flow bypass mitigation measure (Section 4.2.1.5), Fort Collins incorporated an enlarged outlet conduit, which is larger than necessary to meet demand-based releases. The enlarged outlet will be constructed to release up to 800 cfs. Minimize impacts to aquatic ecosystems by upsizing outlet size to allow peak flow bypass. $0 $0 Avoidance and Minimization Mitigation Measures Big Game Interference Minimization 4.2.3.1 Fort Collins aims to avoid and minimize the Halligan Project’s potential impacts on wildlife within the Halligan Project Area when feasible. The Halligan Project includes many construction-related measures designed to avoid and minimize impacts on big game. Information specific to bighorn sheep is discussed in sections 4.2.3.17, 4.2.3.18, and 4.2.3.19. Construction-related measures to avoid and minimize impacts on big game, including the following measures. Because these measures also benefit other resources, they are described elsewhere in the FWMEP:  Construction scheduling to ensure efficient project delivery, to limit temporal impacts and number of seasons during which habitat is disturbed (4.2.3.13)  Construction carpooling (Section 4.2.3.11)  Management of fugitive dust during construction (Section 4.2.3.7)  Minimizing construction disturbance areas Minimization of and the number and footprint of construction access roads and construction areas (Sections 4.2.3.9, 4.2.3.10, and 4.2.3.14)  Reclamation and revegetation of temporarily disturbed areas (Section 4.2.3.9)  Implementation of a noxious and invasive weed management plan for construction and reclamation activities (Section 4.2.3.15). Compensatory mitigation and enhancement measures specific to bighorn sheep are described in Sections 4.3.3 and 5.2.3. $0 $0 EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 486 Item 15. Measurement Type Mitigation, Monitoring, and Enhancement Measure FWMEP Section Purpose for Measure Description of the Commitment[a] Fort Collins Total Capitalized Cost[b] FWMEP Capitalized Cost[b] Avoidance and Minimization Mitigation Measures Preconstruction Botanical Surveys 4.2.3.2 Previous botanical surveys have not located Ute ladies’-tresses orchid in the area of Halligan Reservoir. To further minimize the possibility of Project impacts on this federally threatened plant, botanical surveys will be conducted at a minimum of a year before construction. Surveys will focus on areas that will likely be disturbed by the Halligan Project and that could support the orchid, and be performed during the growing season (July and August). Results of preconstruction surveys will be submitted to USFWS as required by the ESA; CPW will be provided a courtesy copy of results. $10,200 $0 Avoidance and Minimization Mitigation Measures Preconstruction Bat Surveys 4.2.3.3 Visual and auditory detection surveys for bats were conducted in the area of Halligan Dam and up to 0.5 mile downstream of Halligan Dam in 2021. Several lone bats were detected during the surveys, but no large concentrations of bats were identified. The scattered occurrence of lone bat detections suggests that the area below Halligan Dam is used for foraging, but evidence of a bat colony or identification of roosting locations was not observed during this brief presence/absence survey. To minimize the possibility of Project impacts on bats, additional surveys are warranted, including a survey for roosting sites near the dam. This additional bat survey work will be conducted in the year before construction commences for the Halligan Project. Surveys will focus on areas that will likely be disturbed by Halligan Project construction activities. If surveys indicate the presence of an active bat roost near the Halligan Dam, Fort Collins will consult with CPW on appropriate mitigation measures. $10,200 $10,200 Avoidance and Minimization Mitigation Measures Migrating Bird and Raptors Survey 4.2.3.4 Nest surveys were conducted in the area of Halligan Dam and along access roads in 2021. Additional monitoring for migratory birds and raptors will be performed every other year before construction, the year before the start of construction, and annually during construction with a focus on areas of suitable habitat within planned or proposed disturbance areas in the immediate Halligan Project Area. Before and during construction activities, Fort Collins may use bird nesting deterrents during nesting season to reduce the risk of nesting activities during construction. Deterrent measures may include modifying or removing attractive nesting habitat (for example, trees, shrubs, tall grass) within potential disturbance areas during inactive periods to reduce the potential for construction-related impacts during active nesting periods. Before Project implementation, Fort Collins will provide CPW an opportunity to review and comment on Project specifications related to migratory bird and raptor nesting avoidance and minimization. $70,800 $0 Avoidance and Minimization Mitigation Measures Raptor Nesting or Roosting Platforms 4.2.3.5 Fort Collins will include nesting or roosting platforms near Halligan Reservoir to encourage eagles and other raptors, such as osprey, to use the reservoir. The platforms will also minimize any temporary loss of perching locations from the inundation of shoreline trees while new shoreline habitat becomes established. The final design and location of nesting or roosting platforms will be developed in coordination with CPW. The nesting or roosting platforms will be installed as part of the project construction. At this time the exacting timing is not known. However, the nesting or roosting platforms will be installed before inundation of the enlarged Halligan Reservoir begins. $12,400 $0 EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 487 Item 15. Measurement Type Mitigation, Monitoring, and Enhancement Measure FWMEP Section Purpose for Measure Description of the Commitment[a] Fort Collins Total Capitalized Cost[b] FWMEP Capitalized Cost[b] Avoidance and Minimization Mitigation Measures Stormwater Management Plan 4.2.3.6 Targeted planning and successful execution of the stormwater management plan will reduce the potential for water quality degradation of the North Fork and its associated aquatic ecosystem. Fort Collins will develop a stormwater management plan in compliance with local and state requirements and as required by the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES), Construction General Permit, COR400000 prior to construction, which will include all necessary stormwater management controls and best practices, temporary sediment and erosion control during construction, and medium-term sediment and erosion control during vegetation reestablishment. Additionally, a non-stormwater discharge permit and monitoring plan will be prepared, if required, before the start of construction. $14,800 $0 Avoidance and Minimization Mitigation Measures Best Management Practices 4.2.3.7 Fort Collins will employ standard construction best management practices (BMPs; also called control measures) typically included in federal, state, and local permit requirements to reduce potential construction-related impacts on upland and aquatic habitats, fish, and water quality. BMPs will be implemented at Project construction areas including dam construction and staging/stockpile areas, along access roads, the North Poudre Canal Diversion structure, and mitigation or enhancement sites that involve City-led construction. At a minimum, BMPs will include:  Erosion control measures  Sediment control measures  Dust suppression measures  Non-stormwater controls and waste and materials management  Material management and waste management Avoid and minimize impacts to aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems. Refer to the FWMEP text for the complete list of best management practices. Additional measures may be incorporated if those described differ from permit conditions defined in the CWA Section 401 water quality certification and CWA Section 404 permit, or if site conditions warrant them. $1,171,250 $48,750 Avoidance and Minimization Mitigation Measures Existing Dam for Construction Sediment Control 4.2.3.8 Leaving the original dam in place during construction to act as a coffer dam provides strong control of sediment to allow for avoidance of an inadvertent major release of sediment during construction. The existing dam will continue to function normally during the entire time the replacement dam is being constructed; therefore, drawdown of the reservoir will not be necessary during construction. Once the replacement dam is complete, Fort Collins anticipates that a coffer dam will be put in place around the existing dam during the brief (a few months or less) demolition period. Avoid and minimize impacts to aquatics by controlling existing reservoir sediments during construction. $0 $0 Avoidance and Minimization Mitigation Measures Construction Disturbance Minimization and Reclamation 4.2.3.9 Fort Collins will reclaim temporarily disturbed areas following construction completion. Materials stockpile and borrow areas created on Fort Collins’ property may be left in place for long-term operations and maintenance of the enlarged Halligan Reservoir. Reclaiming disturbed areas to their current condition will reduce the permanent footprint of the Halligan Project and reduce the potential for long-term ecological degradation. Revegetation and monitoring is described in Sections 4.2.3.7 and 4.2.3.15. $533,170 $0 EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 488 Item 15. Measurement Type Mitigation, Monitoring, and Enhancement Measure FWMEP Section Purpose for Measure Description of the Commitment[a] Fort Collins Total Capitalized Cost[b] FWMEP Capitalized Cost[b] Avoidance and Minimization Mitigation Measures Access Road Minimization and Reclamation 4.2.3.10 To accommodate larger vehicles and equipment necessary to construct the Halligan Project and to implement some of the mitigation measures described herein existing roads will require some or all of the following: temporary widening to accommodate two-way truck traffic in some locations, placement of new culverts at drainage crossings, grade modifications, and road stabilization. In addition, use of the western access road will be limited as discussed in section 4.2.3.14 Fort Collins proposes using existing roads whenever possible and to reclaim access roads to their current condition following construction completion to reduce the permanent footprint of the Halligan Project and reduce the potential for long-term ecological degradation.Widened roads and turnouts created on Fort Collins property may be left in place for long-term operations and maintenance of the enlarged Halligan Reservoir; widened roads may be left in place on private property if requested by the landowner. $533,170 $0 Avoidance and Minimization Mitigation Measures Traffic Impact Minimization 4.2.3.11 Traffic impacts on residents will be limited to predominant ingress and egress from Highway 287, with less ingress and egress from Larimer County Road 80C (Cherokee Park Road). Given the complexity of construction activities associated with the Halligan Project, large amounts of staffing will be required to access the construction zone throughout Project construction. To minimize impacts on traffic on Highway 287, Fort Collins will construct a temporary or permanent turn lane and/or an acceleration lane. This minimization measure will be designed and implemented in coordination with the Colorado Department of Transportation and Larimer County. Fort Collins will incorporate carpooling of staff to and from construction areas. Carpooling of staff will reduce traffic on access roads and minimize air quality impacts, greenhouse gas emissions, potential wildlife and vehicle collisions, and fugitive dust during construction. To minimize traffic impacts on wildlife as noted here, as well as Sections 4.2.3.1, 4.2.3.7, and 4.2.3.9, will minimize impacts on wildlife by using existing roads, reducing traffic-related equipment emissions and noise, reducing fugitive dust, reducing the potential for wildlife vehicle collisions, and reducing displacement and disturbance of habitats adjacent to construction activities and access roads. Construction of a temporary river crossing on the North Fork below the replacement dam will minimize traffic along County Road 80C by allowing direct access to the west side of Halligan Dam during construction (Section 4.2.3.14). $296,749 $0 Avoidance and Minimization Mitigation Measures Construction Impact Minimization that will Benefit Wildlife 4.2.3.12 Construction of certain elements of the Halligan Project are anticipated to occur throughout all hours of the day or night during certain construction milestones. Fort Collins proposes to minimize nighttime construction activities that have the potential to generate increased noise levels, such as blasting, and will proactively respond to noise complaints. Lighting impacts associated with Halligan Project nighttime construction activities will be minimized in consideration of both local residents and wildlife. Lighting during construction will be limited to what is necessary for safety and security on the Project site during construction. Lighting will be angled and shielded to avoid light pollution and impacts on neighbors and wildlife. Noise will be minimized to the extent practicable during construction; Fort Collins plans to fit equipment with mufflers and apply construction standard practices for noise construction (the specific practices will depend on equipment used). Fort Collins’ contractors will comply with Larimer County ordinances or approved variance requests through the county that may include noise shielding and reduction of after-hours activities. $0 $0 EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 489 Item 15. Measurement Type Mitigation, Monitoring, and Enhancement Measure FWMEP Section Purpose for Measure Description of the Commitment[a] Fort Collins Total Capitalized Cost[b] FWMEP Capitalized Cost[b] Avoidance and Minimization Mitigation Measures Construction Timing Restrictions at the North Poudre Canal and Calloway Diversions 4.2.3.13 To minimize potential construction-related disturbance to bighorn sheep spring and fall movements, Fort Collins and CPW have agreed to implement a 1-year construction window for both the North Poudre Canal and Calloway Diversions. To the extent reasonably possible, all work will be completed within one construction season beginning in November and ending the following end of March. During the 1-year construction window, Fort Collins will perform work in two phases. During the first phase, work on the access road construction, and staging equipment and materials at the North Poudre Canal and Calloway Diversions will occur in July and August. Then during the second phase, both the North Poudre Canal and Calloway Diversions construction work will commence in November and conclude in March before spring movements by bighorn sheep through the mapped linkage area between the two diversion structures. To the extent reasonably possible, all work will be completed within one construction season beginning in November and ending the following end of March. In the unlikely event of an unforeseen occurrence such as extreme snow, Fort Collins will coordinate with CPW to develop a revised schedule. In addition, Fort Collins has not yet come to an agreement with landowners to complete channel improvements and modifications of the Calloway Diversion. Should a delay occur that affects the proposed timing restriction schedule, Fort Collins will coordinate with CPW and landowners to discuss an alternative timeline to avoid or minimize impacts to bighorn sheep as discussed in Sections 4.2.3.17, 4.2.3.19, and 5.1.1.4 $109,500 $109,500 Avoidance and Minimization Mitigation Measures Limited Use of Western Access Road 4.2.3.14 Following completion of the temporary construction access crossing of the North Fork below the Halligan Dam, which is planned in the first year of construction, use of the western access road intersecting Larimer County Road 80C (Cherokee Park Road) will be reduced to only occasional or as-needed access from April to July in the second and subsequent years of construction to reduce construction vehicle disturbance to wildlife in the area. Minimization of potential animal and vehicular interference along Cherokee Park Road. $0 $0 Avoidance and Minimization Mitigation Measures Noxious and Invasive Weed Control and Revegetation 4.2.3.15 Restoration and revegetation will be completed for all temporarily disturbed areas using native plants. These disturbance areas will be monitored after construction to ensure successful re-establishment of vegetation in accordance with Construction General Permit requirement to stabilize all disturbed soil areas (Section 4.2.3.94.2.3.15) before completion of the Halligan Project. Specific revegetation/restoration details will be identified following final design. Fort Collins will develop a noxious and invasive weed management plan for construction activities, in coordination with the Larimer County Weed District. No domestic sheep or goats will be used for weed control on City-owned property or easements Fort Collins grants to others in the vicinity of Halligan Reservoir. Noxious weed BMPs, including chemical, cultural, and mechanical measures, will be implemented during all construction phases for all Halligan Project disturbance areas, including access roads and buffers. Equipment will be cleaned so that it is free of accumulated soils that may carry noxious and invasive weed seeds to the Halligan Project Area $96,264 $0 EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 490 Item 15. Measurement Type Mitigation, Monitoring, and Enhancement Measure FWMEP Section Purpose for Measure Description of the Commitment[a] Fort Collins Total Capitalized Cost[b] FWMEP Capitalized Cost[b] Avoidance and Minimization Mitigation Measures Aquatic Nuisance Species 4.2.3.16 Fort Collins will take a proactive approach to preventing the introduction of aquatic nuisance species into Halligan Reservoir, the North Fork, and the Main Stem. Non-native species and invasive species pose a threat to ecosystems, and Fort Collins will minimize the risk of spreading aquatic nuisance species through implementation of BMPs to prevent the potential spread of these species in Halligan Reservoir and in the rivers. Fort Collins will implement specific procedures to ensure that all equipment is cleaned of mud and debris (for example, tracks, turrets, buckets, drags, teeth), and inspected to confirm they are free of aquatic nuisance species. Specific decontamination measures for equipment or materials that were used in any stream, river, lake, pond, or wetland within 14 days of the start of the project to prevent the spread of New Zealand mudsnails, zebra and quagga mussels, invasive plant species, and other aquatic nuisance species will follow the most current guidance from CPW and are expected to include one or more of the following methods: 1. Remove all mud and debris from equipment (tracks, turrets, buckets, drags, and teeth) and spray/soak in a 1:15 solution of Quat 4 or Super HDQ Neutral institutional cleaners and water. Keep equipment moist with the solution for at least 10 minutes. 2. Remove all mud and debris from equipment (tracks, turrets, buckets, drags, and teeth) and continuously spray/soak equipment with water that is hotter than 140 degrees Fahrenheit for at least 10 minutes. Hand tools, boots, and any other equipment that will be used in the water will be cleaned, as well. $30,000 $0 Avoidance and Minimization Mitigation Measures Bighorn Sheep Habitat Improvements 4.2.3.18 Fort Collins in consultation with CPW, has identified several areas within the Cherokee SWA that would provide the largest benefit to bighorn sheep habitat and foraging through cheatgrass mitigation. The habitat treatment targets cheatgrass seed germination, allowing for higher quality native forage to grow, which, in turn, may keep the Lone Pine herd within the boundaries of Cherokee SWA longer and away from domestic sheep during the April to July grazing period. The treatment should not alter normal migration routes, habitat range use, or lambing areas. Funding will be provided to CPW will install either two water guzzlers for precipitation capture or one water guzzler and one stock-tank type structure that uses water from a spring that CPW holds rights to develop. These features will passively (that is, external power source not needed) provide water sources away from Halligan Project disturbances and are expected to provide benefit before, during, and after construction. The water features will be used to enhance bighorn sheep habitat in areas that may be underused due to lack of water resources and within a reasonable distance of the priority habitat restoration area noted previously. To improve bighorn sheep habitat opportunities and water access on the Cherokee SWA, Fort Collins will provide to CPW $250,000 for chemical treatment to abate invasive cheatgrass over at least 500 acres, along with other habitat improvements. Funding is to complete a minimum of one round of cheatgrass treatment over 500 acres and other habitat improvements that may include the installation of up to two remote passive water sources at least 2 years before the start of project construction in an effort to entice bighorn sheep away from construction areas and areas at times used for the grazing of domestic sheep. Any remaining monies up to the $250,000 earmarked for vegetation and habitat restoration could be used by CPW for habitat treatment on additional acreages within the Cherokee SWA. If additional water features are appropriate for the area, CPW will also consider location and design elements that would exclude domestic ruminants from using the water sources, such as wildlife friendly fencing, to minimize the potential for pathogen transmission. The water features will be used to enhance bighorn sheep habitat in areas that may be underused due to lack of water resources and within a reasonable distance of the priority habitat restoration area noted previously. $250,000 $250,000 EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 491 Item 15. Measurement Type Mitigation, Monitoring, and Enhancement Measure FWMEP Section Purpose for Measure Description of the Commitment[a] Fort Collins Total Capitalized Cost[b] FWMEP Capitalized Cost[b] Avoidance and Minimization Mitigation Measures Bighorn Sheep Collaring Study 4.2.3.19 Support CPW in collaring and disease testing of bighorn sheep from the Lone Pine her to track their movements before, during, and immediately after Halligan Project construction. Collaring study results will support evaluation of whether construction may influence herd habits, in particular with respect to interactions with domestic sheep and/or other bighorn herds. CPW will implement the collaring study. GPS collar monitoring studies are needed to assess disease risk and habitat restoration needs for the Lone Pine Herd by gathering data on herd landscape use (habitat, spatial and temporal), recruitment, and overall health. Depending upon the Lone Pine Herd size, up to a maximum of 15 collars may be deployed. Fort Collins will provide CPW additional funding of up to $120,000 to support global positioning system (GPS) collaring and disease testing of up to a maximum of 15 bighorn sheep from the Lone Pine herd. The preconstruction portion of the GPS collaring study including, and disease testing will begin no less than 2 years before the anticipated start of the Halligan Project construction. GPS collars are expected to have a 2-year life and collect data approximately every 4 hours. Preconstruction collaring data will be considered viable for 5 years. Should construction be pushed beyond that initial 5-year window, a second GPS collar study would start 1 year from the start of construction. The intent of the second preconstruction GPS collar study including, and disease testing is to have accurate and recent data on the Lone Pine herd’s movements before construction. The Lone Pine herd will be fitted with GPS collars and undergo disease testing during all of the construction with collars having an anticipated 2-year battery life. The final phase will be a 2-year postconstruction GPS collaring and disease testing event to evaluate postconstruction movement and habitat use. CPW may euthanize bighorn sheep to prevent disease spread in the Lone Pine herd and/or adjacent herds. As discussed in Section 4.3.3 Fort Collins will provide monetary compensation for any bighorn sheep culls from the Lone Pine herd. $120,000 $120,000 Avoidance and Minimization Mitigation Measures Overhead Power Line and Pole Relocation 4.2.3.20 The Halligan Project will require the relocation of approximately 27 overhead power poles and lines from the southwest end of the exiting reservoir to the new dam since the old power poles would be inundated during the Halligan enlargement. The existing poles and line are too old to be reused safely. The new poles and line will be constructed and energized prior to the removal of the old poles and line. Installation and the removal of the overhead power line and poles will result in temporary disturbance of vegetation due to vehicles driving off-road. At this time, a formal access road is not being proposed for the installation or removal of the overhead power lines and poles. Some vegetation will be permanently removed to for the placement of the new poles. Fort Collins will work with Poudre Valley Rural Electric Authority to perform raptor and migratory nesting bird surveys (Section 4.2.3.4, Migratory Bird and Raptor Surveys) prior to construction. In addition, construction BMPs (Section 4.2.3.7, Best Management Practices) including sediment control and aquatic nuisance species measures (Section 4.2.3.16, Aquatic Nuisance Species), and construction disturbance minimization and reclamation measures (Section 4.2.3.9, Construction Disturbance Minimization and Reclamation) will be implemented. Installation and removal of the overhead power lines and pole will be prohibited between December 1 and April 30. The overhead power lines and poles will follow design guidelines similar to those used by the Avian Power Line Interaction Committee and will have bird diverters. $0 $0 Avoidance and Minimization Mitigation Measures Halligan Reservoir Sediment Management Plan 4.2.4 Operating the reservoir, particularly at low water levels, in accordance with a plan developed by sediment experts is intended to avoid adverse sediment release events. A sediment management plan will be developed for Halligan Reservoir that will provide guidelines for post-construction reservoir operations (including low water level operations). CPW will be given an opportunity to comment on the draft sediment management plan. $75,000 $0 EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 492 Item 15. Measurement Type Mitigation, Monitoring, and Enhancement Measure FWMEP Section Purpose for Measure Description of the Commitment[a] Fort Collins Total Capitalized Cost[b] FWMEP Capitalized Cost[b] Compensatory Mitigation Measures Preservation as Early Compensatory Mitigation Measure 4.3.1 In 2003 to 2004, as an act of early mitigation in anticipation of the Halligan Project, Fort Collins led the purchase and preservation of a permanent conservation easement of a 4,557-acre property known as Roberts Ranch, which comprises several disconnected parcels (Figure 4 8) in the Livermore Valley. The easement covers 4,557 acres of high- quality wildlife habitat and rangelands near Halligan Reservoir and is also adjacent to 14,000 acres of other state and locally protected lands. This early conservation effort provides the following benefits:  Direct and indirect ecological benefit to wildlife resources affected by the Halligan Project, including long-term preservation of suitable habitat for big game ungulates, as well as the federally and state threatened Preble’s meadow jumping mouse and the federally threatened Ute ladies’-tresses orchid  Land preservation and conservation in perpetuity of habitat for wildlife and rare and native plants, and conservation of the diverse forest, shrubland, meadow, and riparian vegetative communities  Approximately 2 decades of land preservation before disturbance from the Halligan Project construction activities  Preservation of areas within the linkage area for the Lone Pine bighorn sheep herd where individual rams have been observed annually by local residents from approximately March to October on parcels of Roberts Ranch east of Highway 287 (Thode, pers. comm. 2021), and limitations on grazing such that species other than cattle or horses cannot be grazed on the property unless approved by The Nature Conservancy in areas where use of cattle or horses is impractical  Conservation of more than 8.8 miles of perennial streams  Direct connectivity to 14,000 acres of adjacent state and locally protected lands $1,800,000 $0 Compensatory Mitigation Measures Fish Passage at the Fort Collins Intake at Gateway Park 4.3.2 The majority of diversions related to the Halligan Project will take place at the Fort Collins’ Intake at Gateway Park on the Main Stem. This diversion structure is located approximately 0.5 mile upstream of the confluence with the North Fork. The diversion structure currently acts as a barrier to fish movement, preventing the migration of fish past the structure. With this action, Fort Collins will compensate for reduction of flows on the Main Stem in the Exchange Reach between the Fort Collins Intake(s) and the North Fork confluence. Fort Collins will construct fish passage around the Fort Collins Intake diversion structure at Gateway Park to increase connectivity for trout and other large-bodied fish species on the Main Stem and to compensate for impacts on Main Stem fisheries associated with flow changes as a result of the Halligan Project. The fish passage will be designed, in consultation with CPW, and to CPW’s Research and Design Guidelines, Fish Passage and River Structures to provide reliable upstream fish passage and will help to provide additional connectivity upstream of the Fort Collins Intake. Construction of this project will be completed prior to Fort Collins beginning Halligan operations that involve exchanges on the Main Stem or on an alternate timeline that is agreed upon between CPW and Fort Collins. $1,210,200 $1,210,200 EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 493 Item 15. Measurement Type Mitigation, Monitoring, and Enhancement Measure FWMEP Section Purpose for Measure Description of the Commitment[a] Fort Collins Total Capitalized Cost[b] FWMEP Capitalized Cost[b] Compensatory Mitigation Measures Bighorn Sheep Mortality Compensation 4.3.3 Fort Collins will avoid and minimize potential Project effects on bighorn sheep through the habitat improvements and movement tracking collaring study described in Sections 4.2.3.17, 4.2.3.18, 4.2.3.19 and through construction timing restrictions described in Section 4.2.3.13. Additional construction-related measures to avoid and minimize impacts on terrestrial wildlife, including bighorn sheep, are described in Section 4.2.3.7. If, despite these efforts, construction of the Halligan Project causes mortality directly, through euthanasia or otherwise, to bighorn sheep in the Lone Pine herd, Fort Collins will offset this unavoidable impact through monetary compensation to CPW. Fort Collins will provide monetary compensation of $7,300 per sheep to CPW for any Lone Pine herd bighorn sheep that experience mortality during project construction and 2 years postconstruction. Although not all mortality experience during the construction period is anticipated to be caused by the Project, as a conservative approach Fort Collins is willing to assume that mortalities during the construction period and 2 years postconstruction will be compensated. Additionally, if Lone Pine herd mortalities are observed in the 2 years following the end of construction, Fort Collins will compensate CPW $7,300 per sheep. CPW has concerns that the Halligan Project construction may cause Lone Pine herd sheep to change movement patterns such that they act as a vector for disease transmission from domestic sheep to the Lower Poudre herd. Fort Collins will work with CPW to develop an adaptive management approach to monitoring bighorn sheep movements to assess disease transmission, and will compensate CPW for Lower Poudre herd bighorn sheep that were exposed to respiratory disease because of the Halligan Project during and 2 years after construction. $0 $0 Compensatory Mitigation Measures Compensatory Mitigation for Halligan Project Impacts on Stream Temperature 4.3.4 The restoration will be focused on either enhancing aquatic life habitat or funding a fish passage project, or both. This money is committed as a compensatory mitigation for unavoidable temperature impacts on the Main Stem. Fort Collins will commit $200,000 of funding for stream restoration efforts along the Main Stem, or North Fork, within or near the Halligan Project Area, including the North Fork above Halligan Reservoir to compensate for potential project-related temperature increases. Fort Collins and CPW will have final approval authority on any use of funds and will be used for the public benefit. Note: This commitment is separate from the $200,000 enhancement commitment for the North Fork described in Section 5.1.1.6; however these funding commitments may be combined or used independently. $200,000 $200,000 Compensatory Mitigation Measures Compensatory Mitigation for Halligan Project Impacts on Wetlands 4.3.5 Wetland mitigation for Halligan Project impacts may include restoration, mitigation banking, or other measures that benefit fish and wildlife. Compensatory mitigation and monitoring for wetlands will be described in a separate mitigation plan yet to be developed for approval by the Corps. $2,490,400 $0 Compensatory Mitigation Measures Special Status Species 4.3.6 Fort Collins seeks to avoid and minimize any adverse impacts on any special-status species. Halligan Project mitigation measures, such as the preservation of Roberts Ranch (Section 4.3.1), and the numerous avoidance and minimization measures (Section 4.2) will adequately mitigate potential Halligan Project effects on state-listed species. This applies for all of Section 4.3.6 except for Section 4.3.6.1 discussed in the next row. No additional species-specific compensatory mitigation measures have been proposed. Although Fort Collins' mitigation actions directed towards special status species (e.g., Preble's meadow jumping mouse) will benefit other fish and wildlife, no costs are included here since they are considered in the Preservation as Early Compensatory Mitigation Measure. $0 $0 Compensatory Mitigation Measures Preble's Meadow Jumping Mouse Habitat Improvements/Monitoring Contribution 4.3.6.1 Mitigation and monitoring of Halligan Project impacts on Preble’s are being developed in consultation with USFWS. Mitigation and monitoring of Halligan Project impacts on Preble’s are described in the Halligan Water Supply Project Preble’s Meadow Jumping Mouse Mitigation Plan. $218,900 $0 EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 494 Item 15. Measurement Type Mitigation, Monitoring, and Enhancement Measure FWMEP Section Purpose for Measure Description of the Commitment[a] Fort Collins Total Capitalized Cost[b] FWMEP Capitalized Cost[b] Compensatory Mitigation Measures Recreational Resources 4.3.7 The surface of Halligan Reservoir is not open to the public for recreational use, the Halligan Project will not change the public’s ability to recreate on the reservoir. The enlarged Halligan Project Reservoir will inundate approximately a 0.75-mile reach of the North Fork upstream of the existing Halligan Reservoir, resulting in the loss of approximately 20 acres of potential hunting lands and river fishing along a 0.4-mile stretch of this reach. The proposed mitigation measure are discussed in detail in the next three rows relating to Sections 4.3.7.1, 4.3.7.2, and 4.3.7.3. Fort Collins understands CPW’s desire to see public angling access at the enlarged Halligan Reservoir. Since the Halligan Project is not impacting surface water recreation at Halligan Reservoir, Fort Collins and CPW have agreed to continue discussions related to recreational opportunities at the enlarged Halligan Reservoir in a process separate from the current processes to enlarge Halligan Reservoir and the FWMEP. To formalize this commitment, Fort Collins will include language in an intergovernmental agreement with CPW to continue discussions related to recreation at the enlarged Halligan Reservoir. Those discussions may include the reservoir being managed for recreation by CPW as a part of the Cherokee SWA. If, separate from the current processes to enlarge Halligan Reservoir, the reservoir is opened to public recreation at a point in the future, any recreation plan proposed by Fort Collins that will affect the Cherokee SWA will be developed in conjunction with CPW and will consider impacts on fish and wildlife habitat, including impacts on any access through the Cherokee SWA. The recreation plan will also consider and compensate for the resource needs for CPW to stock and manage Halligan Reservoir for public angling access, if CPW determines it will maintain a public fishery. $0 $0 Compensatory Mitigation Measures Reconciliation of Title Chain Confusion 4.3.7.1 Fort Collins discovered that approximately 39 acres of land in the eastern half of Section 29 and in the northeastern quarter of Section 32 that were thought to be owned by CPW are owned by Fort Collins and a private party. Upper portions of the enlarged Halligan Reservoir will be located on portions of these lands. For the most part, these lands are surrounded by the Cherokee SWA–Middle Unit and according to CPW, these lands have been accessed by the public for over 50 years20. Fort Collins intends to acquire these lands for the enlarged Halligan Reservoir. After acquiring these lands, Fort Collins will seek an agreement with CPW to convey an easement to CPW across these lands for public use, provided that the surface of the enlarged reservoir will not be opened to public access at this time. Any such agreement and conveyance will be subject to applicable laws, including statutes applicable to CPW, and the Fort Collins Municipal Code Chapter 23 (Public Property), Article IV (Disposition of Property), Division 2 (Real Property). $0 $0 Compensatory Mitigation Measures Funding of Public Access Lease with Roberts Ranch 4.3.7.2 The Krause Field parcel was conserved as a part of the Roberts Ranch conservation easement secured by Fort Collins and partners in 2003 and 2004 (refer to Section 4.3.1). CPW has been pursuing a lease allowing primitive foot access for hunting and fishing on the Krause Field parcel. Fort Collins understands that this lease will provide public access to over 2,200 acres of hunting and approximately 1 mile of river access and fishing, which includes the North Fork and potentially stretches of its tributaries, Dale Creek and Bull Creek. Fort Collins will contribute funding to CPW to support a lease of the Krause Field parcel of Roberts Ranch. Fort Collins agrees to a one- time reimbursement in the amount of $135,000 for CPW to pursue a long-term lease (in process) of the Krause Field parcel. $135,000 $135,000 20 Fort Collins is evaluating if and the extent to which the public has accessed this part of the inundation area and makes no representations on this issue. EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 495 Item 15. Measurement Type Mitigation, Monitoring, and Enhancement Measure FWMEP Section Purpose for Measure Description of the Commitment[a] Fort Collins Total Capitalized Cost[b] FWMEP Capitalized Cost[b] Compensatory Mitigation Measures Parking Area Establishment at State Wildlife Area 4.3.7.3 An existing primitive parking area near the southwest portion of Halligan Reservoir is located on Fort Collins’ property in the northeast quarter of Section 32. The parking area falls within an area previously thought to be owned by CPW. This parking area will be inundated by the enlarged Halligan Reservoir. Fort Collins will provide $30,000 in funds to create a new parking area on CPW land outside of the inundation area, to provide comparable access to this general location. The new parking area will be primitive and similar in form to the existing parking area. $30,000 $0 Compensatory Mitigation Measures Instream Water Rights 4.3.8 The enlarged Halligan Reservoir will inundate approximately 0.75 mile of the North Fork upstream of the current reservoir where the CWCB holds an instream flow water right. Because of the additional stream flow that will be provided downstream, Fort Collins’ commitment to protect those associated releases from Halligan Reservoir for approximately 22 miles downstream using the Protected Mitigation Release statute (CRS 37- 92-102[8]), and the aquatic resource enhancements described in Section 5, no additional compensatory mitigation is proposed for impacts on the CWCB’s instream flow water rights as part of this FWMEP. $0 $0 Monitoring and Adaptive Management for Mitigation Streamflow Monitoring 5.3.1 Streamflow monitoring data will enhance the existing dataset that is available for public use and will also be used by Fort Collins to help inform operational decisions for the enlarged Halligan Reservoir. Fort Collins has already installed one of two new North Fork streamflow gages associated with the Halligan Project. The first gage, located above the future inlet of the enlarged Halligan Reservoir, was installed by Fort Collins in fall 2020 in coordination with the United States Geological Survey. An existing stream gage is located below the Halligan Dam that will remain in the future. The second gage will be installed by Fort Collins at or below the bypass channel to be constructed on the North Poudre Canal Diversion to monitor streamflow and inform North Poudre Canal Diversion and Halligan Reservoir operations. In addition, Fort Collins will also rely on the existing Livermore gage located where the North Fork crosses West County Road 74E. $2,487,200 $0 Monitoring and Adaptive Management for Mitigation Sediment, Macroinvertebrate, and Water Quality Monitoring 5.3.2 Sampling for sediment and macroinvertebrates, downstream of Halligan Reservoir will help monitor sediment relative to standards and identify any new impairment or worsening conditions. This information can be used to determine appropriate response actions per the sediment management plan, as needed. Fort Collins will also monitor iron immediately below the enlarged reservoir for 5 years to determine if the flushing event (described in Section 4.2.1.6) is effective and/or necessary. If a MLOW is installed (described in Section 4.2.2.1), real- time oxygen and temperature data from multiple elevations in Halligan Reservoir during summer months will be needed to support operational decision-making for the MLOW. This sediment sampling will continue for a period of 5 years following the build out of Halligan Project operations, after which time the need to continue sampling will be reconsidered in coordination with CPW and WQCD.Iron monitoring will consist of visual checks for iron deposition on sediment in the vicinity of the NBH sampling station (and photographic records of any observed deposition) as well as continued sampling at NBH for dissolved and total iron. However, if it is determined at the end of the first 5 years following construction (in consultation with CPW) that this operation is no longer needed, then the releases and special monitoring (observations of iron deposition) will end.If a MLOW is installed (described in Section 4.2.2.1), real-time oxygen and temperature data from multiple elevations in Halligan Reservoir during summer months would be used to help manage water quality of releases to the North Fork with an MLOW. As such, this monitoring will be conducted as a critical component of the MLOW mitigation element. $120,000 $120,000 EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 496 Item 15. Measurement Type Mitigation, Monitoring, and Enhancement Measure FWMEP Section Purpose for Measure Description of the Commitment[a] Fort Collins Total Capitalized Cost[b] FWMEP Capitalized Cost[b] Monitoring and Adaptive Management for Mitigation Adaptive Management Costs Various Measures Adaptive management in response to environmental monitoring is indirectly incorporated into some mitigation and enhancement measures in the FWMEP, including the MLOW, bighorn sheep collaring and mortality compensation, sediment management, and temporary environmental pool measures. This measure will help with aquatic and terrestrial species and ecosystems by monitoring and adapting plans accordingly. The FWMEP capitalization cost of $37,500 is for adaptive management related to bighorn sheep. $225,000 $37,500 Monitoring and Adaptive Management for Mitigation Bighorn Sheep Collaring Study 5.3.3 Collaring and tracking of the Lone Pine herd will be conducted before, during, and after the Halligan Project construction. The commitments are captured in the avoidance and minimization mitigation measures described in Section 4.2.3.18 and the compensatory mitigation measure described in Section 4.3.3. $0 $0 Enhancement Measures Temporary Environmental Pool 5.1.1.1 Between the time that Halligan Reservoir is enlarged and the time when Fort Collins grows into its future demand levels associated with the Halligan Project, Fort Collins will dedicate an annually variable storage volume in the enlarged Halligan Reservoir to release for environmental benefits downstream. This annually variable volume of water dedicated for environmental benefits is referred to as the temporary environmental pool (TEP). The purpose of the TEP is to enhance the environmental benefit, or functional lift, of the flow-related operational measures described in Section 4.2.1. The primary objective of the TEP is to positively affect stream health in the North Fork from the replacement Halligan Dam to Seaman Reservoir. In general, the TEP will be used to benefit whole stream health, with the ability to focus on specific river functions, or single-species management in select years. Use of the TEP will be informed by first principles of river ecology. Fort Collins will determine the volume of water available for the TEP each year. Volumes in the range of 500 to 1,000 acre-feet are expected to be available; however, the actual volume available could increase or decrease after information is gained from the first several years of operation of the enlarged Halligan Reservoir. Decisions regarding the volume of water allocated each year will be made by Fort Collins. The volume and targeted window for releases will be determined before July 1 each year. The window for releases will typically be from July 1 to the following April 30. Fort Collins will not re-divert the TEP releases until after they have reached the confluence with the Main stem of the Poudre River. The primary stakeholders for the TEP will be Fort Collins and CPW. The best use of this water will be determined based on decreed beneficial uses of the water rights and current conditions at that point in time and the greatest ecological concerns or issues, with one of the priorities being management of small bodied native fish species downstream of Halligan Reservoir. Operational targets for use of the TEP could be set for several years at a time to address multiple ecological priorities. NPIC cannot divert the TEP releases into the North Poudre Canal pursuant to an existing agreement with Fort Collins. $150,000 $0 Enhancement Measures Joint Operations 5.1.1.2 Fort Collins will continue to entertain opportunities for operational synergies with other managed water deliveries in the Poudre River watershed in order to potentially provide targeted benefits to the watershed. Potential enhancement to environmental benefits related to stream flows. $0 $0 EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 497 Item 15. Measurement Type Mitigation, Monitoring, and Enhancement Measure FWMEP Section Purpose for Measure Description of the Commitment[a] Fort Collins Total Capitalized Cost[b] FWMEP Capitalized Cost[b] Enhancement Measures Fish Passage at the Reconstructed North Poudre Canal Diversion 5.1.1.3 North Poudre Canal Diversion is approximately 6 miles downstream of Halligan Reservoir on the North Fork. The structure currently acts as a barrier to upstream fish passage, preventing the migration of fish past the structure. Fort Collins will reconstruct the North Poudre Canal Diversion so that Fort Collins’ releases can be bypassed by that structure and remain in the North Fork. To provide increased connectivity for small-bodied native species and trout in the North Fork, Fort Collins will incorporate fish passage into or around the reconstructed North Poudre Canal Diversion, in the form of a fish ladder, bypass channel, or other infrastructure. Fish passage will be designed, in consultation with CPW, and to CPW’s Fish Passage and River Structures Research and Design Guidelines to provide reliable fish passage at the North Poudre Canal Diversion and connect an extensive reach of the North Fork. Fish passage construction will happen concurrently with reconstruction of the North Poudre Canal Diversion, in accordance with the timeline listed in Figure 4-7, will be completed by the time Fort Collins begins storing water in the enlarge Halligan Reservoir or an alternate timeline that is agreed upon between CPW and Fort Collins. $1,759,750 $0 Enhancement Measures Channel Improvements and Modifications of the Calloway Diversion 5.1.1.4 The Calloway Diversion is located on the North Fork approximately 7.5 river miles downstream of Halligan Reservoir. The diversion is no longer used. Although water passes the structure, it acts as a barrier to fish passage, preventing the migration of fish past the structure. Fort Collins will pursue an agreement in good faith with the landowners and other stakeholders to complete this project. A preliminary concept was developed in collaboration with landowners, CPW, and other stakeholders, includes removal of the center portion of the structure, while leaving the sidewalls of the structure in place. This project will be constructed in accordance with the timeline listed in Figure 4-7 and will be completed by the time Fort Collins begins storing water in the Halligan Reservoir Expansion or an alternate timeline that is agreed upon between CPW and Fort Collins. If Fort Collins is unable to come to an agreement with the landowners to complete channel improvements and modifications of the Calloway Diversion within the timeline that aligns with the reconstruction of the North Poudre Canal Diversion discussed in Section 5.1.1.3, Fort Collins will coordinate with CPW and the landowners to discuss an alternative timeline to avoid or minimize impacts to bighorn sheep as discussed in Sections 4.2.3.13, 4.2.3.17, and 4.2.3.19. The improvements at the Calloway Diversion will have the largest impact on aquatic habitat; however, the improvements will also benefit terrestrial species, specifically Preble’s. The USFWS considers the Calloway Diversion to be a habitat filter to Preble’s movement. The removal of the diversion will reconnect the Preble’s habitat. $1,120,645 $0 Enhancement Measures Ramping Rate Limitations for NPIC’s Pool in an Enlarged Halligan Reservoir 5.1.1.5 The ramping rate limitations described in Section 4.2.1.2 apply only to Fort Collins’ operation of its portion of the enlarged Halligan Reservoir; they do not apply to operation of NPIC’s portion of the reservoir. Fort Collins will commit to making a good faith effort to reach an agreement with NPIC to adhere to the same ramping rate limitations. Previous discussions with NPIC indicate that it would prefer to explore any such commitments after the enlarged reservoir is operational for several years. $0 $0 EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 498 Item 15. Measurement Type Mitigation, Monitoring, and Enhancement Measure FWMEP Section Purpose for Measure Description of the Commitment[a] Fort Collins Total Capitalized Cost[b] FWMEP Capitalized Cost[b] Enhancement Measures North Fork Stream Restoration 5.1.1.6 Fort Collins will commit to provide funding for stream restoration efforts along the North Fork. The restoration will be focused on either enhancing habitat for small-bodied native fish or salmonids. Fort Collins will commit $200,000 of funding for stream restoration efforts along the North Fork, or Main Stem, within or near the Halligan Project Area, including the North Fork above Halligan Reservoir. This commitment is separate from the $200,000 mitigation commitment for the Main Stem described in Section 4.3.4; these funds may be combined or used independently. Fort Collins and CPW will have final approval authority on any use of funds and will be used for the public benefit. $200,000 $200,000 Enhancement Measures Bottom Release from Halligan when Spilling 5.2.1.1 Water will be released from Halligan Reservoir through the bottom outlets at times when the reservoir is spilling over the dam. Avoiding buildup of sediment behind the dam should, in part, help avoid an adverse sediment release event like the one that occurred because of operations in 1996. Thermal shock can occur below the Halligan Reservoir dam under current Halligan Reservoir dam operations. The Halligan Project has an inherent benefit of reducing the current frequency of thermal shock below Halligan Reservoir dam because no spilling is anticipated (per DEIS flow modeling) to occur in summer or fall months (that is, at times when the reservoir is thermally stratified). Bottom release should allow for reduced retention of sediment in Halligan Reservoir, allowing for appropriate sediment transport downstream to the North Fork. This measure is also considered a voluntary enhancement in terms of river temperature for its parallel benefits in reducing the risk of thermal shock below the Halligan Reservoir dam. Bottom releases during spilling would provide further enhancement in terms of further reducing the risk of thermal shock because such releases would serve to blend top and bottom temperatures, minimizing the sharp temperature change in releases, in the unanticipated event that the reservoir does spill at a time of thermal stratification with the Halligan Project. $0 $0 Enhancement Measures Passive Aeration in Outlet Structure 5.2.2 Fort Collins will incorporate design measures for the replacement Halligan Dam that passive physical aeration. This will increase dissolved oxygen concentrations in water released to the North Fork, enhancing conditions for aquatic life immediately below the reservoir. This aeration will be applied to releases from both Fort Collins’ and NPIC’s portion of the enlarged Halligan Reservoir. Because adverse impacts on aquatic life are not anticipated in terms of oxygen below Halligan Reservoir, inclusion of passive aeration in the outlet structure is considered to be a voluntary enhancement, as opposed to mitigation. Design measures being evaluated that would increase DO include an updated stilling basin, a stepped spillway, and a turbulent discharge area with energy dissipation. This aeration will be applied to releases from both Fort Collins’ and NPIC’s portion of the enlarged Halligan Reservoir. $0 $0 Enhancement Measures Prohibition of Domestic Sheep and Goat Grazing on City-owned Lands Near Halligan Reservoir 5.2.3.1 Several land managers within the Lone Pine herd-occupied range along or near key components of the Halligan Project use domestic sheep to control larkspur (Delphinium species), which are toxic to cattle. Although domestic sheep can be an effective vegetation management tool, this practice increases the chances of commingling between the Lone Pine herd and domestic sheep. The greatest concern of such commingling is the transmission of deadly pathogens between domestic sheep and goat populations and populations and the Lone Pine herd. As a measure to help reduce the long-term risk of disease transmission, soon as this FWMEP is approved, Fort Collins will:  Permanently stop grazing domestic sheep or goats for weed control or other purposes on any Fort Collins-owned lands around Halligan Reservoir  Will not enter into grazing leases that would authorize others to graze domestic sheep or goats on any Fort Collins-owned lands around Halligan Reservoir  Will not grant licenses or convey easements authorizing domestic sheep or goats to graze on any Fort Collins-owned lands around Halligan Reservoir $0 $0 EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 499 Item 15. Measurement Type Mitigation, Monitoring, and Enhancement Measure FWMEP Section Purpose for Measure Description of the Commitment[a] Fort Collins Total Capitalized Cost[b] FWMEP Capitalized Cost[b] Enhancement Measures Advocate for Cessation of Domestic Sheep and Goat Grazing on Private Lands Near Halligan Reservoir 5.2.3.2 Landowners near the Halligan Project Area periodically allow domestic sheep and goat grazing on their property to control larkspur, which are toxic to cattle and horses. Comingling of domestic sheep and goats with bighorn sheep is linked to disease transmission to bighorn sheep, which can result in bighorn sheep mortality. Fort Collins will engage with local landowners to advocate for both the temporary cessation of domestic sheep and goat grazing during construction, as well as for the permanent cessation of domestic sheep and goat grazing near the Halligan Project Area. Ceasing domestic sheep and goat grazing on private property around the Halligan Project Area will avoid the potential for disease transmission from domestic sheep and goats to bighorn sheep. $0 $0 Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable Mitigation $15,345,903 $2,958,650 Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable Monitoring and Adaptive Management $2,832,200 $157,500 Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable Total Mitigation, Monitoring and Adaptive Management Cost $18,178,103 $3,116,150 Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable Enhancement $3,230,395 $200,000 Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable Total Mitigation and Enhancement Costs for Project $21,408,498 $3,316,150 Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable Total Design and Construction Costs (Per 30% Design) $144,584,000 Not Applicable [a] The description of mitigation commitments is at a summary level - see text for details of the commitment. The text shall take precedent over any discrepancies between this table and the text. [b] Capitalized cost is the sum of the capital cost plus any annual operations and maintenance costs capitalized over the life of the commitment, or 50 years for those commitments that are perpetual. EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 500 Item 15. Appendix C Surface Water Quality Supplemental Information EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 501 Item 15. Appendix C. Surface Water Quality Supplemental Information This appendix presents an overview of surface water quality current conditions for Halligan Reservoir, Seaman Reservoir, the North Fork, and the Main Stem. This appendix is intended to be a high-level summary and is not intended to fully recreate documentation of the studies/communications referenced (Hydros 2020, 2021a, 2021b, 2021c, and 2021d, 2022a, 2022b, and 2022c). Instead, highlights of the key findings regarding current surface water-quality conditions are presented, by area. The referenced studies rigorously document the conceptualization of existing major drivers of spatial and temporal variability in temperature and water quality in Halligan Reservoir, Seaman Reservoir, the North Fork, and the Main Stem. The conceptual understanding in those documents is based on evaluation of observed water-quality data, flow data, diversion patterns, reservoir operations, geology, point sources, land use, and spatially varying meteorological conditions. Observed data were also compared in these studies to applicable aquatic life water-quality standards to identify existing concerns relative to standards. Sampling stations considered in those analyses and referenced in this appendix are presented in Appendix D, Water Quality Sampling Location Maps. Additionally, Appendix D is supported by two memoranda (Hydros 2022a and Hydros 2022c). C.1 Halligan Reservoir Current conditions in Halligan Reservoir are discussed in Hydros (2020, 2022a, and 2022c) and summarized briefly here. Halligan Reservoir is currently an approximately 6,400 acre-feet, on-channel, water supply reservoir on the North Fork. The reservoir is relatively shallow except near the dam (Figure C-1). The annual residence time is relatively short, averaging roughly 26 days (based on observed data from 2010 to 2018). Monthly residence times tend to be relatively low (fewer than 30 days) from April through October and higher in winter months of November through March (Figure C-2). This reflects the typical seasonal inflow and release patterns. Inflows into the reservoir follow a typical pattern of high flows during spring snowmelt runoff and declining flows through the summer. The reservoir fills in the winter and the timing of full pool can vary by year, sometimes filling as early as the end of December and sometimes not filling until the end of May. The reservoir stratifies each year, generally from May to August, with the duration of stratification being limited by strong winds and reservoir operations that draw down water levels during summer. Water can be released via outlet works at the bottom of the reservoir and/or at the spillway (when the reservoir is full). EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 502 Item 15. Figure C-1. Bathymetric Map of Halligan Reservoir (Based on 2003 Survey) at Existing Full Pool Figure C-2. Average Monthly Residence Time in Halligan Reservoir (Based on Observed Release Rates and Storage Volumes from 2010 to 2018) For most constituents, inflow concentrations to Halligan Reservoir peak during spring runoff and then decline. While the reservoir is stratified during summer, the hypolimnion can become hypoxic (≤ 2 milligrams per liter [mg/L] dissolved oxygen [DO]; Figure C-3) and internal loading of redox-sensitive constituents from the sediments is observed. Chlorophyll a concentrations tend to be relatively low, averaging 6 micrograms per liter [µg/L] for July through September (2016 to 2019). The maximum observed chlorophyll a concentration in Halligan Reservoir (2016 to 2019) is 13.3 µg/L (November 8, 2016; Figure C-4).21 The reservoir is not on the current CWA Section 303(d) list or the 21 Note that the sampling stations considered in the development of the understanding of current conditions for surface water quality are mapped in Appendix D. EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 503 Item 15. Monitoring and Evaluation list for any constituents (WQCC 2021b) because the data were not previously shared with WQCD; however, a comparison of observed data to applicable aquatic life water-quality standards and interim nutrient criteria (WQCC 2020) indicates possible current in-reservoir concerns for dissolved silver, water temperature, and total phosphorus. Figure C-3. Dissolved Oxygen Profiles in Halligan Reservoir (2021) Figure C-4. Observed Chlorophyll a Concentrations in Halligan Reservoir (2016 to 2019) EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 504 Item 15. C.2 Seaman Reservoir Current conditions in Seaman Reservoir are described in detail in Hydros (2021b) and briefly summarized in this section. Seaman Reservoir is a 4,150 acre-feet,22 on-channel water supply reservoir on the North Fork operated by the City of Greeley located 22 miles downstream of Halligan Reservoir. The average annual residence time (2008 to 2019) is 45 days. Inflows to the reservoir primarily occur during spring runoff and enter the reservoir via the North Fork. Because the reservoir is often full during spring runoff, much of the spring runoff flow is passed through the reservoir and released to the North Fork downstream. The reservoir is often drawn down during late summer and fall, and typically refills by December. Water is released from outlet works at the bottom of the reservoir dam when pool levels are below the spillway. Seaman Reservoir stratifies in the summer each year, with stratification typically beginning early April or May and lasting until fall turnover in September or October. At times, water quality below Seaman Reservoir has negatively impacted aquatic life, including a fish kill in August 2018 (Battige 2018). Anoxia (0 mg/L DO) is routinely observed in the hypolimnion of Seaman Reservoir during summer stratification (for example, Figure C-5), and the reservoir also periodically exhibits metalimnetic DO minima (caused by the decay of settling organic matter; for example, the profile on June 25, 2019 on Figure C-5). The seasonal reducing conditions in the hypolimnion cause internal release of nutrients and metals from the reservoir sediment. Summer chlorophyll a concentrations are typically below 20 µg/L, but major blooms have also occurred. For example, a cyanobacteria bloom occurred in 2012 exhibiting a peak observed chlorophyll a concentration of 183 µg/L, and another bloom occurred in 2017, with a peak observed chlorophyll a concentration of 100 µg/L. Figure C-5. Example Dissolved Oxygen Profiles from Seaman Reservoir, 2019 22 Recent (2016) bathymetric surveys performed by TetraTech indicate the reservoir capacity is approximately 4,150 acre-feet, suggesting the reservoir has lost approximately 850 acre-feet of storage to sedimentation since reservoir construction in 1941 (TetraTech 2018). EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 505 Item 15. Comparison of observed data from Seaman Reservoir to applicable aquatic life water-quality standards (WQCC 2021a) indicates concerns with DO and temperature. In 5 of 11 years from 2008 to 2019, DO concentrations were observed below the standard in the mixed layer following fall turnover (for example, the profile on September 23, 2019 on Figure C-5). Seaman Reservoir is currently on the CWA Section 303(d) list for DO (WQCC 2021b). There are also two years in the recent record (2017 and 2018) that show temperatures in the mixed layer exceeding the applicable standard at a time when no adequate refuge for fish existed at greater depth (e.g., 7/10/18 in Figure C-6).23 Given the anoxic conditions in the hypolimnion during stratification and the bottom releases during summer, there may also be issues relative to the aquatic life sulfide standard in and immediately below the reservoir, though there are no sulfide data24 to verify this concern. Figure C-6. Example Profile Pair from Halligan Reservoir Showing Temperature Exceedance and No Adequate Refuge; July 10, 2018 Finally, observed data from Seaman Reservoir suggest concerns relative to the interim nutrient criteria values (WQCC 2020) for chlorophyll a, total nitrogen, and total phosphorus. While the interim criteria values have not been adopted as standards for the reservoir, concentrations in excess of the interim values are observed in more than half of the years of record from 2008 through 2019. 23 Adequate refuge refers to layers in the water column where both temperature and dissolved oxygen are within their respective standards. 24 Note that the standard applies to undissociated sulfide, and there are no undissociated sulfide data. EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 506 Item 15. C.3 North Fork Current conditions for surface water quality on the North Fork are discussed in detail in Hydros (2021b, 2022a, and 2022c) and summarized in this section. Water quality on the North Fork from Halligan Reservoir to the confluence with the Main Stem is influenced by releases from Halligan and Seaman Reservoirs, as well as seasonally by inflow water quality of tributaries and groundwater in the Livermore Valley. Concentrations of many constituents tend to peak during spring runoff. There is notable attenuation for some constituents, including nutrients and some metals, along the approximately 22 river miles from Halligan Reservoir to Seaman Reservoir, particularly in summer and winter months (outside of the high-flow spring runoff period). Current aquatic life water-quality concerns on the North Fork relative to standards are limited to dissolved silver and water temperature. Additionally, CPW has expressed concern regarding total iron concentrations, specifically below Halligan Reservoir, indicating that CPW believes the existing standard is not adequately protective of aquatic life. Note that this iron aquatic life standard concern is specific to CPW, and WQCD intends to focus on the existing aquatic life iron standard for the purposes of CWA Section 401 water quality certification. Finally, there is an existing total maximum daily load (TMDL) for sediment on the North Fork. The following paragraphs provide additional discussion regarding current conditions on the North Fork for dissolved silver, water temperature, total iron, and sediment. C.3.1 Dissolved Silver Dissolved silver in the North Fork is on the current CWA Section 303(d) list (WQCC 2021b) because it exceeds the hardness-based standard in some years (during spring runoff when hardness tends to be low). Observations above standards are most frequent in the reaches above and below Halligan Reservoir, though exceedances also occur farther downstream (Figure C-7). The timing and spatial distribution in the silver data indicate that it is mobilized from the watershed by runoff. There are no known metals mining or industrial activities in the watershed that could serve as an anthropogenic source of the observed silver. Further, the extensive Halligan Reservoir dataset indicates that there is no evidence suggesting the occurrence of internal loading of silver within the reservoir (Hydros 2022c). Figure C-7. Hardness across the North Fork, 2016-2019 EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 507 Item 15. C.3.2 Water Temperature Current conditions for river temperature on the North Fork are discussed in detail in Hydros (2021d) and summarized in this section. The reach of the North Fork below Seaman Reservoir is currently on the CWA Section 303(d) list for temperature (WQCC 2021b); however, observed data indicate that there are consistent issues relative to both the acute and chronic temperature standards across most of the North Fork in summer months, typically July through September. There are no issues on the North Fork relative to temperature standards outside of summer months with two exceptions. First, there are occasional fall shoulder season issues below Seaman Reservoir, with conditions exceeding the acute and chronic temperature standards in early November in some years. Second, sharp changes in water temperature can occur downstream of the Halligan Reservoir dam (that is, thermal shock) at times when the reservoir is thermally stratified and reservoir outflows switch from spilling of warmer water over the dam to bottom releases of cooler water (for example, July 2017; Figure C-8). Such cases of unnatural thermal shock can adversely affect aquatic life. Figure C-8. Example of Thermal Shock below Halligan Dam (NBH), 2017 Red circle indicates observed sharp drop in river temperature due to switch from spilling over dam to bottom releases. Issues relative to temperature standards generally increase from upstream to downstream on the North Fork in the summer months, as illustrated in the example dataset from July 2019 on Figure C-9 and Figure C-10. Summer temperatures tend to be coolest immediately below Halligan Reservoir (NBH), reflecting bottom release temperatures, though the chronic temperature standard is still exceeded in all years of record at NBH, with typical months of concern being July, August, and/or September. The rate of warming along the North Fork is strongly influenced by meteorological conditions and flow rate, including the effects of the North Poudre Canal Diversion, a major diversion located 6 river miles downstream of Halligan Reservoir. Summer warming of river water is tempered somewhat through the Livermore Valley by inflows from tributaries and groundwater gains (refer to NBP), which can comprise the majority of flow in the North Fork below Lone Pine Creek from July through September (Hydros 2021a). Below Seaman Reservoir on the North Fork (refer to NF-PRU) water temperatures can be lower than those immediately upstream of Seaman Reservoir (refer to NSR) in early summer (for example, July), but the opposite pattern is observed in later summer and early fall. On the North Fork EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 508 Item 15. below Seaman Reservoir, there are exceedances of both the acute and chronic summer standards in all years of the observed record. Figure C-9. Observed Weekly Average Temperatures across the North Fork on a Typical Summer Day with Bottom Releases from Halligan Reservoir, 7/19/2019 °C = degree(s) Celsius NBH, NFP, NPC, NCP, NSC, NBP, NEN, NSR, and NF-PRU are temperature sensor locations, and CS-II is the applicable summertime temperature standard. Weekly average temperature is a chronic temperature standard metric Figure C-10. Observed Daily Maximum Temperatures across the North Fork on a Typical Summer Day with Bottom Releases from Halligan Reservoir, 7/19/2019 Daily maximum is an acute temperature standard metric C.3.2.1 Total Iron Observed data indicate that there are no issues on the North Fork relative to the current aquatic life standard for total iron (1,000 µg/L, assessed as an annual median); however, CPW has expressed EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 509 Item 15. concerns that the existing standard is not adequately protective.25 CPW cites Cadmus et al. (2018), indicating that the chronic iron standard should be on the order of 251 µg/L, based on mesocosm tests. While Fort Collins acknowledges that revision of the aquatic life iron standard may be appropriate, the 251 µg/L value from Cadmus et al. (2018) is not directly comparable to field measurements of total iron. Assertion of a disconnect between field measurements of total iron and the 251 ug/L value is based on the following: Cadmus et al. (2018) arrived at the 251 µg/L value through mesocosm studies applying ferric chloride, which results in colloidal iron in solution. This form of iron is not directly comparable (in terms of effect on aquatic life) to iron bound in suspended sediments, which would be included in total iron lab analyses from field samples. Net loading calculations indicate that Halligan Reservoir is a sink for iron. Inflow concentrations of both total and dissolved iron peak during runoff. Data indicate that internal loading of iron from sediments occurs in Halligan Reservoir during summer stratification due to reducing conditions in the hypolimnion. Further, observed data indicate that a chronic standard value of 251 µg/L would not currently be met upstream or downstream of the reservoir, or within Halligan Reservoir. This is the case for chronic total or dissolved iron at 251 µg/L at any depth level in Halligan Reservoir (Table C-2). Table C-2. Median and 85th Percentiles of Total Iron and Dissolved Iron Data Site Years of Record Total Iron Median[a] (µg/L) Dissolved Iron 85th Percentile[a] (µg/L) NDC (North Fork above Dale Creek) 2016–2021 799 487 NAH (Halligan Reservoir inflow) 2020–2021 660 341 Halligan, top 2016–2021 377 318 Halligan, bottom 2016–2021 778 412 NBH (below Halligan Reservoir) 2016–2021 622 357 [a] These metrics are shown because water quality standards are typically assessed by comparing the median (for total metals) or the 85th percentile (for dissolved metals) of the data to the standard value. While chronic concentrations of total iron below Halligan Reservoir are currently greater than 251 µg/L, there is currently no site-specific indication of aquatic life impairment on the North Fork because of iron, though observations to date are not definitive. There have been no observations of iron coating of sediments below the reservoir,26 which is an expressed concern of CPW regarding inhibition of periphyton growth, benthic macroinvertebrates, and early life stage development of fish eggs. Unfortunately, because of confounding factors, there is no direct approach to definitively determine on a site-specific basis whether there is current impairment below Halligan Reservoir because of iron. Multiple known aquatic life stressors on the system, including temperature and low flow rates, could confound interpretation of the cause of any observed impairment. 25 While CPW has expressed concerns with the existing aquatic life standard for total iron, WQCD has made it clear that the existing standards will be the basis for analysis in the HWSP 401 Certification Application, and 251 ug/L will not be considered in that analysis as an aquatic life standard for total iron. 26 Sampler observations are limited to the reach between the dam and NBH (the sampling location approximately 600 feet below the dam). While NBH is relatively close to the dam, it is expected to be far enough downstream to observed iron coating issues because dissolved oxygen concentrations at this location are consistently at saturation. EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 510 Item 15. C.3.3 Sediment Total Maximum Daily Load Currently, there is a sediment TMDL on the North Fork that extends from Halligan Reservoir dam to a point 3.2 miles downstream. The TMDL was developed in 2002 (WQCC 2002) in response to a CWA Section 303(d) listing of sediment for the reach because of a major sediment release event in 1996. The sediment release event occurred at the time of a drawdown of the reservoir to allow for a safety inspection of the dam and outlet structure. The 1996 sediment release resulted in severe adverse impacts on fish and benthic macroinvertebrates in the North Fork in the 3.2 miles of river immediately downstream of Halligan Reservoir. There have been no observed damaging sediment releases from Halligan Reservoir since the 1996 event, and recent data suggest sediment and aquatic life standards are currently being attained. Specifically, pebble counts from 2020 indicate that percent fines are below the applicable threshold, and macroinvertebrate data from 2019 and 2020 indicate that multimetric index values are above the applicable attainment threshold. Macroinvertebrate data from 2020 also indicate that sediment threshold indicator values (TIVSED) are below the applicable impairment threshold. C.4 Main Stem Water quality on the Main Stem over the approximately 60 river mile reach from the Munroe Canal Diversion to the confluence with the South Platte River is influenced by many factors, including seasonal snowmelt runoff, major tributary inflows, groundwater inflows, major diversions, treated wastewater effluent, subsurface geology, and stormwater runoff. Current water-quality concerns on the Main Stem, in terms of exceeding or approaching aquatic life standards, are limited to water temperature. Additionally, observed concentrations of Total Nitrogen and Total Phosphorus are routinely above interim nutrient criteria (WQCC 2020) in Segments 12a and 12b (from Prospect Road in Fort Collins to the confluence with the South Platte River), though those criteria are not currently applicable standards. Brief overviews of major temperature and non-temperature water-quality dynamics on the Main Stem are provided in the following subsections. These discussions present major drivers of water-quality response from upstream to downstream and provide information relevant to subsequent discussions of anticipated Halligan Project impacts. Additional detail on spatial and temporal patterns and drivers of water-quality in the Poudre River can be found in Hydros (2015, 2021a, 2021c, and 2021d). C.4.1 Poudre River Temperature Dynamics The Poudre River from the Munroe Canal Diversion to the Larimer County Canal (Segment 10a) is currently on the CWA Section 303(d) list for temperature (WQCC 2021b) because of exceedances of the chronic temperature standard. There are observations in excess of the chronic temperature standard in summer months (July, August, and/or September) from the top of Segment 10a to just above the Hansen Supply Canal inflow near the bottom of the segment. The frequency and magnitude of exceedances of the chronic temperature standard increase from upstream to downstream across this sub-reach of Segment 10a. The rate of warming over Segment 10a above Hansen Supply Canal is exacerbated by major diversions, the largest of which is the Munroe Canal Diversion. Inflows from the North Fork in this reach tend to be notably warmer than the Main Stem during runoff months, summer months, and early fall. However, the warming effect of the North Fork inflows on the Main Stem in summer months is limited, due to relatively small flow rates from the North Fork. Finally, there is a dramatic shift in river temperature below the inflow from Hansen Supply Canal near the bottom of Segment 10a (for example, Figure C-11 and Figure C-12). Hansen Supply Canal provides cooling water to the Main Stem, typically from May to EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 511 Item 15. October, in volumes significant enough to sharply reduce river temperatures (Bartholow 1991 and Hawley et al. 2014), averaging 42 percent of the flow in the river below its point of entry from July through September (Hydros 2021a). The cooling effect often reduces temperature from above the chronic standard to well below the chronic standard. As a result, stream temperatures on the Main Stem are less sensitive to small changes in flow rates downstream of Hansen Supply Canal on Segment 10a and through Segment 10b. Figure C-11. Weekly Average Temperatures on Select Summer Days in 2018 across the Main Stem Focus Reach Location of Hansen Supply Canal (HSC) inflow noted Figure C-12. Daily Maxima on Select Summer Days in 2018 across the Main Stem Focus Reach Location of HSC inflow noted Below Hansen Supply Canal, summer river temperatures tend to increase moving downstream through Segments 10b and 11. The rate of warming is increased primarily by major diversions in Segment 10b. While temperature standards tend to be met in Segment 10b, the chronic temperature standard in HSC Inflow HSC Inflow EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 512 Item 15. Segment 11 (which was made more stringent in 2020) is routinely exceeded in summer months (July, August, and/or September). Farther downstream in Segments 12a and 12b, observed data exhibit no issues relative to acute or chronic temperature standards. There is apparent warming in the Main Stem during summer months (July, August, and September) near the upstream end of Segment 12a because of inflows from the Fossil Creek Reservoir Outlet, which comprises a notable fraction of flow in the Main Stem immediately below the outlet’s confluence with the river in summer months, averaging 15 percent of the flow from July through September (Hydros 2021a). Moving downstream of the Fossil Creek Reservoir Outlet, warming tends to be somewhat limited over the remainder of Segments 12a and 12b (for example, Figure C-6 and Figure C-8). This is attributed to the competing effects of warming from flow reductions by major diversions and cooling because of groundwater return flows over the reach. Return flows include significant groundwater gains through Segments 12a and 12b (Hydros 2021a). In these segments, groundwater tends to be cooler than the river in summer months by 5°C to more than 10°C, providing a notable cooling effect on the river. There is also a dampening of the diurnal temperature range across Segment 12a that is indicative of the temperatures and magnitude of the groundwater inflows to the river (Hydros 2021a). There is an apparent warming effect from Greeley wastewater treatment plant effluent (near the upstream end of Segment 12b), typically observed in August and September; although temperature standards tend to be met in the Main Stem below the effluent discharge location, temperatures routinely approach the chronic standard. Downstream of the Greeley wastewater treatment plant, river temperatures exhibit some cooling before entering the South Platte (for example, Figure C-6 and Figure C-8), reflecting additional inflow of cooler groundwater. C.4.2 Poudre River Non-temperature Water-quality Dynamics There are currently no CWA Section 303(d) listings for aquatic life standards on the Main Stem from Munroe Canal Diversion to the South Platte River, based on the most recent assessment of the Poudre River in 2017 (WQCC 2021b). Still, to support consideration of potential effects of the Halligan Project, it is important to understand several key drivers of water-quality in the Main Stem. A detailed conceptual understanding of current water-quality dynamics on the Main Stem was developed based on observed data and consideration of natural and anthropogenic flow patterns, geology, land use, point sources, and non-point sources. Water-quality responses in the Main Stem follow many general patterns expected for most river systems. For example, water quality in the Main Stem generally tends to deteriorate from upstream to downstream, reflecting both natural and anthropogenic influences. Additionally, as expected, nutrient and metals concentrations are observed to increase downstream of treated wastewater effluent locations, particularly at times of lower flow in the Main Stem. This section summarizes the observed influences of other current Main Stem water-quality drivers specific to the Poudre River, including spring runoff, the North Fork, subsurface geology, and groundwater/agricultural return flows. Additional information is available on patterns and drivers of the current water-quality response across the Main Stem in Hydros (2015, 2021a, and 2021c). Concentrations of some constituents on the Main Stem increase with seasonal spring runoff, including iron (total and dissolved), aluminum (total), manganese (dissolved and total), suspended solids, and mercury (total). This pattern reflects the mobilization of these constituents from the watershed and riverbeds as a result of seasonal snowmelt. Many of these constituents also show elevated concentrations in the Poudre River after wildfires and flooding. During spring runoff, the influence of point sources and groundwater recharge are minimized because of the typically high flow volumes associated with snow melt. While this water-quality pattern is notable in the observed record for many EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 513 Item 15. constituents, there are no associated water-quality concerns relative to aquatic life standards that are driven by this natural phenomenon. The North Fork is a critical tributary for consideration of potential effects of the Halligan Project on the Main Stem. While there are no CWA Section 303(d) listings at the mouth of the North Fork or on the Main Stem below the North Fork for aquatic life standards (except temperature), water entering the Main Stem from the North Fork tends to have higher concentrations of many constituents as compared to water in the Main Stem upstream of the North Fork. These include dissolved solids, hardness, arsenic, and sulfate. Additionally, the North Fork exhibits higher concentrations of ammonia, phosphorus, nitrogen manganese, and iron on a seasonal basis, corresponding to the timing of stratification and internal loading from sediments within Seaman Reservoir. These seasonally elevated concentrations on the North Fork are typically observed from July through September/October, depending on the timing of turnover in Seaman Reservoir. Currently, the North Fork comprises a seasonally variable fraction of flow in the Main Stem below its confluence (Figure C-13), with relatively low percent contributions in summer and early fall (7 percent to 25 percent) and higher percent contributions through the winter months (30 percent to about 45 percent). Figure C-13. Average Monthly Percentage of Flow from the North Fork on the Main Stem below the North Fork Confluence (based on observed flows 2009–2018) Varying subsurface geology across the Main Stem also plays a role in observed water-quality response. From upstream to downstream over the focus reach of the Main Stem, the Poudre River passes through several geologic zones that affect water quality in the river (Figure C-14). The most critical zones are the Pierre Shale and Fox Hill Sandstone/Laramie Formation. From the lower half of Segment 10b through Segment 11 and the upper half of Segment 12a (through both Fort Collins and Windsor), the bedrock below the alluvium is comprised of low-permeability Pierre Shale, which can be a source of selenium to the river. Farther downstream in the plains (downstream of Windsor in Segment 12a), the bedrock EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 514 Item 15. changes to the overlying Fox Hills Sandstone and the Laramie Formations. These sedimentary formations are less resistant to weathering and are notable sources of dissolved and particulate material to the river. The effects of these geologic features are apparent in the observed water-quality data, particularly outside of the snowmelt runoff season. Figure C-14. Diagram of Geologic Zones of the Poudre River Main Stem Focus Reach Finally, groundwater recharge and agricultural return flows are important drivers of water quality in the Main Stem. Groundwater recharge typically comprises the majority of the flow in Segment 12a and Segment 12b in all months outside of peak snowmelt runoff (Figure C-15). This reflects the stepwise pattern across Segments 12a and 12b of major diversions reducing flow and groundwater recharge replacing those flows. Agricultural return flows also make up a notable fraction of flow in the lower portion of Segment 12a and in Segment 12b in the latter months of the irrigation season (typically August through October; for example, Figure C-15). This pattern reflects both the increased extent of shallow alluvium as well as the increased agricultural land use in the Lower Poudre River. Groundwater recharge sources tend to increase total dissolved solids, nitrate, nitrite, arsenic, iron, and manganese concentrations in the river. Agricultural return flows tend to increase organic carbon and nutrient concentrations. The dominance of groundwater recharge and agricultural return flows in these reaches effectively minimizes the influence of small changes to water quality in Segments 10a, 10b, and 11 on water quality in Segments 12a and 12b. EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 515 Item 15. Figure C-15. Poudre River Fraction of Flow by Source, 2016 Monthly Averages Source: Hydros 2021 EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 516 Item 15. Appendix D Water Quality Sampling Location Maps EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 517 Item 15. Appendix D. Water Quality Sampling Location Maps Figure D-1. Water-Quality Sampling Locations on the North Fork below Halligan Reservoir and its Tributaries EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 518 Item 15. Figure D-2. Macroinvertebrate and Pebble Count Sampling Sites on the North Fork EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 519 Item 15. Figure D-3. Water Quality Sampling Locations along the Poudre River EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 520 Item 15. Figure D-4. Temperature Gages along the North Fork and Poudre River EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 521 Item 15. Appendix E Parks and Wildlife Commissioner and Public Comment Summary EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 522 Item 15. Appendix E. Parks and Wildlife Commissioner and Public Comment Summary This appendix summarizes the comments Fort Collins received on the Fish and Wildlife and Mitigation Enhancement Plan (FWMEP) from the Colorado Parks and Wildlife Commission (Commission) and the public. This appendix also highlights the changes Fort Collins made to the FWMEP based on the comments received. E.1 Commissioner Comments On May 4, 2023, Fort Collins and C olorado Parks and Wil dlife (CPW) staff presented the proposed FWMEP to the Commission. Six commissioners provided comments and or asked questions during the meeting. Commissioner comments provided in the next subsection are not verbatim but a summary of what was stated. Fort Collins used the meeting recording and transcript to summarize the key points from each commissioner. Fort Collins has provided a response to each commissioner’s comments. During the meeting, Fort Collins responded to some comments, or another commissioner responded to comments. During the meeting, Fort Collins responded to some comments, or another commissioner responded to comments. It is no ted within the commissioner comments where the questions were addressed during the meeting. In addition, some commissioners had overlapping questions/concerns. In those instances, Fort Collins has referenced the first time the question was addressed. Commissioner Reading: Would like to see Fort Collins make it permanent that you remove sheep and goats from your properties and strengthen the language in the document. And to put pressure on your neighbors, especially The Nature Conversancy, to remove sheep and goats from their property. Response to Commissioner Reading: Fort Collins has updated Section 5.2.3.1, Prohibition of Domestic Sheep and Goat Grazing on City Owned Lands Near Halligan Reservoir, to permanently not graze domestic sheep or goats for weed control or other purposes on any Fort Collins-owned lands around Halligan Reservoir; enter into a grazing leases that would authorize others to graze domestic sheep or goats on any Fort Collins-owned lands around Halligan Reservoir; or grant licenses to convey easements authorizing domestic sheep or goats to graze on any Fort Collins-owned lands around Halligan Reservoir. Fort Collins has and will continue to have discussions with adjacent landowners about removing domestic sheep and goats from their private property. To date, the conversations and negotiations have been unproductive. Commissioner Tutchton: The project is providing 8,000 acre-feet of water to fuel future sprawl and the plan never actually looks at that impact. Instead we focus on the footprint of the project instead of what the project is going to allow and probably what it took away, which was the agricultural lands that were providing wildlife habitat. Provide clarification about the protection of stream flows. It sounded like the flows would be maintained unless Fort Collins had lawn watering restrictions. Once on, lawn watering restrictions the flows would EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 523 Item 15. go away. I think there is room for improvement related to the protection of the summer and winter flows. Commissioner Tutchton shares Commissioner Reading’s concerns about bighorn sheep. He believes Fort Collins should get rid of sheep and goat grazing on their properties. Preble’s meadow jumping mouse (Preble’s) sections completely defers to the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). Whatever the USFWS decides will be legally required under their process. Look at including an enhancement for Preble’s habitat. Without the fourth water gage we cannot count the potential positive benefits to the river if we do not know whether or not they exist. The water gage is critical to knowing whether or not there is an actual benefit in that lowest reach before it hits the main stem. Has Fort Collins considered on-site solar or small-scale hydro to replace the transmission lines? Response to Commissioner Tutchton: The purpose and need of the project to provide approximately 7,900 acre-feet of additional firm yield has been approved as part of the US Army Corps Engineers (Corps) Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). This is projected to be the buildout of the Fort Collins Utilities’ water service area, which has been carefully planned for several decades. Fort Collins has clarified the language around the curtailment of the Winter Release Plan in Sections 4.2.1.1 and 4.2.1.7. In Section 4.2.1.7, Water Supply Shortage Events and Curtailment Measures, Fort Collins will consider its future water supply and demand conditions and operations and the impacts to its water systems. Fort Collins commits to incorporating into its planning and modeling the potential of operations that include continuing the Summer Low-flow Plan even during greater water restriction levels. If appropriate and approved by City Council, Fort Collins will incorporate into future policies that the Summer Low-flow Plan operations continue at some level even during greater water restriction levels (particularly during restriction levels that allow lawn watering). Fort Collins will coordinate with CPW on potential changes to these curtailment measures. Removal of bighorn sheep from Fort Collins property is discussed in the response to Commissioner Reading. The USFWS Preble’s Mitigation Plan outlines several enhancement measures. At the request of CPW staff information related to Preble’s was kept to a minimum in the FWMEP. Fort Collins has added some additional text to Section 5.1.1.4, Channel Improvements and Modifications of the Calloway Diversion to reflect that the changes to the Calloway Diversion also enhance Preble’s habitat connectivity. Fort Collins and CPW staff have worked together to find a solution related to a fourth gage above Seaman Reservoir. Fort Collins will perform preconstructi on surveys of the existing flow between the existing Livermore gage and above Seaman Reservoir in different seasons to determine if there are flow losses in this lower reach. Details of the preconstruction monitoring and any next steps will be included in the intergovernmental agreement with CPW. Section 4.2.1.2, Summer Low-flow Plan, has been updated to reflect this change. The existing overhead power lines and poles need to be relocated out of the enlarged Halligan Reservoir inundation zone. Fort Collins is considering other power options. However, alternative EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 524 Item 15. power options are currently not part of the Corps EIS. Should Fort Collins choose to pursue an alternative power source, the Corps will determine if an EIS reevaluation is necessary. Commissioner May: Concur with other commissioners on the problem with the bighorn sheep intermingling with domestic sheep and goats. Concerned that if we do not address that issue we’ll be back here in a few years and hear about the loss of that herd. Question: Is the current dam under any dam safety compliance order? Answer given during meeting: Fort Collins responded to this question during the meeting that the dam has passed inspections every year but will eventually need to be replaced. Question: Will the current dam be removed or partially removed and inundated? Answer given during meeting: Fort Collins responded to this question during the meeting that it has not yet been determined and how it would likely happen if only partially removed. Question: With the 5 cubic feet per second (cfs), will that be measured at just the diversions or at Seaman Reservoir? 5 cfs is a very small amount of water. What is the guarantee that the water will get all the way to the bottom? Answer given during meeting: Fort Collins responded to this question during the meeting that the 5 cfs is a commitment to provide that flow at those gages even if more than 5 cfs needs to be released. Commissioner May: Believes a stream gage at the very botom of the 22-mile stretch is important to ensure a minimum flow. Response to Commissioner May: Removal of bighorn sheep from Fort Collins property is discussed in the response to Commissioner Reading. Refer to the response to Commissioner Tutchton regarding the modified proposal to determine if a fourth gage is necessary. Commissioner Hasket: Wants to make sure that there is a strong collaborative effort with CPW related to the continued recreation discussion. Commissioner Haskett is concerned that the recreation component will be forgotten if it is not in the FWMEP. Commissioner Haskett would like to see it in the FWMEP. Response to Commissioner Hasket: Fort Collins and CPW have agreed to continue discussions related to surface water recreational opportunities, primarily public angling, at the enlarged Halligan Reservoir in a process separate from the FWMEP processes since the Halligan Project is not impacting surface water recreation. Section 3.9.3, Evaluation of Future Public Use of the Enlarged Halligan Reservoir, has been updated to include a commitment in an intergovernmental agreement with CPW to continue discussion related to surface water recreation at the enlarged Halligan Reservoir. Commissioner Adams: Related to Commissioner Hasket’s comment about recreation. Is there a potential role for one of regional partners to inform and participate around the collective ownership of this effort? EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 525 Item 15. What habitats/wildlife are losing water to supplement the reservoir for this project? Would like to acknowledge where the water is coming from before it gets to the reservoir and how that is impacting habitats. Commissioner May: Answered Commissioner Adams questions during the meeting that he understands the water rights that Fort Collins is using originally came from agricultural lands that Fort Collins already converted and grew over and thus not directly impacting existing habitat. Response to Commissioner Adams: Fort Collins will parti cipate in any recreation discussions but will defer to CPW staff recommendations on including CPW regional partners to inform and participate in the discussions. Commissioner Hauser: I would like to see a firm commitment that holds both sides accountable to continuing the recreation discussion. Would like to see future updates on both the impact side and the access side. Response to Commissioner Hauser: Refer to the response to Commissioner Hasket regarding the commitment to continuing the recreation discussion. E.2 Public Comment Received by CPW During the May 4, 2023 Commission meeting, two groups provided both verbal and writen public comment on the FWMEP: •Terry Meyers, Executive Director of the Rocky Mountain Bighorn Sheep Society (RMBS) •David Nickum, Executive Director of Colorado Trout Unlimited (TU). In addition to verbal comments, both groups submited writen comments to the Commission, which were shared with Fort Collins. The writen comments mirror the verbal comments provided by both groups. Copies of the RMBS and TU leters can be found in FWMEP Appendix F. RMBS and TU’s primary concerns are listed below followed by a response from Fort Collins. RMBS Concern: If a water guzzler or stock tank-type water sources are developed for bighorn sheep, RMBS requests they be designed or placed to exclude domestic ruminants to reduce the potential for pathogen transmission between domestic ruminants and bighorn sheep. Fort Collins response to RMBS: Text in Section 4.2.3.18, Bighorn Sheep Habitat Improvements, was softened to provide flexibility in how habitat improvement monies could be used. RMBS Concern: Concern that the FWMEP does not provide specific actions that would be taken if bighorn sheep are documented moving toward or even contacting domestic sheep or goats, or if respiratory disease is detected in bighorn ship in the Lone Pine Herd. Fort Collins response to RMBS: CPW has said that if there is confirmed exposure between domestic sheep and bighorn sheep, the bighorn sheep in question will be euthanized. Text in Section 4.2.3.19, Bighorn Sheep Collaring Study, has been updated. RMBS Concern: The RMBS requests that actions be listed that could be implemented if respiratory disease is detected in Lone Pine bighorn sheep or if contact with domestic sheep and/or goats appears imminent or is confirmed. EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 526 Item 15. Fort Collins response to RMBS: Adaptive management would be used to try and prevent domestic sheep and bighorn sheep from comingling. Removal of domestic sheep from the area is preferred but Fort Collins can only remove domestic sheep and goats from their properties. To date atempts to temporarily or permanently have sheep removed from adjacent properties has been unsuccessful. However, as discussed in Section 5.2.3.2, Advocate for Cessation of Domestic Sheep and Goat Grazing on Private Lands Near Halligan Reservoir, Fort Collins will continue to engage with local landowners to advocate for the both the temporary cessation of domestic sheep and goat grazing during construction, as well as for the permanent cessation of domestic sheep and goat grazing near the Halligan Project Area. As part of the collaring study, CPW will also be performing disease testing at the beginning of each phase of the collaring study. If CPW identifies a sick bighorn sheep that sheep will be culled from the herd. CPW has said that if there is confirmed exposure between domestic sheep and bighorn sheep, the bighorns will be euthanized to prevent disease transmission to other herds. Additional text related to disease testing has been added to Section 4.2.3.19, Bighorn Sheep Collaring Study. TU Concern: When modernizing North Poudre diversion structure, incorporate ability to measure diversion and remove only what is needed, helping to rewater the 2 miles downstream. Fort Collins response to TU: Once the North Poudre Canal Diversion structure is updated, the winter and summer releases will be able to pass through the diversion. As discussed in Sections 4.2.1.1 and 4.2.1.2, an existing agreement with North Poudre Irrigation Company (NPIC) prohibits the winter and summer low-flow releases from being diverted into the North Poudre Canal Diversion. Fort Collins and NPIC have had discussion about limiting the amount of water being removed at the North Poudre Canal Diversion to what is necessary since diversion structure will be designed and rebuilt to allow NPIC to be more selective in the amount of water being diverted. However, NPIC has indicated they would like to see how the enlarged Halligan Reservoir is operated before they commit to a new operation approach. TU Concern: Coordinate with NPIC to ensure effective implementation of flow commitments. Fort Collins response to TU: As discussed in Section 4.2.1.1, Winter Release Plan, a nd Section 4.2.1.2, Summer Low-flow Plan, Fort Collins has an existing agreement with NPIC that prohibits the winter and summer releases being diverted into the North Poudre Canal Diversion. As discussed in the previous response, the updated structure will have the ability to pass the flows. Fort Collins will also be installing a gage in and or slightly downstream of the diversion to ensure the appropriate flows are getting past the North Poudre Canal Diversion as discussed in Section 4.2.1.2, Summer Low-flow Plan. TU Concern: Maintain minimum flow releases when drought restrictions are in place for Ft Collins water customers. Fort Collins response to TU: Refer to the response to Commissioner Tutchton in Section E.1 Commissioner Comments. TU Concern: Avoid winter exchanges on the mainstem Poudre that would undermine the benefits of joint operating program releases intended to maintain overwintering habitat. EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 527 Item 15. Fort Collins response to TU: The joint operating program between Fort Collins and the City of Greeley is a program to release 10 cfs from upper Poudre River basin reservoirs mainly to provide flows in the upper reaches of the Poudre River where Fort Collins and Greeley’s storage reservoirs are located. Use of the Halligan enlargement winter exchanges by Fort Collins is critical to meeting its customers’ demands and other water rights obligations. These exchanges would reduce Greeley’s portion of the joint operation releases of 7 cfs to 4 cfs in the.5-mile stretch between F ort Collins’ pipeline diversion at Gateway Park to the North Fork confluence. TU Concern: Focus investment of the $200,000 (per river) for restoration on the North Fork and mainstem Poudre on sites/projects that will benefit public fisheries. Fort Collins response to TU: Fort Collins has updated the text in Section 4.3.4, Compensatory Mitigation for Halligan Project Impact on Stream Temperature, and Section 5.1.1.6, North Fork Stream Restoration, to reflect Fort Collins and CPW commitment to use the funds within the Main Stem, or North Fork, within or near the Halligan Project Area, including the North Fork above Halligan Reservoir and for a restoration project that maximize the overall benefit to the public as well as the aquatic and riparian ecological function. TU Concern: Ensure that modifications at the Calloway Diversion do not result in opening up currently protected riparian habitat to intrusion by livestock. Fort Collins response to TU: The current design does include a breakaway fence to keep catle out of Phantom Canyon. The details of the design are not included in the FWMEP since the City does not have a contract with the landowner to complete the work at this time. The existing fenced-off riparian area south of the canyon is outside of the footprint of the proposed Calloway Diversion project and therefore would not be affected by the project. TU Concern: Increase funding for a recreation lease along the North Fork upstream of Halligan commensurate with the permanent loss of river fishing due to the proposed inundation. Fort Collins response to TU: Due to the issues discussed in Section 3.9.1.1, Land Ownership, and Section 3.9.2, Halligan Project Effect on Recreation and Public Access Fort Collins, is not proposing to increase the amount of funding for the hunting and fishing lease discussed in Section 4.3.7.2, Funding of Public Access Lease with Roberts Ranch. However, Fort Collins has agreed to continue discussions with CPW to have public angling access to the enlarged Halligan Reservoir; refer to Section 3.9.3, Evaluation of Future Public Use of the Enlarged Halligan Reservoir. TU Concern: Establish an agreement in principle on how public angling access can be provided for Halligan Reservoir. Fort Collins response to TU: Fort Collins has agreed to continue discussions with CPW to have public angling access at the enlarged Halligan Reservoir; refer to Section 3.9.3, Evaluation of Future Public Use of the Enlarged Halligan Reservoir. E.3 Summary of Public Comment Received by Fort Collins Fort Collins chose to host a virtual open house from May 1 to May 15 for the public to review information from the FWMEP. A virtual platform was selected because it allows the information to be accessible longer and can be viewed on a smart phone, tablet, or computer at any time that is EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 528 Item 15. convenient for the end user. The virtual public meeting consisted of approximately 40 virtual boards that provided an overview of the project and highlighted the key mitigations and enhancements of the FWMEP. The virtual open house also provided links to FWMEP, and the Draft EIS on the Corps website. Fort Collins advertised the virtual open house through their Halligan Project and Utilities emails list, paid for boosted posts on the Fort Collins Facebook page, and posted a notice on the Halligan Project website. The boosted Facebook post received 859 clicks, 52 likes, and 11 comments. The Facebook comments were not substantive and are not included here. While the virtual open house was open the Fort Collins virtual open house site received over 894 visitors. Providing public comment was optional for visitors. However, only eight individuals choose to provide public comments through the Google Form embedded in the virtual platform. The comment form included two mandatory questions and one optional question. Mandatory questions required a text response, which could have been as simple as placing an “x” in a box before submitting the form. The questions on the comment form included: 1)Do you think the mitigation and enhancement measures provided are adequate? Please include your thoughts. 2)Are there any additional or different mitigation and enhancement measures you would like to see? 3)Do you have other thoughts about the Halligan Water Supply Project? This question was optional for participants. A summary of the substantive comments can be found in Sections E.4 through E.6. Commenter quotes are verbatim. Appendix F contains the full, unedited versions of the public comments. Fort Collins also required participants to provide a postal zip code, as a way of tracking where the comments were coming from. All but one zip code was from the Fort Collins or the Livermore Valley area. Table E-1 shows the location and number of responses per zip code. The one exception was from Comment ID 2, which provided a zip code of “Puerto Aventuras, Mexico.” The person’s comment displayed a familiarity with the project area; therefore, the comments were retained. Table E-1. Location of Halligan Project Virtual Public Meeting Participants Zip Code Number of Responses 80521 2 80524 1 80525 2 80528 1 Puerto Aventuras, Mexico 1 E.4 Feedback on Question 1 Six of the commenters felt the mitigation measures being proposed in the FWMEP were adequate. Of the two commenters that felt the FWMEP did not provide adequate mitigation and enhancement measures only one, Comment ID 8, provides substantive comments. Fort Collins has summarized the commenters four primary comments below. Appendix F contains the full comment. EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 529 Item 15. Comment ID 8: The commenter notes the primary failing of the FWMEP is an “Adaptive Management EIS.” The commenter also notes “Many of the measures in this plan seem ideally suited for ensuring that the brown trout population thrives in the North Fork. Brown trout may be the single most important factor driving down native fish populations.” Related to brown trout management, the FWMEP provides “litle indicati on of how temperature release might be used to manage to support native fish management” through releases from the multilevel outlet works (MLOW). Adaptive management is needed for ramping rates, mitigation measures intended to enhance riparian habitat, and restore stream habitat. What does "Adaptive management in response to environmental monitoring is indirectly incorporated into some mitigation and enhancement measures…even mean in this context, especially for MLOW and temporary environmental pool?” Lastly, “As the plan currently stands, there is litle in terms of objectives beyond a hope/expectation that native fish and these other ecosystem components will benefit. There is also no clear process for adapting over time; quite the opposite--many of the planned actions are so ‘locked in’ that they could not be adjusted even if there was evidence that they were not working.” Response to Comment ID 8: Many of the mitigations proposed in this plan also have a regulatory mechanism that defines their success. As permits have not yet been obtained, the specific of the success criteria cannot be provided. In addition, if a mitigation is failing within the context of a regulatory permit, the process must be adapted within the regulating agency framework. For items where there is not a regulatory framework, such as with the bighorn sheep collaring study, Fort Collins and CPW will continue to discuss the logistics, which will include some form of adaptive management, related to this effort through the development of the intergovernmental agreement. The term indirectly as it relates to the MLOW is outlined in Section 4.2.2.1, Multilevel Outlet Structure, which states “an MLOW is not expected to be necessary from the perspective of aquatic life mitigation efforts… [and is therefore] not a commitment in the FWMEP.” For the temporary environmental pool, Fort Collins a nd CPW have not agreed to specific management objects beyond what is stated in Section 5.1.1.1, Temporary Environmental Poll. E.5 Feedback on Question 2 Three of the eight commenters indicated the measures provided are reasonable. One commenter recommended the dam be removed. Comment ID 2 and Comment ID 3 are more general comments that Fort Collins has responded to below. Comment ID 6 and Comment ID 8 provided substantive comments. Comment ID 8 succinctly reiterated the comment theme from Question 1, which was addressed previously; therefore, Fort Collins is not providing a response here, refer to the response provided in Section E.4. Comment ID 6 provided four additional measures for consideration. Fort Collins has summarized all the comments and provided responses. Appendix F contains the full comments. Comment ID 2: Would like to see “Continued and improved per capita water use in Fort Collins.” Response to Comment ID 2: Fort Collins has a strong commitment to water conservation and continues to innovate, providing ongoing and relevant water efficiency support to the community. EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 530 Item 15. The 2022 Water Conservation Annual Report,1 indicates that community gallon per capita per day is down 34% since 2000; 173.3 million gallons of treated water was saved in 2022 (Fort Collins 2022). Comment ID 3: “Curious if the greenback trout still exist and if they are part of the consideration?” Response to Comment ID 3: Greenback cuthroat trout (Oncorhynchus clarkii stomias) reclamation and reintroduction were considered for the North Fork, but restoration of greenback cuthroat trout in Fish Creek and Dale Creek was part of that potential restoration plan. Refer to FWMEP Section 4.1.2, Changes from the Draft EIS Conceptual Mitigation Plan, for more information on why the concept of greenback cuthroat trout population restoration was ultimately dismissed. Comment ID 6: Commenter indicated there is a bald eagle and golden eagle nests near the dam and North Poudre Canal Diversion structure that could be impacted by construction. The impact to the nesting and territory occupation needs more assessment and in particular avoidance of construction activities prior to and during nesting. The increased flows of 3 and 5 cfs will help but still does not approach the range of historical flows. “I encourage talking to CWCB to explore if their instream flow can be used to enhance flows between Halligan and Seaman reservoirs.” The proposed ramping rates are too short. Lastly, “The conservation easement on the Roberts Ranch does not allow for public recreational access. Therefore the proposed lease for public hunting and fishing on the Krause Field would be a violation of the easement. The Nature Conservancy (TNC) should be consulted before any steps are taken on this proposal.” Response to Comment ID 6: As outlined in Section 4.2.3.4, Migratory Bird and Raptor Surveys, Fort Collins will be doing migratory bird and raptor monitoring every other year before construction to collect baseline data. Prior to construction, surveys will be done to determine if there are any active nests in the construction area. If nests are identified, Fort Collins will consult with CPW to determine which measures from their buffer guidelines for nesting raptors would minimize any potential adverse impacts from construction related activities. As described in Section 4.3.8, Instream Water Rights, Fort Collins is commited to protecting the project’s mitigations releases for approximately 22 miles downstream using the Protected Mitigation Release statute (Colorado Revised Statutes Section 37-92-102[8]). Any additional future instream flows provided by Colorado Water Conservation Board (CWCB) could be accommodated in the Halligan Dam operations; however, Fort Collins is not aware of any such current or future CWCB- protected instream flows. The ramping rates proposed by Fort Collins and included in Section 4.2.1.5 Ramping Rate Limitations of the FWMEP, have been developed by hydrologists, ecologists and geomorphologists to determine the optimal rates to provide timing, frequency, magnitude and duration of flow to mimic a nature flood cycle as best as possible given the constraints of the available water supply. CPW has led the effort to obtain a hunting and fishing lease for Krause Field of the Roberts Ranch Conservation Easement. Fort Collins is only providing funds to support an already existing hunting and fishing agreement. 1 htps://www.fcgov.com/utilities/img/site_specific/uploads/23-25044-2022-water- conservation-reportfinal.pdf?1685659564 EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 531 Item 15. E.6 Feedback on Question 3 Fort Collins received seven comments on this optional question. Five of the seven comments provided a positive response to the project. One comment is a question related to future recreation. Two comments express disappointment with the project. As the question is optional Fort Collins is not providing a response to all the comments. Comment ID 3: “Too early for access planning for fishing?” Response to Comment ID 3: Fort Collins and CPW have agreed to continue discussions related to recreational opportunities at Halligan Reservoir in a process separate from the current processes to enlarge Halligan Reservoir and the FWMEP. Refer to Section 3.9.3, Evaluation of Future Public Use of the Enlarge Halligan Reservoir. EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 532 Item 15. Appendix F FWMEP Virtual Open House Public Comments EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 533 Item 15. P.O. Box 349 • Clifton, CO • 81520-0349 May 4, 2023 Colorado Parks and Wildlife Commissioners C/O Colorado Parks and Wildlife 6060 Broadway Denver, CO 80216 RE: Halligan Water Supply Project Fish and Wildlife Mitigation and Enhancement Plan Dear Commissioners: Please accept the following comments on the Halligan Water Supply Project Fish and Wildlife Mitigation and Enhancement Plan (mitigation plan) on behalf of the Rocky Mountain Bighorn Society (RMBS). The RMBS is 501(c) (3) organization with a mission to promote the science-based management of the bighorn sheep, educate the public about their life and habitat, and assure the sportsman’s rights in proper opportunities. The RMBS appreciates the thoroughness of City of Fort Collins and Colorado Parks and Wildlife staff in recognizing potential impacts the Halligan Water Supply Project may have on the Lone Pine and other nearby bighorn sheep herds, and the willingness of the City to mitigate those impacts. In addition, we request a few improvements and clarifications be added to the mitigation plan. Habitat Enhancement The RMBS supports efforts to address invasive cheatgrass in order to improve bighorn sheep foraging opportunities. However, we question the need for additional water sources given that bighorn sheep are well adapted to dry western landscapes. There are several creeks and springs in the vicinity (Rabbit, Lone Pine, North Fork of the Poudre, etc.). Moreover, stock tanks have been observed to bring bighorn sheep in close contact with domestic ruminants which has resulted in suspected pathogen transmission in some circumstances which may result in respiratory disease in wild sheep. If guzzler or stock tank type water sources are developed for bighorn sheep, we request that they be designed or placed to exclude domestic ruminants in order to reduce the potential for pathogen transmission between domestic ruminants and bighorn sheep. Construction Activity Mitigation The RMBS is pleased to see that dust mitigation will be implemented during construction activities, as dust is a respiratory irritant that may increase bighorn sheep susceptibility to respiratory diseases including pneumonia. We also appreciate the willingness of the City of Fort Collins to compensate for any bighorn mortalities during construction and for a two year period post-construction. EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 534 Item 15. We recognize the thorough discussion of potential displacement of bighorn sheep that may result in contact with nearby domestic sheep and/or goats on private lands. The commitment to monitoring bighorn sheep movements using GPS collar technology prior to, during, and post construction is welcome and necessary. However, we do not see specific actions that would be taken if bighorn sheep are documented moving toward or even contacting domestic sheep or goats, or if respiratory disease is detected in bighorn within the Lone Pine Herd. As acknowledged in the mitigation plan, in the event of respiratory disease in the Lone Pine herd, dispersing bighorn sheep – especially rams traveling during the breeding season – may expose bighorn sheep in the Lower Poudre herd. In addition, if the Lower Poudre herd sustains a respiratory disease event, it is predictable that seasonal ram movements will spread pathogens to the Upper Poudre bighorn herd and on to the Rawah bighorn herd and possibly to the Never Summer bighorn herd as well. The RMBS requests that actions be listed that could be implemented if respiratory disease is detected in Lone Pine bighorn sheep or if contact with domestic sheep and/or goats appears imminent or is confirmed. In an effort to prevent or contain a respiratory disease outbreak, the RMBS would support removal, including by lethal means, of bighorn sheep that have contacted domestic sheep or goats or bighorn sheep that exhibit respiratory disease causing pneumonia. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Halligan Water Supply Project Fish and Wildlife Mitigation and Enhancement Plan. Please do not hesitate to reach out to me if you have questions or if the RMBS can be of assistance in any way. Respectfully, Terry E. Meyers Executive Director Attachment: Lone Pine Herd (S40) History and Status The Lone Pine bighorn sheep herd is the result of a 1977 transplant of 19 bighorn from Trickle Mountain (Vieira 2012). After the initial release, the herd grew rapidly, but by 1988 there were only an estimated 20 bighorn remaining (Bailey 1990, Vieira 2012). Since then, estimates have ranged from years with no observed bighorn up to about 35 bighorn (Vieira 2012). There is no historical documentation of native bighorn in the Lone Pine area or even in the Poudre Canyon (S1 and S58), although bighorn have long been documented in the Rawah Range (S18) (Vieira 2012). The 2012 Poudre-Rawah-Lone Pine Herd Management Plan (Vieira 2012) describes documented movement between the Upper Poudre (S1) and the Rawah Range (S18), and suspected movements between Lone Pine (S40) and Lower Poudre (S58). There is no reason to doubt there is some interaction, especially by rams, between the Upper Poudre (S1) and Lower Poudre (S58) bighorn herds given the continuous canyon habitat. EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 535 Item 15. There is considerable potential for bighorn to contact domestic ruminants in the Lone Pine area. A large band of domestic sheep graze one private parcel in spring to reduce larkspur before cattle are grazed later in the summer. Domestic goat flocks occur on private land. Bighorn sheep have been seen in proximity to cattle on private land. Cattle graze on Cherokee State Wildlife Area. Literature Cited: Bailey, J. A. 1990. Management of Rocky Mountain Bighorn Sheep Herds in Colorado. Colorado Division of Wildlife Special Report Number 66. 24 pages. Vieira, M. 2012. Bighorn Sheep Management Plan: Data Analysis Unit RBS-1 Poudre/Rawah/Lone Pine. Colorado Parks and Wildlife. https://cpw.state.co.us/thingstodo/Pages/HerdManagementPlans.aspx EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 536 Item 15. Trout Unlimited: America’s Leading Coldwater Fisheries Conservation Organization Colorado Office: 1536 Wynkoop Street, Suite 320, Denver, CO 80202 PHONE: (303) 440-2937 WEB: www.coloradotu.org EMAIL: david.nickum@tu.org May 17, 2023 To: Colorado Parks and Wildlife Commission Re: Halligan Water Supply Project Draft Fish and Wildlife Mitigation and Enhancement Plan Colorado Trout Unlimited and the Rocky Mountain Flycasters Chapter (collectively “TU”) appreciate the opportunity to provide these written comments on the Draft Fish and Wildlife Mitigation and Enhancement Plan for the Halligan Water Supply project (Plan). TU represents more than 11,000 members across Colorado including nearly 1,200 in the Rocky Mountain Flycasters Chapter serving Fort Collins/Loveland and the surrounding areas. TU has been extensively involved in conservation efforts throughout the Cache la Poudre basin, including work by the local chapter on the Eagle’s Nest Open Space located along the North Fork of the Poudre downstream of the project. TU appreciates the work that Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW) staff have done with the City of Fort Collins in developing this plan to date and are supportive of many elements in the plan. We do see some specific areas in need of further refinement, as outlined in our comments below, and look forward to working with CPW and the City to address these concerns. In summary, our recommended adjustments within the plan are:  When modernizing North Poudre diversion structure, incorporate ability to measure diversion and remove only what is needed, helping to rewater the 2 miles downstream.  Coordinate with North Poudre Irrigation Company to ensure effective implementation of flow commitments.  Maintain minimum flow releases when drought restrictions are in place for Ft Collins water customers.  Avoid winter exchanges on the mainstem Poudre that would undermine the benefits of joint operating program releases intended to maintain overwintering habitat.  Focus investment of the $200,000 (per river) for restoration on the North Fork and mainstem Poudre on sites/projects that will benefit public fisheries.  Ensure that modifications at the Calloway diversion do not result in opening up currently protected riparian habitat to intrusion by livestock.  Increase funding for a recreation lease along the North Fork upstream of Halligan commensurate with the permanent loss of river fishing due to the proposed inundation.  Establish an agreement in principle on how public angling access can be provided for Halligan Reservoir. These recommendations are described further in our more detailed comments below. Flow measures – North Fork. Base flows are the most critically limiting flow factor on the North Fork between Halligan and Seaman Reservoirs, with periods of zero or near-zero flows hampering the ability of trout and native fish species to survive and thrive in the river. Accordingly, we are appreciative that the Plan addresses this problem by incorporating minimum flow commitments of 3 cfs (winter) and 5 cfs (summer). While these flows are less than a healthy minimum instream flow that Colorado Trout Unlimited Rocky Mountain Flycasters Chapter of Trout Unlimited EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 537 Item 15. would be recommended for a stream of the North Fork’s size, a consistent base flow will represent meaningful improvement from the status quo by eliminating zero flow days and helping to sustain and refresh pools with holding habitat for fish. TU applauds the City for its inclusion of a flushing flow program to bypass the projected three highest flow days each year, along with ramping on the days prior to and following that three-day period. This should help with some key ecological functions including flushing of sediment and providing riparian vegetation with some spring saturation. We are especially impressed that the outlet has been designed to accommodate release of these important peak flows up to 800 cfs; we anticipate that in most years with peaks that would exceed that level, Halligan will fill and be spilling so as to provide a peak flushing flow. Similarly, we support the proposed ramping rates on releases to avoid impacts that more sudden flow changes might otherwise create for fish downstream. In particular, we support gradual down-ramping of flows when releases are being dropped so as to reduce the likelihood of fish becoming stranded in habitats that will then be dewatered as flows continue to drop. The City’s proposal to modify the existing North Poudre Irrigation Company diversion will facilitate these flow programs, enabling controlled flow releases of the proposed 3 and 5 cfs minimums as well as providing for fish passage at the diversion which currently serves as a barrier to fish movement. This diversion has traditionally swept the river, with water run through a tunnel to a point at which flows are measured and directed into the conveyance to NPIC users while excess flow is returned through an overflow channel to the North Fork approximately two miles downstream from the diversion. The City’s proposal will help return minimum flows to that impacted reach. We recommend also exploring options for measuring diversions at the NPIC diversion structure itself, so that water in excess of delivery needs is kept in the stream throughout rather than removed for a two mile stretch of habitat. This could create further ecological lift and connectivity on the North Fork without impairing delivery of NPIC’s water rights into their system. On all of the proposed flow measures, ensuring the anticipated benefits will depend upon effectively engaging NPIC as well given their involvement in operations of the historic pool portion of the enlarged Halligan. The benefits of the flushing flow and ramping programs in particular will depend upon such collaboration, or the benefits will be reduced or negated (especially downstream of the NPIC diversion). We are hopeful that the City’s status as a major shareholder in NPIC will give them sufficient influence to ensure such coordination across the full range of flow management efforts included in this Plan. The success of this Plan is dependent upon the diligent compliance by all relevant parties, without exception. Finally, we are concerned that the City proposes that its flow commitments could be discontinued during times when they are in first-stage drought restrictions – meaning that outdoor watering would be limited to two days per week. That is a very modest level of drought restriction, more aligned with what should be the norm for landscape irrigation during normal conditions, and we are concerned that this loophole will significantly diminish the benefits being claimed under the Plan. Given the large volumes of water associated with the peak flow bypass program, we can understand the need to forego those commitments when in drought periods. However, we suggest that the minimum release commitments should be maintained regardless of drought restriction status, or that an exemption from those commitments be tied to more significant restrictions (such as a ban on EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 538 Item 15. outdoor watering). Given the low volumes involved with the base flow program, we would anticipate the City’s water demands even under low or moderate drought restrictions would be sufficient to use the base flow releases in meeting municipal needs. Flow measures – mainstem Poudre. While the greatest flow impacts of the Halligan project take place on the North Fork, the mainstem Poudre will also be impacted on the exchange reach when water sent down the North Fork is exchanged up for diversion at the City’s upstream points of diversion. Key low-flow challenges for the Poudre’s fishery include elevated summer temperatures and limited overwintering habitat. To address the former, the Plan includes an agreement not to exchange up the mainstream during key summer periods. However, no similar consideration is given to winter low-flow impacts. To address the concern of low winter flows throughout the mainstem Poudre, a joint operating program has been in place for many years involving Fort Collins, Greeley, and the Water Supply and Storage Company, each of which have significant reservoir facilities in the headwaters. Through this program, releases are made to maintain 10 cfs so as to support appropriate overwintering habitat for the resident fishery. TU would ask that the Plan add provisions to avoid exchanging up the mainstem against those base winter releases under the joint operating program, thereby reducing that program’s benefits to winter habitat. Other fishery mitigation. The Plan includes provisions for mitigation and enhancement through investment in two projects of $200,000 each toward habitat connectivity and/or restoration on both the North Fork and the mainstem Poudre. We applaud this commitment, and TU hopes to work in concert with CPW and the City in order to leverage these dollars further so as to increase the ultimate benefits to stream habitat and fisheries. We recommend that the Plan note a priority for use of these funds in locations that will benefit publicly-accessible fisheries. TU would welcome the opportunity to partner with the City and CPW on these projects, drawing from its extensive volunteer base to expand the impact of these investments. TU applauds inclusion in the Plan of adjustments to multiple diversion structures so as to restore fish passage and improve habitat connectivity within the watershed. Providing free up- and down- stream movement for fisheries and other aquatic life contributes to the health of the watershed and increases resiliency of aquatic species in the face of localized disturbances. We are pleased to see reconnection of habitat at the North Poudre, Calloway, and mainstem Fort Collins diversions included. In the case of Calloway, we note that the existing diversion blocks cattle intrusion into currently protected upstream riparian habitats. We recommend that modifications at the Calloway diversion are installed such that they do not open up that protected riparian corridor to intrusion by livestock. Long-time members of TU in the region recall the disastrous sediment releases in 1996 that smothered habitat and killed fish in the Phantom Canyon reach downstream of Halligan. We therefore appreciate the City’s statement in the Plan that they will manage future sediment releases to occur in conjunction with spilling of high flows, to provide for sufficient flows to transport any released sediment through the downstream reaches. The Plan acknowledges the need to further examine and address water quality in the context of 401 certification for the Halligan project. We note that the Rocky Mountain Flycasters Chapter TU is collaborating with The Nature Conservancy this year to install a new water quality monitoring station EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 539 Item 15. in Phantom Canyon. We are hopeful that real-time data from that station can assist CPW and the City in assessing baseline and future conditions so as to ensure that any adverse impacts to water quality can be recognized and addressed. Recreation. For years, anglers have enjoyed access on the North Fork above Halligan Reservoir through the Cherokee State Wildlife Area (SWA). With existing access along approximately ¾ of a mile lost to inundation under the Halligan project, we were pleased to see the Plan include provisions for the City to help fund continued leasing of approximately a mile of water on the north side of the North Fork, complementing the existing access on the south bank and helping to reduce potential for inadvertent trespass or other use conflicts that might adversely effect fishing opportunity. However, the proposed funding level toward an access lease ($135,000) is intended to cover 30 years at the existing lease cost. As the loss of access to inundation is permanent, the mitigation provided should be perpetual as well. We recommend that the Plan be modified to provide a level of funding consistent with the market value of a permanent access easement for the reach; if a perpetual agreement cannot be secured with the landowner, the funds should then be applied to other public access in the basin that may be identified by CPW staff. The Plan does not ultimately address the question of providing angling access to the enlarged Halligan Reservoir itself, instead deferring that matter to future discussions. We recognize that specific details must be addressed on how such access would be managed in a sustainable manner and avoid adverse impacts on wildlife in the Cherokee SWA, for example by the continuation of existing closures to protect wintering areas utilized by deer and elk. However, rather than deferring the question of access entirely to the future – with no certainty that it will ultimately be addressed – CPW and the City should at least define a process by which access will be provided. TU recommends that the Plan include an agreement in principle to opening Halligan Reservoir to angling access, with recognition of the stewardship needs for the City and CPW that will provide sideboards on how such access is managed. Full details can then be resolved between CPW and the City in a manner consistent with those guiding principles. We fear that without such an agreement, the potential public benefit of this $157M investment via access to an excellent, nearby recreation destination will never be realized. We appreciate the opportunity to comment, and look forward to working with the Commission, CPW staff and the City to address these issues and refine the Plan in a manner that we hope can enjoy broad public support. EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 540 Item 15. ID Timestamp 1. Do you think the mitigation and enhancement measures provided are adequate? Please include your thoughts. 2. Are there any additional or different mitigation and enhancement measures you would like to see? 3. Do you have other thoughts about the Halligan Water Supply Project? Zip code of residence. 1 5/2/2023 9:02:40 Yes, they sound like more than enough. If our biggest concerns are bighorn sheep, which the world isn't running out of anytime soon, and a rare mouse, which no one even knows about, we're in great shape. It's my understanding that there's debate about whether the mouse can even be classified as its own species. In any case, if they can't survive the enlargement of one small reservoir, there was no saving them to begin with. I'm glad we're keeping them in mind, but the animals will be fine. Most will be better off it seems. Let's not lose the forest for the trees. No, I do not think we need to add to our 170 pages of mitigation and enhancement measures. Let's get this show on the road! Couldn't be clearer that this is a net gain for 95% of all stakeholders, including fish and wildlife. 80528 2 5/8/2023 16:41:52 Yes Continued and improved per capita water use reductions in Fort Collins. Intentionally left blank. 80524 3 5/10/2023 17:03:15 Yes, appears to be the best idea with good planning I have not read the entire brochure, but I will ask my question and see what response comes back. I know from fishing in the streams above Halligan in my youth that there is/was a population of greenback trout in Fish Creek, maybe Dale Creek. Curios to know if they still exist and if so are they part of the consideration? I managed a water treatment project for the University of Colorado at the Mountain Research Center and had the duty to protect the breeding population of Como Creek Greenback Trout, mid 90s, so I know the trout preservation process and watershed protection process is intense. Too early for access planning for fishing? I used to hike into the streams feeding Halligan and N Fork via Turkey Roost. Once in a while would get a permit from Karl to fish Phantom Canyon until Game and Fish flushed the dam and filled the canyon with debris:) Puerto Aventuras, Mexico 4 5/11/2023 8:10:11 No. Halligan Dam needs to be torn down. Halligan Dam needs to be torn down. The City must focus on water conservation and tear down Halligan Dam. 80521 5 5/11/2023 21:10:58 Yes - thanks for all the work that went into addressing all the issues I cannot think of any. An excellent idea. Extremely low impact compared to building a new dam in a different location on the steam. Replaces a very old dam hopefully before it would fail. Updating infrastructure that is this old is always a good idea. 80525 EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 541 Item 15. ID Timestamp 1. Do you think the mitigation and enhancement measures provided are adequate? Please include your thoughts. 2. Are there any additional or different mitigation and enhancement measures you would like to see? 3. Do you have other thoughts about the Halligan Water Supply Project? Zip code of residence. 6 5/12/2023 16:22:58 I support the following mitigation and enhancements measures:  Flows to reduce 0-water flow days.  Ramping up and down of flows and peak flow releases.  Increasing winter flows and summer flows.  The focus on aquatic native macroinvertebrates and small bodied native fish and rainbow trout.  Radio collaring and tracking of big horn sheep to determine movements to ensure increased survival.  Fish passage projects and restoration of the stream segment upstream and downstream of the Calloway diversion.  No public access on Halligan Reservoir.  Maintenance and improvement of PMJM habitat.  Managing construction activities to reduce impacts to wildlife and reduce expansion of non-native weeds.  Redesign of the canyon diversion for the NPIC canal.  Additional monitoring stations. Yes. I suggest the following.  A bald eagle nest is located 1/2 mile downstream in The Nature Conservancy Preserve. The river and reservoir is also used year round by bald eagles. I do not agree that impacts will be negligible. Construction may cause the bald eagle nest site to be abandoned and may also interfere with foraging and territory occupation. This needs more assessment and in particular avoidance of construction activities prior to and during nesting.  Golden eagles nest upstream and downstream of the NPIC canyon diversion. Reconstruction of the diversion may impact golden eagle nesting and territory occupation. This needs more assessment and in particular avoidance of construction activities prior to and during nesting.  3cfs winter flow is a very low and minimal flow offer. This flow barely connects pools and barely helps maintain dissolved oxygen levels. Any increase in winter flows would provide higher survival rates for fish and aquatic insects.  5cfs during the summer months will help, but still does not approach the range of historic flows. I encourage talking with CWCB to explore if their instream flow can be used to enhance flows between Halligan and Seaman reservoirs.  Ramping rates used in the past were most effective when delivered over a 3-day period. This occurred via the agreement between TNC and NPIC. 18 hours and 10 hours proposed are too short.  The conservation easement on the Roberts Ranch does not allow for public recreational access. Therefore the proposed lease for public hunting and fishing on the Krause Field would be a violation of the easement. The Nature Conservancy should be consulted before any steps are taken on this proposal. I support the City of Fort Collins being the sole operator of a permitted new Halligan Reservoir. This will ensure all parts of the mitigation and enhancement plan are carried out as permitted. 80536 7 5/15/2023 11:01:11 Yes. An extensive amount of analyses has been performed and it seems apparent that the environmental conditions along the North Fork of the Poudre and in other areas will be improved with the construction of the Halligan Reservoir Supply Project. The measures provided are extensive and reasonable as presented and I do not believe additional measures are necessary. The project as presented should provide increased reliability for the City of Fort Collins water supply system with important mitigation and enhancement measures to protect and improve the local fishery and wildlife resources. 80525 EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 542 Item 15. ID Timestamp 1. Do you think the mitigation and enhancement measures provided are adequate? Please include your thoughts. 2. Are there any additional or different mitigation and enhancement measures you would like to see? 3. Do you have other thoughts about the Halligan Water Supply Project? Zip code of residence. 8 5/15/2023 19:53:17 The planned measures are good but not adequate for the aquatic and streamside ecosystems. They are inadequate because there is no assurance that the goals for these ecosystems will be achieved, and there is no comprehensive adaptive management plan set up for learning and adjusting over time. This is most obvious with the goals for small-bodied native fish, where notably: BIGGEST ISSUE FOR WHICH ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT EIS NEEDED: Many of the measures in this plan seem ideally suited for ensuring that the brown trout population thrives in the North Fork. Brown trout may be the single most important factor driving down native fish populations. Ensuring 3 cfs in winter and 5 cfs ensures that there will always be sufficiently cool temperatures and sufficient oxygen for brown trout to thrive. Creating connectivity across the current stream flow diversion structures will allow the brown trout to roam at will; currently it is difficult for the brown trout to live downstream of the NPIC structure, and any large browns that get caught below the structure cannot travel back upstream. There is good reason to think that flow and diversion mitigation will make the already strong brown trout population even stronger, and that this stronger population will have even greater negative impact on the native fish. The FWMEP says "Spawning of small-bodied native fish in the North Fork is temporally limited by seasonal water temperatures. Species observed in the North Fork below Halligan Reservoir require temperatures that range from 12 degrees Celsius (°C) to 29°C (Woodling 1985). Based on temperature data analyzed from 2016 to 2020 (Hydros 2021d), the North Fork below Halligan Reservoir currently maintains suitable spawning temperatures for small-bodied native fish from approximately June to October." BUT, current temperatures below Halligan come nowhere close to 29 deg C, which per the above statement is "REQUIRED." It's actually probably not required that high, but there is good evidence that the native populations would benefit from higher temperatures that make trout uncomfortable. And in any case "current" isn't what matters; how the multi-level outlet works will be managed is what matters, but there is little indication of how temperature of releases might be managed to support native fish. (part of the issue here is that there is a commitment to "aquatic life standards", which is a problem here because of the transition-zone status of this stream- -what will be done to managing the conflict needs of the fish in this zone?) Ramping rates are based on rough understanding of the ecosystem, and the 3-day duration is also a guess. You don't know how this is going to play out actually. Adaptive management is needed. Other mitigation measures intended to enhance riparian habitat for Prebles, restore stream habitat, and restore/maintain riparian habitat generally are similarly problematic in the absence of adaptive management. The plan says, "Adaptive management in response to environmental monitoring is indirectly incorporated into some mitigation and enhancement measures in the FWMEP, including the MLOW, bighorn sheep collaring and mortality compensation, sediment management, and temporary environmental pool measures." What does "indirectly" even mean in this context, especially for MLOW and TEP? Adaptive begins with setting objectives, monitoring and learning over time, and adjusting in response to learning. As the plan currently stands, there is little in terms of objectives beyond a hope/expectation that native fish and these other ecosystem components will benefit. There is also no clear process for adapting over time; quite the opposite--many of the planned actions are so "locked in" that they could not be adjusted even if there was evidence that they were not working. Please require a clear, robust, outcomes-based adaptive management plan. Also, include experts and stakeholders outside Fort Collins and CPW. Overall, I prefer this project to Fort Collins joining NISP. That said, there is a huge missed opportunity to do right by the river, and to be an example for all of Colorado and the West. As a Fort Collins resident, I expect the City to go above and beyond in taking care of all the other species and ecosystems that co-reside with us in and along the Poudre River. 80521 EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 543 Item 15. Exhibit B WATER DEDICATION AND DELIVERY AGREEMENT EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-083 Page 544 Item 15. File Attachments for Item: 16. Resolution 2025-084 Approving an Exception to the Competitive Purchasing Process for the Purchase of Animal Control Services from NOCO County Humane for 2025. The purpose of this item is to request an exception to the competitive bid process for the purchase of services for a one-year term beginning January 1, 2026, from NOCO Humane for the operation and management of the animal shelter. Approval of this exception may be used as authorized in City Code Section 8-161(d)(4) as the basis for the City Manager and the Purchasing Agent to negotiate and agree to the additional purchase of animal control services from NOCO Humane through December 2030 without further Council approval. Exception to Competitive Bidding Rationale: Code Section 8-161(d)(1)(a). There exists only one (1) responsible source. Page 545 City Council Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 1 of 2 September 16, 2025 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Council STAFF Lori Schwarz, Deputy Director PDT Gerry Paul, Purchasing Director SUBJECT Resolution 2025-084 Approving an Exception to the Competitive Purchasing Process for the Purchase of Animal Control Services from NOCO County Humane for 2025. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to request an exception to the competitive bid process for the purchase of services for a one-year term beginning January 1, 2026, from NOCO Humane for the operation and management of the animal shelter. Approval of this exception may be used as authorized in City Code Section 8-161(d)(4) as the basis for the City Manager and the Purchasing Agent to negotiate and agree to the additional purchase of animal control services from NOCO Humane through December 2030 without further Council approval. Exception to Competitive Bidding Rationale: Code Section 8-161(d)(1)(a). There exists only one (1) responsible source. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Resolution. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION The City has contracted with NOCO Humane (formally the Larimer Humane Society) for animal control services since 1986. The contract requires NOCO Humane to provide a variety of specialized equipment and personnel necessary to provide animal control services to the City; to operate a shelter facility; to provide emergency veterinary care; to dispose of dead animals; to respond to animal-related calls for service; to enforce City ordinances pertaining to animals; to administer a pet licensing program; and to provide accurate quarterly reports to City staff. There is no other known organization, entity or individual currently capable of performing these services. The City relies on NOCO Humane to address animal-related issues within the City limits, and it remains dedicated to providing professional animal control services to the City. The contract between the City and NOCO Humane expires December 31, 2025. This year is the fifth and final year of the current contract. A new contract is required pursuant to Code Sec. 8-186 which limits multi-year contracts to five (5) years. Adoption of this resolution will allow this contractual relationship to continue. Page 546 Item 16. City Council Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 2 of 2 CITY FINANCIAL IMPACTS The proposed 2026 contract contains a negotiated cost to the City for animal control services in the amount of $1,225,107 paid in monthly installments of $ 102,092.25. Funds for the contract are authorized in the 2026 budget. The cost for 2026 is an increase of $27,680 or 2.3% from the contract price in 2025. The increase for 2026 of $27,680 includes a reduction of $49,318 attributable to a credit for the pending license fee increase of $2.00. BOARD / COMMISSION / COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION None. PUBLIC OUTREACH None. ATTACHMENTS 1. Resolution 2025-084 Page 547 Item 16. -1- RESOLUTION 2025-084 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS APPROVING AN EXCEPTION TO THE COMPETITIVE PURCHASING PROCESS FOR THE PURCHASE OF ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICES FROM NOCO COUNTY HUMANE FOR 2025 A. Section 8-161(d)(1)(a) of the Code of the City of Fort Collins authorizes the Purchasing Agent to negotiate the purchase of supplies and services without utilizing a competitive bidding process where the Purchasing Agent determines that only one responsible source exists. B. The Purchasing Agent has established that NOCO Humane is the only responsible source for the animal control services needed within the City, which includes, without limitation, professional animal control enforcement, public education, operation and maintenance of an animal shelter, transportation of animals, and pick-up and disposal of dead animals (“Animal Control Services”). C. The Purchasing Agent has submitted the requisite written justification for such determination to the City Manager for approval. D. The City Manager has reviewed and approved the procurement of these Animal Control Services. E. The cost to purchase these Animal Control Services is $1,225,107 for the one-year term beginning January 1, 2026. F. City Code Section 8-161(d)(3) requires approval by the City Council of all procurements which exceed the cost of $200,000 prior to acquisition. G. City Code Section 8-161(d)(4) permits the City Council to authorize the Purchasing Agent to negotiate the additional purchase of Animal Control Services from NOCO Humane for up to four additional one-year terms after the initial one-year term. In light of the foregoing recitals, which the Council hereby makes and adopts as determinations and findings, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. The Council hereby approves, as an exception to the City’s competitive purchasing process, the purchase of Animal Control Services for a one -year term beginning January 1, 2026, from NOCO Humane to include, without limitation, the provision of all necessary personnel trained in the area of animal control; the provision of uniforms to all animal control enforcement officers; and the provision of humane and modern vehicles for the safe transportation of animals, for a total payment of One Million Two Hundred Twenty-Five Thousand One Hundred Seven Dollars and Zero Cents Page 548 Item 16. -2- ($1,225,107) in twelve (12) monthly payments of $102,092.25 for the one-year term beginning January 1, 2026, together with retained impoundment and license fees. Section 2. The Purchasing Director may use this approval, as authorized in City Code Section 8-161(d)(4), as the basis for negotiating the additional purchase of Animal Control Services from NOCO Humane for up to four additional one-year terms extending through January 2029. Passed and adopted on September 16, 2025. ______________________________ Mayor ATTEST: ______________________________ Sr. Deputy City Clerk Effective Date: September 16, 2025 Approving Attorney: Stefanie Boster Exhibit: None Page 549 Item 16. File Attachments for Item: 17. Resolution 2025-085 Approving Participation in the Settlement with Additional Opioid Defendants, Alvogen, Apotex, Amneal, Hikma, Indivior, Viatris, Sun, and Zydus, and a Related Waiver of Claims. The purpose of this item is to consider a resolution to allow the City to participate in the Colorado Opioids Settlement with Alvogen, Apotex, Amneal, Hikma, Indivior, Viatris, Sun, and Zydus by granting approval to sign an additional participation agreement and waiver of claims for opioid-related damages. This is in follow-up to prior approvals of settlements with multiple other opioid defendants, negotiated through national settlement efforts coordinated through the State of Colorado. Page 550 City Council Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 1 of 2 September 16, 2025 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Council STAFF Rupa Venkatesh, Assistant City Manager SUBJECT Resolution 2025-085 Approving Participation in the Settlement with Additional Opioid Defendants, Alvogen, Apotex, Amneal, Hikma, Indivior, Viatris, Sun, and Zydus, and a Related Waiver of Claims. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to consider a resolution to allow the City to participate in the Colorado Opioids Settlement with Alvogen, Apotex, Amneal, Hikma, Indivior, Viatris, Sun, and Zydus by granting approval to sign an additional participation agreement and waiver of claims for opioid-related damages. This is in follow-up to prior approvals of settlements with multiple other opioid defendants, negotiated through national settlement efforts coordinated through the State of Colorado. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Resolution. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION Through extensive negotiations, local governments and the Colorado Attorney General’s Office negotiated a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to govern how opioid settlement funds will be allocated in Colorado, to maximize recovery from the variety of lawsuits filed by the state and local governments across the nation along with the Subdivision Settlement Participation Forms. To date, Colorado is on track to receive over $880 million in opioid settlement funds, including just over $12 million from this proposed settlement. However, the amount the State recovers from the settlements is determined in part by the rate of participation of local governments, including both cities and counties, in the settlement agreement. More information about the State of Colorado settlements and framework for distribution and use of the settlement funds can be found at: https://coag.gov/opioids/ .  The Colorado framework allocates to participating local governments 20% of the total settlement funds.  The framework allocates 60% of the settlement funds to 19 regional opioid abatement councils to be distributed for eligible projects.  Larimer County is one of the regions that receives and then distributes the regional funds. Page 551 Item 17. City Council Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 2 of 2  The Larimer County Regional Opioid Abatement Council has received applications for and allocated approximately $5.5 million for 2022-2024.  The City has designated Rupa Venkatesh, Assistant City Manager, to serve as its representative on the Council  More on the Larimer County Regional Opioid Abatement Council can be found at: https://www.larimer.gov/bocc/regional-opioid-abatement-council#/list/  The framework allocates 10% of the settlement proceeds to an Infrastructure Fund that is allocated by the Colorado Opioid Abatement Council.  The framework allocates 10% of the settlement proceeds to the State of Colorado, managed by the Colorado Department of Law. In 2021, Council adopted Resolution 2021-113, approving participation in the Colorado Opioids Settlement and authorizing execution of related agreements. In 2022, Council adopted Resolution 2022-055, authorizing the execution of an intergovernmental agreement (IGA) regarding regional opioid settlement implementation and designating a representative to the Larimer Regional Opioid Council. On March 21, 2023, Council adopted Resolution 2023-028, authorizing the execution of participation agreements and waivers of claims for the City to participate in the additional settlements negotiated on behalf of the State of Colorado and participating local governments with opioid defendants Teva, Allergan, Walmart, CVS and Walgreens. On August 20, 2024, Council adopted Resolution 2024-096, authorizing the execution of participation of agreements and waivers of claims for the City to participate in additional settlements negotiated on behalf of the State of Colorado and participating local governments with opioid defendants Kroger. Most recently on September 2, 2025, Council adopted Resolution 2025-081 authorizing the execution of participation of agreements and waivers of claims for the City to participate in additional settlements negotiated on behalf of the State of Colorado and participating local governments with opioid defendants Purdue. CITY FINANCIAL IMPACTS By approving the settlements from the additional defendants (Alvogen, Apotex, Amneal, Hikma, Indivior, Viatris, Sun, and Zydus) the City and the Larimer County region stand to receive an undetermined amount over a period of fifteen years. The State will not know the full amount to be received by the State and allocated until all communities that choose to participate have formalized their participation. These settlements will range from 1 year to 10 years and the total settlement is approximately $720 million with the State of Colorado expecting to receive just over $12 million. BOARD / COMMISSION / COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION None. PUBLIC OUTREACH None. ATTACHMENTS 1. Resolution 2025-085 Page 552 Item 17. -1- RESOLUTION 2025-085 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS APPROVING PARTICIPATION IN THE SETTLEMENT WITH ADDITIONAL OPIOID DEFENDANTS, ALVOGEN, APOTEX, AMNEAL, HIKMA, INDIVIOR, VIATRIS, SUN, AND ZYDUS, AND A RELATED WAIVER OF CLAIMS A. Communities throughout the State of Colorado, including the City of Fort Collins (“City), are suffering from an epidemic of opioid addiction. B. The opioid epidemic has not only affected individuals and families across the country, but it has also burdened the local and state governments charged with providing the services needed to address the wave of addiction . C. Local and state governments across the nation, including in Colorado, have filed lawsuits against opioid manufacturers, distributors, and pharmacies for creati ng the opioid epidemic. D. The parties to the various opioid lawsuits have been negotiating settlement agreements to resolve the litigation which include incentive payments for maximizing participation by local governments. E. Through extensive negotiations, local governments and the Colorado Attorney General’s Office negotiated a Memorandum of Understanding to govern how opioids settlement funds will be allocated in Colorado, to maximize recovery from the variety of lawsuits filed by the state and local govern ments across the nation (“MOU”), along with the Subdivision Settlement Participation Forms to address opioid defendants Johnson & Johnson, AmerisourceBergen, Cardinal Health, and McKesson . F. On December 7, 2021, the City Council approved Resolution 2021-113, approving participation in the Colorado Opioids Settlement and authorizing execution of related agreements, which were signed and submitted to the Colorado Attorney General in December 2021. G. On May 3, 2022, the City Council approved Resolution 2022 -055, authorizing the execution of an intergovernmental agreement regarding regional opioid s settlement implementation (“IGA”) and designating a City representative to the Larimer Regional Opioid Council. Resolution 2022-055 appointed Social Sustainability Department Director, Beth Yonce, as the City’s representative to the Larimer Regional Opioid Council until such time as the City Manager designates a different City representative. Assistant City Manager Rupa Venkatesh has served as the alternate representative and will replace Ms. Yonce as the City Manager’s appointee. H. The City entered into the IGA and it has since been amended to add participation by the Town of Estes Park, pursuant to City Council’s Resolution 2023-011, adopted on January 17, 2023. Page 553 Item 17. -2- I. On March 21, 2023, the City Council adopted Resolution 2023-028, approving additional settlements with opioid defendants Teva, Allergan, Walmart, CVS and Walgreens. J. On August 20, 2024, the City Council approved Resolution 2024-096 approving additional settlements with opioid defendant Kroger. K. On September 2, 2025, the City Council approved Resolution 2025-081 approving additional settlements with opioid defendant Purdue. L. A national settlement has now been negotiated on behalf of the State of Colorado and participating local governments with additional opioid defendant s, Alvogen, Apotex, Amneal, Hikma, Indivior, Viatris, Sun, and Zydus, and the City may participate in this settlement and receive settlement payments by executing a participation form for this opioid defendant, including an associated waiver of claims. M. The City desires to participate in the Colorado opioids settlement to increase recoveries for Colorado government entities and so the City is eligible to receive settlement funds to be used for approved purposes to abate the opioid epidemic as defined in the MOU for the benef it of the residents of the City. N. Accordingly, the City Council desires to approve participation in the Alvogen, Apotex, Amneal, Hikma, Indivior, Viatris, Sun and Zydus settlement and authorize execution of a Alvogen, Apotex, Amneal, Hikma, Indivior, Viatris, Sun, and Zydus participation form consistent in content with the sample form attached to this Resolution as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this reference. In light of the foregoing recitals, which the Council hereby makes and adopts as determinations and findings, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. The City Council approves the City’s participation in the Alvogen, Apotex, Amneal, Hikma, Indivior, Viatris, Sun, and Zydus settlement. Section 2. The Mayor is authorized and directed to execute on behalf of the City a participation form consistent with this Resolution and in a final form recommended and presented by the City Manager and approved by the City Attorney. Page 554 Item 17. -3- Passed and adopted on September 16, 2025. ______________________________ Mayor ATTEST: ______________________________ Sr. Deputy City Clerk Effective Date: September 16, 2025 Approving Attorney: Dianne Criswell Exhibit: Exhibit A – Participation Form Page 555 Item 17. EXHIBIT K Subdivision Participation and Release Form Governmental Entity: Fort Collins city State: CO Authorized Signatory: /officialname_purdue/ Address 1: /address1_purdue/ Address 2: /address2_purdue/ City, State, Zip: /cit_pd//state_pd//zi_pd/ Phone: /phone_purdue/ Email: /email_purdue/ The governmental entity identified above (“Governmental Entity”), in order to obtain and in consideration for the benefits provided to the Governmental Entity pursuant to that certain Governmental Entity & Shareholder Direct Settlement Agreement accompanying this participation form (the “Agreement”)1, and acting through the undersigned authorized official, hereby elects to participate in the Agreement, grant the releases set forth below, and agrees as follows. 1.The Governmental Entity is aware of and has reviewed the Agreement, and agrees that by executing this Participation and Release Form, the Governmental Entity elects to participate in the Agreement and become a Participating Subdivision as provided therein. 2.The Governmental Entity shall promptly after the Effective Date, and prior to the filing of the Consent Judgment, dismiss with prejudice any Shareholder Released Claims and Released Claims that it has filed. With respect to any Shareholder Released Claims and Released Claims pending in In re National Prescription Opiate Litigation, MDL No. 2804, the Governmental Entity authorizes the Plaintiffs’ Executive Committee to execute and file on behalf of the Governmental Entity a Stipulation of Dismissal with Prejudice substantially in the form found at https://nationalopioidsettlement.com. 3.The Governmental Entity agrees to the terms of the Agreement pertaining to Participating Subdivisions as defined therein. 4.By agreeing to the terms of the Agreement and becoming a Releasor, the Governmental Entity is entitled to the benefits provided therein, including, if applicable, monetary payments beginning following the Effective Date. 5.The Governmental Entity agrees to use any monies it receives through the Agreement solely for the purposes provided therein. 6.The Governmental Entity submits to the jurisdiction of the court in the Governmental Entity’s state where the Consent Judgment is filed for purposes limited to that court’s role as and to the extent provided in, and for resolving disputes to the extent provided in, the 1 Capitalized terms used in this Exhibit K but not otherwise defined in this Exhibit K have the meanings given to them in the Agreement or, if not defined in the Agreement, the Master Settlement Agreement. K-1 Docusign Envelope ID: 651B90DA-9179-45BF-9E6A-7B1B8CBCCAC9 SAM P L E EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-085 Page 556 Item 17. Agreement. The Governmental Entity likewise agrees to arbitrate before the National Arbitration Panel as provided in, and for resolving disputes to the extent otherwise provided in, the Agreement. 7.The Governmental Entity has the right to enforce the Agreement as provided therein. 8.The Governmental Entity, as a Participating Subdivision, hereby becomes a Releasor for all purposes in the Agreement, including without limitation all provisions of Article 10 (Release), and along with all departments, agencies, divisions, boards, commissions, districts, instrumentalities of any kind and attorneys, and any person in his or her official capacity whether elected or appointed to serve any of the foregoing and any agency, person, or other entity claiming by or through any of the foregoing, and any other entity identified in the definition of Subdivision Releasor, to the maximum extent of its authority, for good and valuable consideration, the adequacy of which is hereby confirmed, the Shareholder Released Parties and Released Parties are, as of the Effective Date, hereby released and forever discharged by the Governmental Entity and its Subdivision Releasors from: any and all Causes of Action, including, without limitation, any Estate Cause of Action and any claims that the Governmental Entity or its Subdivision Releasors would have presently or in the future been legally entitled to assert in its own right (whether individually or collectively), notwithstanding section 1542 of the California Civil Code or any law of any jurisdiction that is similar, comparable or equivalent thereto (which shall conclusively be deemed waived), whether existing or hereinafter arising, in each case, (A) directly or indirectly based on, arising out of, or in any way relating to or concerning, in whole or in part, (i) the Debtors, as such Entities existed prior to or after the Petition Date, and their Affiliates, (ii) the Estates, (iii) the Chapter 11 Cases, or (iv) Covered Conduct and (B) as to which any conduct, omission or liability of any Debtor or any Estate is the legal cause or is otherwise a legally relevant factor (each such release, as it pertains to the Shareholder Released Parties, the “Shareholder Released Claims”, and as it pertains to the Released Parties other than the Shareholder Released Parties, the “Released Claims”). For the avoidance of doubt and without limiting the foregoing: the Shareholder Released Claims and Released Claims include any Cause of Action that has been or may be asserted against any Shareholder Released Party or Released Party by the Governmental Entity or its Subdivision Releasors (whether or not such party has brought such action or proceeding) in any federal, state, or local action or proceeding (whether judicial, arbitral, or administrative) (A) directly or indirectly based on, arising out of, or in any way relating to or concerning, in whole or in part, (i) the Debtors, as such Entities existed prior to or after the Petition Date, and their Affiliates, (ii) the Estates, (iii) the Chapter 11 Cases, or (iv) Covered Conduct and (B) as to which any conduct, omission or liability of any Debtor or any Estate is the legal cause or is otherwise a legally relevant factor. 9.As a Releasor, the Governmental Entity hereby absolutely, unconditionally, and irrevocably covenants not to bring, file, or claim, or to cause, assist or permit to be brought, filed, or claimed, or to otherwise seek to establish liability for any Shareholder Released Claims or Released Claims against any Shareholder Released Party or Released Party in any forum whatsoever, subject in all respects to Section 9.02 of the Master Settlement Agreement. The releases provided for herein (including the term “Shareholder Released K-2 Docusign Envelope ID: 651B90DA-9179-45BF-9E6A-7B1B8CBCCAC9 SAM P L E EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-085 Page 557 Item 17. Claims” and “Released Claims”) are intended by the Governmental Entity and its Subdivision Releasors to be broad and shall be interpreted so as to give the Shareholder Released Parties and Released Parties the broadest possible release of any liability relating in any way to Shareholder Released Claims and Released Claims and extend to the full extent of the power of the Governmental Entity to release claims. The Agreement shall be a complete bar to any Shareholder Released Claim and Released Claims. 10.To the maximum extent of the Governmental Entity’s power, the Shareholder Released Parties and the Released Parties are, as of the Effective Date, hereby released and discharged from any and all Shareholder Released Claims and Released Claims of the Subdivision Releasors. 11.The Governmental Entity hereby takes on all rights and obligations of a Participating Subdivision as set forth in the Agreement. 12.In connection with the releases provided for in the Agreement, each Governmental Entity expressly waives, releases, and forever discharges any and all provisions, rights, and benefits conferred by any law of any state or territory of the United States or other jurisdiction, or principle of common law, which is similar, comparable, or equivalent to §1542 of the California Civil Code, which reads: General Release; extent. A general release does not extend to claims that the creditor or releasing party does not know or suspect to exist in his or her favor at the time of executing the release that, if known by him or her, would have materially affected his or her settlement with the debtor or released party. A Releasor may hereafter discover facts other than or different from those which it knows, believes, or assumes to be true with respect to the Shareholder Released Claims or such other Claims released pursuant to this release, but each Governmental Entity hereby expressly waives and fully, finally, and forever settles, releases and discharges, upon the Effective Date, any and all Shareholder Released Claims or such other Claims released pursuant to this release that may exist as of such date but which Releasors do not know or suspect to exist, whether through ignorance, oversight, error, negligence or through no fault whatsoever, and which, if known, would materially affect the Governmental Entities’ decision to participate in the Agreement. 13.Nothing herein is intended to modify in any way the terms of the Agreement, to which Governmental Entity hereby agrees. To the extent any portion of this Participation and Release Form not relating to the release of, or bar against, liability is interpreted differently from the Agreement in any respect, the Agreement controls. 14.Notwithstanding anything to the contrary herein or in the Agreement, (x) nothing herein shall (A) release any Excluded Claims or (B) be construed to impair in any way the rights and obligations of any Person under the Agreement; and (y) the Releases set forth herein shall be subject to being deemed void to the extent set forth in Section 9.02 of the Master Settlement Agreement. K-3 Docusign Envelope ID: 651B90DA-9179-45BF-9E6A-7B1B8CBCCAC9 SAM P L E EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-085 Page 558 Item 17. I have all necessary power and authorization to execute this Participation and Release Form on behalf of the Governmental Entity. Signature:/signer_1_purdue/ Name:/name_1_purdue/ Title:/title_1_purdue/ Date:/date_1_purdue/ K-4 Docusign Envelope ID: 651B90DA-9179-45BF-9E6A-7B1B8CBCCAC9 SAM P L E EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2025-085 Page 559 Item 17. File Attachments for Item: 18. First Reading of Ordinance No. 157, 2025, Amending Chapter 2, Article VII, Division 2 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins Relating to the Gift Acceptance Restrictions and the Definitions Section of the City’s Ethics Rules. The purpose of this item is to consider amendments to the City’s ethics rules related to gift acceptance restrictions recommended by the Ethics Review Board. Corresponding changes to the definitions section of the ethics rules will also be considered. Page 560 City Council Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 1 of 3 September 16, 2025 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Council STAFF Jenny Lopez Filkins, Senior Deputy City Attorney Carrie Daggett, City Attorney SUBJECT First Reading of Ordinance No. 157, 2025, Amending Chapter 2, Article VII, Division 2 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins Relating to the Gift Acceptance Restrictions and the Definitions Section of the City’s Ethics Rules. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to consider amendments to the City’s ethics rules related to gift acceptance restrictions recommended by the Ethics Review Board. Corresponding changes to the definitions section of the ethics rules will also be considered. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION Under “other business” at its January 21, 2025, City Council meeting, several members of the Council asked the Ethics Review Board (ERB) to review the City’s requirements related to the acceptance of gifts, gift disclosures, and financial disclosures and consider recommended changes. City Code Section 2- 576(b) prohibits officers (and employees) from accepting a gift or favor if it might be construed as compensation for an official decision or would tend to impair independence of judgment in official duties. Section 2-576(b) currently does not provide sufficient clarification for officers and employees. At its April 7, 2025, meeting, the ERB reviewed the rules related to acceptance of gifts and determine whether to make any recommended changes at its next meeting. At its May 5, 2025, meeting, the ERB reviewed various gift restrictions of other Colorado municipalities of similar size, including those of the cities of Arvada, Aurora, Boulder, Broomfield, Colorado Springs, Denver, Lafeyette, Lakewood, Littleton, Loveland, and Westminster, among others. The ERB also considered related gift restrictions of the state of Colorado. During the May 5 meeting, the ERB discussed issues and questions that Councilmembers and City staff frequently encounter in interpreting and applying the City’s current gift restrictions. The ERB also considered a question of whether to add a specific value restriction and time period for acceptance of unsolicited gifts. The ERB voted to recommend amendments that add a specific dollar limit by reference to a state constitutional provision that currently sets the limit at $75 within a twelve-month period. With the proposed amendments, this amount will adjust for inflation. Page 561 Item 18. City Council Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 2 of 3 Some gift restrictions remain in the draft amendments but are reworded or clarified, including:  Payment for speeches, debates or public appearances;  Gifts that are offered or received that could influence or be perceived to influence objectivity when conducting City business;  Gifts from a donor who has a matter pending before City Council. Some exceptions currently in the ethics rules remain in draft amendments but are reworded or clarified, including:  Reported campaign contributions;  Non-pecuniary award publicly presented by nonprofit or governmental organization in recognition of public service;  Payment for travel expenses to attend a conference or other similar event if attendance is on behalf of the City, documented and the person is scheduled to deliver a speech, participate in a presentation, participate on a panel, receive an award or they are wearing City name tag identifying them as a City representative;  Employment compensation. ERB expressed support for adding the following exceptions to the gift acceptance restrictions:  Any scholarship or grant or other financial aid for education given to any covered person or immediate family member for any reason.  The cost of admission to any charity event attended on behalf of the City or any of its affiliated organizations if the cost of admission is less than the dollar amount established in Colorado Constitution, Article XXIX, Section 3.  Any gift solicitation for a charitable purpose as determined to be appropriate by the City or its affiliated entities.  Any gift, whether solicited or not, given to and accepted on behalf of the City to benefit a public safety or community purpose.  Awards or prizes given at competitions or drawings at events where no admission is charged and which are open to the public.  Reasonable cost and frequency of City sponsored educational events, so long as the events are reported on the disclosures required under City Code section 2-656.  Perishable or consumable gifts given to a City department or group if the gift is: o Approved by the City Manager; o Not donated by a City service provider or vendor; o The receiving department is not responsible for regulating or otherwise transacting City business with the donor.  Gifts accepted in an officer or employee’s official capacity that will become property of the City.  For Councilmembers and their relatives, reasonable cost and frequency of meals and event tickets pertaining to their official duties as members of City Council so long as the gift is documented and is not intended to affect, and does not affect, a direct official action. Page 562 Item 18. City Council Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 3 of 3  A non-pecuniary award of reasonable value and frequency publicly presented by an entity affiliated with or formed by the City or to which the City Council has appointed the Councilmember or the City has appointed the employee and in recognition of their service as an officer or employee.  Discounts that are similarly available to all employees, or discounts that are offered to the public generally or to a large segment of the public (i.e., all uniformed personnel, all government employees, or all first responders).  Reasonable cost of travel on behalf of the City (e.g., fees, meals, lodging, and/or transportation) to another City, whether in Colorado or out-of-state, to observe programs, projects or operations in that City and/or of its City Council.  Any other exception approved in an ERB advisory opinion. The ERB discussed adding the exception about allowing Councilmembers and their relatives reasonable cost and frequency of meals and event tickets pertaining to their official duties as Councilmembers and agreed that so long as the gift is documented and is not intended to affect, and does not affect a direct official action, the exception should be included. At its May 5 and July 7, 2025, meetings, the ERB also considered whether to make other substantive changes to existing gift restrictions and did not recommend others for the Council’s consideration. Clarifying amendments to Sec. 2-575 of the City Code, the definitions section of the ethics rules are also proposed. The amendments define the terms “employee” and “officer” and distinguish between the roles. The changes to the gift restrictions will go into effect on October 17, 2025. CITY FINANCIAL IMPACTS None. BOARD / COMMISSION / COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION The Ethics Review Board recommends draft amendments to the gift restrictions for Council consideration. PUBLIC OUTREACH None. ATTACHMENTS 1. ERB Meeting Minutes, April 7, 2025 2. ERB Meeting Minutes, May 5, 2025 3. ERB Meeting Minutes, July 7, 2025 (draft) 4. Council Gifts and Favors Flow Chart 5. Presentation for Items 18,19, and 20 6. Ordinance No. 157, 2025 Page 563 Item 18. April 7, 2025, 3:30 pm ETHICS REVIEW BOARD MEETING MINUTES COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Jeni Arndt, Councilmember Julie Pignataro, Councilmember Tricia Canonico STAFF PRESENT: Rupa Venkatesh, Sarah Kane, Briana McCarten OTHER PRESENT: Halee Wahl A. Call Meeting to Order B. Roll Call C. Elect Chairperson Councilmember Pignataro moved, seconded by Mayor Arndt, to nominate Councilmember Canonico as Chairperson of the Ethics Review Board (“ERB”). Councilmember Canonico expressed her willingness to serve as chair. The motion passed unanimously. D. Agenda Review Carrie Daggett, City Attorney, provided an overview of the topics for the ERB to consider. Daggett stated that at under Other Business at the January 21, 2025, Council meeting, several Councilmembers supported a request that the ERB meet to review the City’s requirements around the acceptance of gifts, gift disclosures, and financial disclosures and consider recommending changes. The ERB may present any recommended Code changes to Council. Canonico noted she would like to see a better definition of which social events that must be posted. Venkatesh will supply a previously-drafted memo addressing this topic. E. Approval of May 22, 2023, Minutes Councilmember Pignataro moved, seconded by Mayor Arndt, to approve the minutes of the May 22, 2023, meeting of the Ethics Review Board. The motion passed unanimously. F. Agenda Item 1: Overview – Gift Restrictions Daggett noted that the packet includes basic overview information about each of the three topics the Ethics Review Board had been asked to review. The first item presented was review of the gift restrictions for City officers and employees. She noted that the meeting packet contains gift restriction language from the State Page 564 Item 18. Constitution as well as from other Colorado cities that have their own provisions. Pignataro commented that the ERB should consider what the issues have been with the gift restrictions. Pignataro questioned where the information on the Council Gifts and Favors FAQ came from because it isn’t from City code language. Daggett responded that the City Attorney’s Office (“CAO”) and City Manager’s Office (“CMO”) worked together to prepare the document to assist with day-to-day decisions related to accepting and reporting gifts. Assistant City Manager Rupa Venkatesh stated that Councilmembers should report any tickets to events received directly should be reported. She noted that at times donors give tickets to the City and then the City will redistribute the tickets to whoever will be representing the City at the event. When Councilmembers receive tickets from the City to attend and represent the City, those are not a “gift” and so do not need to be reported. Pignataro questioned who defines an event wherein a Councilmember is carrying out their role as a Councilmember. Arndt stated that the State’s approach is to distinguish attending to be part of the program or speaking at the event from just attending. The Board discussed different scenarios that are undefined and difficult to discern whether they are gifts that may be accepted. Daggett suggested adding provisions to City code that clarify these questions. Pignataro asked for a good way to distinguish when a Councilmember is acting as an elected official versus a member of the community attending an event. This will be discussed further by the Board. It was noted one indicator of attending on behalf of the City is wearing a City badge. G. Agenda Item 2: Overview – Gift Disclosures Daggett noted that the packet included background and comparison information about the gift disclosures requirements. Arndt expressed frustration with having to report gifts with a very small value. Pignataro suggested that a dollar limit would be helpful. Daggett stated that having parameters for gifts not significant enough to report would make reporting easier. The Board discussed instances wherein an official or employee could potentially accept gift before realizing that the gift is not acceptable. The Board discussed possibly changing the policy so that gifts received by one individual or entity are reported only once they meet a certain threshold in a certain period of time. Pignataro referenced the other municipalities’ code sections provided in the meeting packet for comparison and requested that data be provided in a table format that calls out the outliers. Daggett asked the ERB to consider the purpose and benefit of the requirement to report gifts. Page 565 Item 18. H. Agenda Item 3: Overview – Financial Disclosures Daggett again noted the packet included background and comparison information about the financial disclosures requirement. She explained that the financial disclosures required for candidates theoretically provides voters with information to evaluate conflicts of interest a candidate or elected official may have. Mayor Arndt confirmed that currently elected officials must submit their financial interests to the State via the State’s form. Daggett stated that different municipalities have different reporting thresholds. Daggett isn’t sure how the City decided on its $10,000 threshold. Pignataro was curious how long that threshold has been in place. Information about this will be presented when this item returns to the Board’s agenda. Canonico pointed out that a $10,000 threshold from many years ago is different than that amount today. Arndt expressed an opinion that a spouse’s financial interests are only relevant when that interest is jointly shared with the reporting person. Arndt went on to say that these financial disclosures may deter a person from running for office. Arndt discussed her preference for a requirement to report only real property located in the jurisdiction in which a reporting person serves. Pignataro asked if a personal address must be included on the disclosures and suggested reporting only the district in which the reporting person lives. Daggett explained that the requirement has to do with providing the public with information to evaluate a conflict of interest when an elected official is making a decision about a certain location in the City. Arndt expressed a desire to ensure the financial disclosures for all reporters, including City Attorney and City Manager, be made publicly available in the same way. Pignataro suggested the disclosures be made available to the public upon request to the Clerk’s Office. The group discussed that the disclosures are currently intended to be posted and available on the City’s website, but the links to the disclosures on the website do not work. Daggett suggested that considering the scope of interests that must be reported will be an important part of the discussion of this item. I. Discuss Work Plan and Schedule for Future Meetings Daggett suggested the Board discuss gift restrictions at its next meeting because the policy is the foundation for other requirements and applies to all City officials and employees. Daggett suggested discussing one topic per meeting, but that each discussion may require more than one meeting. The Board discussed summer schedules and decided to schedule meetings through August. Daggett asked if the Board would expect a Council Work Session on the Board’s recommentations to be needed. The Board thought it would want to complete its work in time for recommended Code changes to be presented to Council in August. Page 566 Item 18. Daggett noted staff will present information to the Board to assist in Board discussion of the gift restrictions recommendations at the May 5 meeting. The June meeting will finish the gift restriction discussion, if necessary, and begin the gift disclosure discussion. The July meeting should begin discussing financial disclosures. The goal is to have proposed code language ready for the Board to review once the discussion has proceeded to that point. J. Other Business None. K. Adjournment The meeting adjourned by unanimous consent at 4:32. Minutes approved by the Chair and a vote of the Board on May 5, 2025. Page 567 Item 18. May 5, 2025, 3:30 pm ETHICS REVIEW BOARD MEETING MINUTES COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Jeni Arndt, Councilmember Julie Pignataro, Councilmember Tricia Canonico STAFF PRESENT: Rupa Venkatesh, Sarah Kane, Briana McCarten OTHER PRESENT: Halee Wahl A. Call Meeting to Order B. Roll Call C. Approval of April 7, 2025, Minutes Councilmember Pignataro moved, seconded by Mayor Arndt, to approve the April 7, 2025, minutes. The motion passed unanimously. D. Gift and favors Restrictions Jenny Lopez Filkins reviewed the Ethics Review Board’s (ERB) desire to discuss gifts and favors restrictions in the Code that applies to elected officials and employees. Value Restrictions Lopez Filkins explained that the current City code does not provide for a value restriction and provided examples of other Colorado cities’ code provisions and other states’ statutes around gifts and favors restrictions. Some Colorado cities do not have a value restriction, some provide a dollar limit, some follow the Colorado constitution. Arndt clarified that no gift of any value is allowed under the current code. Lopez Filkins discussed that the City’s current code requires an official or employee to decide if a gift would impair their judgment. Some entities allow gifts under a certain dollar limit. Lopez Filkins asked if the ERB desires to use the examples as a model for changes to City code. The ERB clarified with the CAO that they would like to have a conversation about the topics for discussion rather than hear the CAO’s presentation and then ask for feedback. Pignataro asked what the CAO sees as the problem that these discussions and potential code changes address. Councilmember Canonico expressed their opinion that there is a lack of clarity and predictability around these topics and suggested an update to the code that allows for a dollar limit that adjusts with inflation. Arndt expressed frustration with the current practice of reporting every small value item received and the interpretation that an official may not accept items given to all attendees at an event. City Attorney Daggett explained that there is a conflict between the City’s gift restriction and reporting requirements in that there is a restriction on any gifts but that any gift of significant value Page 568 Item 18. must be reported. Arndt stated that the contradiction should be clarified. Lopez Filkins stated that staff has the same concerns. Pignataro brought up that a member of the public can always utilize the ethics complaint process if they ever question an official’s actions around the receipt of gifts. Arndt and Daggett discussed that an official may also ask the ERB for an advisory opinion. Lopez Filkins reiterated that the City Council has a desire to enact a value restriction on gifts. Lopez Filkins gave an overview of several other Colorado cities’ codes. Lopez Filkins highlighted the City of Colorado Springs’s code exception for event tickets that are documented. Lopez Filkins clarified for Pignataro that “documented” means anything reported on disclosures. Arndt asked if the CAO found any of the cities’ examples particularly reasonable. Lopez Filkins stated her opinion that Colorado Springs has a well written and reasonable code. Daggett pointed out that Colorado Springs’s code specifies that a ticket given to an official’s guest is a gift. Arndt clarified that a ticket to an event given to an official for the purpose of the official to act in their official capacity means an event that the official wouldn’t otherwise attend. Lopez Filkins highlighted Colorado Springs’s provision around tickets or gifts given to the City. ERB and CAO discussed that Colorado Springs relies on Colorado’s gift restriction statute and automatically adjusts for inflation every four years. Lopez Filkins asked for the ERB’s opinion on value restrictions. Pignataro stated they liked the idea of relying on the Colorado constitution. Lopez Filkins moved on to discuss prohibited gifts and whether the ERB would like to enact a dollar threshold or specifically prohibit gifts from a donor who has a decision pending before the Council. Arndt and Pignataro discussed certain scenarios in which a prohibition on gifts from a donor who has a decision pending before Council and suggested that a code provision to this effect would be helpful. Additional Exceptions Lopez Filkins highlighted subsections of Colorado Springs’s gift restriction code that provide exceptions to its gift restrictions. Lopez and Arndt discussed a situation in which an official or employee wins a drawing at a conference. Canonico expressed a desire to allow employees to accept a prize. Daggett highlighted Colorado Springs’s provision about allowing the acceptance of the cost of attending a conference and suggested it would be helpful in the City’s code. Arndt expressed that they liked that provision. Canonico stated that a scenario in which the cost for officials and employees to spend the night in another city while visiting to observe that city and its council should fall into this category. ERB stated that they did not have concerns about any of the other provisions in Colorado Springs’s code. Page 569 Item 18. Additional Restrictions Lopez Filkins provided some examples of restrictions that appear frequently in other cities’ codes that do not appear in the City’s gift restriction code. ERB discussed scenarios that could fall into those categories. Definitions Lopez Filkins suggested that the City code would not need to expand its definition if the City decides to adopt a provision that specifically addresses gifts given to the City that will be distributed to officials or employees. Daggett clarified that the purpose of this discussion topic is to differentiate between gifts given to the City for the purpose of distributing to an official or employee versus gifts given to the City that will not be distributed. Pignataro expressed concern that for the City to accept event tickets and then distribute to officials or employees is a workaround to the gift restriction rules. Lopez Filkins described that the subsections of Colorado Springs’s code that address gifts given to the city that are meant to become property of the city would address the workaround described by Pignataro. Daggett agreed. Arndt and Canonico expressed that they liked the process of distributing event tickets given to the City. Role of City Councilmembers of In Official Capacity Lopez Filkins suggested that it would be helpful to add language to the code that clarifies when a councilmember is acting in their official role when attending an event. Arndt highlighted that Colorado Springs’s code and Colorado’s statute specifies that an official is attending an event in their official capacity when they are listed on the event program with their official title. ERB discussed when a councilmember is acting as a councilmember versus when they are acting as a political candidate. E. Other Business Daggett asked to confirm that the August 4 meeting is scheduled. Lopez Filkins stated that the CAO intended to have code language around gift restrictions prepared to present at the June 2 meeting. Arndt clarified that they would like to discuss the proposed code language as well as gift reporting at the June meeting. F. Adjournment The meeting adjourned by unanimous consent at 4:21 p.m. Minutes approved by the Chair and a vote of the Board on June 2, 2025. Page 570 Item 18. July 7, 2025, 3:30 pm ETHICS REVIEW BOARD MEETING MINUTES COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Jeni Arndt, Councilmember Julie Pignataro, Councilmember Tricia Canonico STAFF PRESENT: Carrie Daggett, Jenny Lopez Filkins, Rupa Venkatesh, Briana McCarten, Sarah Kane (remote) OTHER PRESENT: Halee Wahl (remote) Call Meeting to Order Roll Call Approval of June 2, 2025, Minutes Councilmember Pignataro moved and Mayor Arndt seconded the motion to approve the June 2, 2025, minutes. The motion passed unanimously. Possible Board Recommendation regarding Gift Restrictions Code Amendments Senior Deputy Attorney Jenny Lopez Filkins reminded the Ethics Review Board (ERB) that at its June 2 meeting, the Attorney’s Office presented proposed amendments to section 2-576 of City Code, which addresses councilmember gift restrictions. Lopez Filkins explained that the Attorney’s Office is presenting further amendments to section 2-576 based on the ERB’s input from the June 2 meeting. Lopez Filkins explained that amendments to subsection (b) makes clear that a councilmember may not solicit donations on behalf of a board on which they are a member. Lopez Filkins explained that the amendment to subsection (e) clarifies its language. Amendments to subsection (e)(4) reflect the ERB’s desire to exempt any taxable employee’s benefits from gift restrictions. Subsection (e)(10) changes the reference to a non-profit organization to organizations with which the City is affiliated or to which the City has appointed a councilmember to. Other amendments make wording more consistent. The ERB agreed with the proposed amendments. Lopez Filkins and City Attorney Daggett stated that the Attorney’s Office has provided the proposed gift restriction amendments to certain City staff and asked for feedback. The Attorney’s Office will make any suggested changes and will explain anything substantive in the AIS that goes to City Council. Pignataro moved and Arndt seconded the motion to adopt the draft gift restriction amendments and recommend the draft amendments to City Council. The motion passed Page 571 Item 18. unanimously. Possible Board Recommendation regarding Gift Reporting Code Amendments Lopez Filkins explained that the Attorney’s Office drafted proposed amendments to section 2-656 of City Code based on the ERB’s discussions at the June 2 meeting. Lopez Filkins explained that amendments to subsection (c)(1) provides that items valued over $10 must be reported. Subsection (b) specifically excludes the requirement to report items that were given or paid by the City, an entity affiliated with the City, and organizations to which the City has appointed a councilmember. The ERB discussed the contradiction between the proposed amendments to the gift restrictions at section 2-576 that prohibit the acceptance of items valued over $75 and sections 2-656(c)(2) and (4) that requires reporting tickets to events and educational events valued over $75. Councilmembers may not accept any items valued over $75 pursuant to the gift restriction Code, and therefore, there would be no need to report items valued over $75. Pignataro suggested revising the proposed language in subsection (c)(2) to reflect the language in the gift restrictions with respect to the value being determined by the amount the charity reports to the IRS. Councilmember Canonico requested that the Attorney’s Office prepare an updated flow chart that reflects the amendments. Canonico recalled that, at the June 2 meeting, the ERB requested that the reporting requirement threshold be raised to $25. The ERB requested that the proposed amendment at section 2-656(c)(2) be removed because it would require reporting a gift that may not be accepted. However, the proposed amendment at section 2-656(c)(3) may remain because it refers to a gift restriction exception regarding costs of conferences, seminars, events, or meetings at section 2-576(e)(10). Similarly, section 2-656(c)(4) may remain because it refers to the gift restriction exception regarding City-sponsored educational events at section 2-576(e)(11). Lopez Filkins asked the ERB if they were interested in adding a section to subsection (c) that requires reporting business meals described in section 2-576(e)(13). The ERB requested to remove the business meals reporting requirements from the gift restriction and gift reporting Code sections. Lopez Filkins asked the ERB if they were interested in adding a section to subsection (e) that requires reporting of meals and event tickets for the reporter and family members with a value over $75 or the self-adjusted amount in effect at the time. The ERB decided that the reporting requirements for such meals and event tickets should apply to each recipient. Page 572 Item 18. The ERB requested that subsection (d) add a requirement that, if a Councilmember does not have any gifts to report, they will notify the City Clerk in writing. Pignataro moved and Arndt seconded the motion to adopt the draft gift reporting amendments and recommend the draft amendments to City Council. The motion passed unanimously. Possible Board Recommendation regarding Financial Disclosure Code Amendments Lopez Filkins explained that the Attorney’s Office drafted proposed amendments to section 2-636, 2-637, and 2-638 of City Code based on the ERB’s discussions at the June 2 meeting. The ERB requested that the disclosure requirements of certain interests be limited geographically to the growth management area (GMA). The ERB requested that section 2-636(d) add a provision that a City Manager or a City Attorney that is serving on an interim basis are also required to file financial disclosures. Lopez Filkins informed the ERB that the City set the debts, interests, and investments $10,000 disclosure threshold in 1971 and that the inflation-adjusted amount would now be roughly $76,000. The ERB requested that the disclosure threshold for debts, interests, and investments at sections 2-637(a)(2) and (5) be amended to $25,000. The ERB requested that this amount will self-adjust according to the consumer price index rounded to the nearest $1,000. The ERB agreed with the amendment to section 2-638 that clarifies the language around the City Clerk providing notice before the disclosure deadlines. The ERB clarified that it a part of the Clerk’s duties to notify reporters of the deadlines, but that it is not a requirement. The ERB requested to add sentence permitting a reporter to reply to the Clerk’s notification email stating that they have nothing to report. Lopez Filkins stated that currently section 2-640 permits a report to submit their income tax returns along with a list of investments in lieu of submitting a financial disclosure form. The ERB requested to remove that Code section. Pignataro moved and Arndt seconded the motion to adopt the draft financial disclosure amendments and recommend the draft amendments to City Council. The motion passed unanimously. The ERB requested an updated FAQ flow chart that depicts the code amendments. Cancel or Continue August 4, 2025, Meeting The ERB decided to hold the August 4, 2025, meeting on everyone’s calendar as a placeholder. If, after gathering input from other City staff, there are significant requested changes, the ERB will need to meet on August 4, 2025, if there are no significant Page 573 Item 18. requested changes, the meeting will be canceled and the proposed amendments will be recommended to City Council in September. Other Business The ERB did not discuss any other business. Adjournment The meeting adjourned by unanimous consent at 4:37 p.m. Minutes approved by the Chair and a vote of the Board on , 2025. Page 574 Item 18. Does the gift include any of the following: accommodations, tours, event tickets, recreation, entertainment, meals or other similar personal benefit in which you have a substantial interest and the acceptance of which could be perceived to influence your objectivity when conducting business on behalf of the City? Yes You may not accept this gift. This restriction applies to an officer’s or employee’s relatives. Is the gift offered by a donor who has a matter pending before City Council? You may not accept this gift. Yes Is the gift considered a payment for a speech, debate, or other public event?You may not accept this gift. Yes Does the gifted item have a value less than $75? (This amount is in effect as of 1/1/2025 and will adjust in accordance with Colorado Constitution, Article XXIX, Section 3.) Yes You may accept this gift as long as all gifts received from the vendor or third party total less than $75 per year. You must report the gift(s) if the cumulative value is greater than $25. Did you pay part of the cost of the gift in order to reduce its value to less than $75 (or as adjusted above)? You may not accept this gift. No COUNCIL GIFTS AND FAVORS FAQ When someone offers you anything of any value, you should evaluate if you are permitted to accept it. Some gifts may need to be reported to the City Clerk. The following flowchart can provide you with guidance to evaluate which gifts may be accepted and their reporting requirements. • City Code Sections 2-576(b)–(e) contain the gifts and favors provisions and list types of gifts or favors that you are allowed to accept. • City Code Section 2-656 requires Councilmembers to report gifts on a quarterly basis (by January 15, April 15, July 15, and October 15). If you did not receive a gift or benefit that is required to be reported in the previous quarter, you must notify the City Clerk in writing that you do not have a gift to report. • If you ever have a question as to whether a gift is acceptable, you may ask the Ethics Review Board for an advisory opinion. No Could the gift reasonably be considered a bribe or a means of improper influence on a direct official action? No Yes You may not accept this gift. No TRAVEL AND EVENTS Does the gift include any of the following: accommodations, tours, event tickets, recreation, entertainment, meals or other similar personal benefit in which you have a substantial interest and the acceptance of which could be perceived to influence your objectivity when conducting business on behalf of the City? Yes You may not accept this gift. This restriction applies to an officer’s or employee’s relatives. Is the gift an award or prize given at a competition or event where no admission is charged and which is open to the public? You may accept this gift as long as 1) there is no admission charge, and 2) the competition or event is open to the public. You do not need to report the award or prize. Yes For COUNCILMEMBERS, CITY MANAGER, and CITY ATTORNEY, whether permanent or interim: is the gift a fee, meal, lodging, or transportation that is associated with your attendance at a conference, seminar, event, or meeting? No The cost of attendance is paid pursuant to a vendor agreement or contract; or The cost is paid by a governmental entity or an organization to which the City Council has appointed you, or an entity affiliated with or formed by the City; or The City Manager’s Office asked you to attend the event on behalf of the City. You may accept this gift as long as if you are scheduled to give a speech, participate in a presentation or panel, or receive an award and meets one of the requirements below. You do not need to report this gift. Is the gift the cost of a City-sponsored educational event?Yes You may accept this gift. You must report this gift if its value is greater than $75. No Is the gift an event ticket or meal pertaining to your official duties as a Councilmember?Yes You may accept this gift as long as 1) the gift is documented, and 2) the gift is not intended and does not affect a direct official action. This restriction applies to relatives as long as they attend the event with you. You do not need to report this gift. Is the gift the reasonable cost of travel on behalf of the City to another City, whether in Colorado or out-of-state? Yes You may accept this gift as long as the purpose of the travel is to observe programs, projects, or operations in that City and/or of its City Council. You do not need to report this gift. CHARITIES Is the gift the cost of admission to a charity event? Yes You may accept this gift as long as you attend on behalf of the City or any of its affiliated organizations and the value is less than $75. You do not need to report this gift. Is the gift the cost of admission to a charity event? Yes You may accept this gift as long as you attend on behalf of the City or any of its affiliated organizations and the value is less than $75. You do not need to report this gift. Is the gift a solicitation for a charitable purpose as determined to be appropriate by the City or its affiliated entities? Yes You may accept this gift. You do not need to report it. No FINANCIAL GAIN Did you receive a component of compensation paid or other recognition given in the normal course of employment, appointment, volunteer services, or business, including taxable employee benefits? Yes You may accept this compensation or benefit. You do not need to report it. Did you or a family member receive a scholarship, grant, or other financial aid for education?Yes You may accept this benefit. You do not need to report this benefit. Is the gift a discount?Yes You may accept the discount as long as it is similarly available to all employees or the public generally or to a large segment of the public (i.e., all uniformed personnel, all government employees, or all first responders). You do not need to report the discount. TO OR FROM THE CITY Is the gift given to and accepted on behalf of the City to benefit a public safety or community purpose? You may accept this gift. You do not need to report it.Yes No Is the gift a perishable or consumable gift to a City department or group that is: approved by the City Manager? Or not donated by a City service provider or vendor? Is the recipient is not responsible for regulating or transacting with the donor? Yes You may accept this gift and you do not need to report it. Will the gift become property of the City?Yes You may accept this gift and you do not need to report it. No Is the gift or benefit given by or paid by the City, an entity affiliated with or formed by the City, or an organization to which the City Council has appointed you? Yes You may accept this gift or benefit as permitted below. Reporting requirements are stated below. NON-PECUNIARY Is the gift a non-pecuniary award of appreciation such as a plaque or professional award? Yes You may accept this gift if it is presented by a nonprofit organization in recognition of public service. You do not need to report it. No Is the gift a non-pecuniary award?Yes You may accept this gift as long as 1) the gift is of reasonable value and frequency, 2) public presented by an entity affiliated with or formed by the City or to which the City Council has appointed you, and 3) the gift is given in recognition of your service as an officer. This restriction applies to Councilmembers and City employees. You do not need to report this gift. VALUE RESTRICTION GENERAL RESTRICTIONS No No No No No No No Page 575 Item 18. Headline Copy Goes Here Jenny Lopez Filkins Senior Deputy City Attorney City Attorney’s Office Gift Restrictions, Gift Reporting, and Financial Disclosure Code Amendments 09/16/25 Page 576 Item 18. Headline Copy Goes Here 2 Council Priority to Review and Update Ethics Code •City Council the Ethics Review Board consider changes to the City’s ethics rules about (1) acceptance of gifts, (2)gift reporting and (3) financial disclosures •The ERB met in April, May, June and July. •The draft amendments considered tonight include ERB recommendations. Page 577 Item 18. Headline Copy Goes Here 3 Topics for Discussion A.Gift Restrictions –Ordinance No.157,2025 B.Gift Reporting Requirements –Ordinance No.159,2025 C.Financial Disclosure Requirements –Ordinance No.158,2025 Page 578 Item 18. Headline Copy Goes HereGift Restriction Amendments –Ord. No. 157 4 Gift Restriction Amendments Page 579 Item 18. Headline Copy Goes Here 5 Gift Restriction Amendments –Ord. No. 157 Current restrictions and exceptions create confusion and similar, repeated questions for Councilmembers and staff. Page 580 Item 18. Headline Copy Goes Here 6 Gift Restriction Amendments –Ord. No. 157 •ERB reviewed and considered others’ gift acceptance restrictions: •the state of Colorado •Arvada, Aurora, Boulder, Broomfield, Colorado Springs, Denver, Lafayette, Lakewood, Littleton, Loveland and Westminster. Page 581 Item 18. Headline Copy Goes Here 7 Gift Restriction Amendments –Ord. No. 157 Common question: Is it okay to accept an unsolicited gift? •Amendments clarify •Based on current dollar amount in state law ($75) •Adjusts for inflation Page 582 Item 18. Headline Copy Goes Here 8 Gift Restriction Amendments –Ord. No. 157 •Some existing gift restrictions reworded or clarified: •Payment for speeches, debates or public appearances •Gifts from a donor with matter pending before City Council Page 583 Item 18. Headline Copy Goes Here 9 Gift Restriction Amendments –Ord. No. 157 •Some exceptions reworded or clarified: •Reported campaign contributions •Plaque in recognition of public service •Reasonable costs for attendance at conferences or similar events •Employment compensation Page 584 Item 18. Headline Copy Goes Here 10 Gift Restriction Amendments –Ord. No. 157 New exceptions added: •Financial aid, scholarship •Ticket or admission to charity event attended on behalf of the City and cost of admission less than state law amount ($75); •A gift solicitation for a charitable purpose as determined to be appropriate by City or its affiliated entities; Page 585 Item 18. Headline Copy Goes Here 11 Gift Restriction Amendments –Ord. No. 157 Additional new exceptions added: •A gift to benefit public safety or community; •Awards or prizes given at competitions or drawings; •Reasonable cost and frequency of City sponsored educational events Page 586 Item 18. Headline Copy Goes Here 12 Gift Restriction Amendments –Ord. No. 157 New exceptions added : •Perishable or consumable gifts given to the City or a City group; •Gifts accepted in a person’s official capacity that will become City property; Page 587 Item 18. Headline Copy Goes Here 13 Gift Restriction Amendments –Ord. No. 157 New exceptions added: •Awards or prizes given at competitions or drawings •Discounts that are widely available Page 588 Item 18. Headline Copy Goes Here 14 PAUSE FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION OF ORD. NO. 157, 2025 PAUSE FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION OF ORD. NO. 157, 2025 Page 589 Item 18. Headline Copy Goes Here 15 Gift Reporting Amendments –Ord. No. 159 Sec. 2-576 currently requires every Councilmember who receives gifts or other benefits to file a quarterly gift report. No other explanation or clarification is provided. Page 590 Item 18. Headline Copy Goes Here 16 Gift Reporting Amendments –Ord. No. 159 •ERB discussed common questions and issues. •ERB recommends add specific gift reporting obligations to the City’s ethics rules, like other home rule cities. Page 591 Item 18. Headline Copy Goes Here 17 Gift Reporting Amendments –Ord. No. 159 ERB recommends not requiring Councilmembers to report gifts that are given or paid by: ⎻The City ⎻An entity affiliated with or formed by the City ⎻An organization to which the City has appointed the Councilmember. Page 592 Item 18. Headline Copy Goes Here 18 Gift Reporting Amendments –Ord. No. 159 ERB supports adding specific gift reporting obligations to the ethics rules: Any unsolicited item or items accepted if valued at more than $25; Costs of conferences, seminars, events or meetings (fees, meals, lodging, registration or admission and transportation); Page 593 Item 18. Headline Copy Goes Here 19 Gift Reporting Amendments –Ord. No. 159 ERB supports adding specific gift reporting obligations to the ethics rules (continued): Cost of City-sponsored educational events if the dollar amount is higher than dollar amount established in state law Cost of meals and event tickets given to Councilmembers and their relatives Page 594 Item 18. Headline Copy Goes Here 20 Gift Reporting Amendments –Ord. No. 159 Gift reporting requirements go into effect for reports due after January 1, 2026. Page 595 Item 18. Headline Copy Goes Here 21 PAUSE FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION OF ORD. NO. 159, 2025 PAUSE FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION OF ORD. NO. 159, 2025 Page 596 Item 18. Headline Copy Goes Here 22 Financial Disclosure Amendments –Ord. No. 158 Current financial disclosure obligations require Councilmembers, City Manager and City Attorney to file quarterly reports of their financial interests. Page 597 Item 18. Headline Copy Goes Here 23 Financial Disclosure Amendments –Ord. No. 158 •ERB reviewed others’ financial disclosure requirements ⎻Colorado state’s rules ⎻Arvada, Aurora, Colorado Springs, Denver, Louisville, and Loveland. Page 598 Item 18. Headline Copy Goes Here 24 Financial Disclosure Amendments –Ord. No. 158 •ERB discussed common questions. •ERB recommended maintain current list of financial interests to be disclosed. Page 599 Item 18. Headline Copy Goes Here 25 Financial Disclosure Amendments –Ord. No. 158 ERB recommended •Exclude compensation from the City from the obligation to report sources of income; •Limit requirements about disclosure of property and business interests to those within the growth management area; Page 600 Item 18. Headline Copy Goes Here 26 Financial Disclosure Amendments –Ord. No. 158 ERB recommended •Increase the dollar threshold regarding investment or business interest and creditors to whom they owe money from $10K to $25K; •Automatically adjust amounts for inflation. Page 601 Item 18. Headline Copy Goes Here 27 Financial Disclosure Amendments –Ord. No. 158 ERB recommended •Delete alternative to file a federal income tax return Page 602 Item 18. Headline Copy Goes Here 28 Financial Disclosure Amendments –Ord. No. 158 Changes to the specific disclosure requirements will go into effect January 1, 2026. Page 603 Item 18. Headline Copy Goes Here 29 Flow Chart Categories: General restrictions Travel and Events Charities Financial Gain To or From the City Non-monetary Value Restriction Page 604 Item 18. -1- ORDINANCE NO. 157, 2025 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AMENDING CHAPTER 2, ARTICLE VII, DIVISION 2 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS RELATING TO THE GIFT ACCEPTANCE RESTRICTIONS AND THE DEFINITIONS SECTION OF THE CITY’S ETHICS RULES A. Under “other business” at its January 21, 2025, City Council meeting, several members of the City Council asked the Ethics Review Board (“ERB”) to review the City’s restrictions on officers’ and employees’ acceptance of gifts, honoraria and favors and consider whether they recommend changes to the restrictions. B. Section 2-576(b) of the City Code prohibits officers (and employees) from accepting a gift or favor if it might be construed as compensation for an official decision or would tend to impair independence of judgment in official duties. Code Section 2- 576(b) currently does not provide sufficient clarification for officers and employees. C. The ERB met on April 7, May 5, June 2 and July 7, 2025. On May 5, 2025, the ERB focused its discussion on current gift restrictions, whether to add a specific value restriction to the City Code, and whether to modify exceptions or restrictions to acceptance of gifts. D. At its May 5 meeting, the ERB also reviewed and considered gift restrictions of other Colorado municipalities, the state of Colorado and some other states. E. The ERB discussed questions and issues that Councilmembers and staff frequently encounter when interpreting the City’s current gift restrictions. F. The ERB recommends amendments that address frequently encountered questions and issues and align with common gift restrictions of other Colorado municipalities. G. The ERB recommends an amendment to add a specific value restriction and period for acceptance of unsolicited gifts. H. The ERB recommends amendments to Code Section 2-576(b) that provide more categories and examples of gifts that are permissible and that are prohibited. I. Proposed amendments to Code Section 2-576(b) will decrease confusion for officers and employees and should minimize the risk that an officer or employee will inadvertently accept a prohibited gift. J. Proposed amendments to Section 2-575 of the City Code amend and clarify the definitions of “officers” and “employees” and distinguish between the two roles. K. Proposed amendments to Code Section 2-576(b) will decrease confusion for officers and employees and should minimize the risk that an officer or employee will inadvertently accept a prohibited gift. Page 605 Item 18. -2- In light of the foregoing recitals, which the Council hereby makes and adopts as determinations and findings, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. Section 2-575 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby amended to read as follows: Sec. 2-575. Ethical rules of conduct—Definitions. The following words, terms and phrases, when used in this Division, and in Section 9 of the Charter Article IV, shall have the following meanings: (a) Attempt to influence or influence, as it pertains to this Division, shall mean take any action intended to impact, shape, control, sway, bias or prejudice. (b) Benefit shall mean an advantage or gain. (c) Board and commission member shall mean a member of any appointive board or commission of the City. (d) Confidential information or information received in confidence shall mean: (1) Information contained in any writing that may properly be withheld from public inspection under the provisions of the Colorado Open Record s Act and that is marked "confidential" when provided to the officer or employee; (2) All information exchanged or discussed in any executive session properly convened under § 2-31 or 2-71 of the Code, except to the extent that such information is also contained in a public record available to the general public under the provisions of the Colorado Open Records Act; or (3) All communications between attorneys representing the City and officers or employees of the City that are subject to the attorney-client privilege, whether oral or written, unless the privilege has been waived. (e) Councilmember shall mean a member of the City Council. (f) Different in kind from that experienced by the general public shall mean of a different type or nature not shared by the public generally and that is not merely different in degree from that experienced by the public generally. (g) Direct shall mean resulting immediately and proximately from the circumstances and not from an intervening cause. (h) Detriment shall mean disadvantage, injury, damage or loss. (i) Employee shall mean any person holding a position by employment in service of the City, whether part-time or full-time. (ij) Financial interest shall have the meaning given to this term in Section 9(a) of Charter Article IV, which states: Financial interest means any interest equated with money or its equivalent. Financial interest shall not include: Page 606 Item 18. -3- (1) the interest that an officer, employee or relative has as an employee of a business, or as a holder of an ownership interest in such business, in a decision of any public body, when the decision financially benefits or otherwise affects such business but entails no foreseeable, measurable financial benefit to the officer, employee or relative; (2) the interest that an officer, employee or relative has as a nonsalaried officer or member of a nonprofit corporation or association or of an educational, religious, charitable, fraternal or civic organization in the holdings of such corporation, association or organization; (3) the interest that an officer, employee or relative has as a recipient of public services when such services are generally provided by the city on the same terms and conditions to all similarly situated citizens, regardless of whether such recipient is an officer, employee or relative; (4) the interest that an officer, employee or relative has as a recipient of a commercially reasonable loan made in the ordinary course of business by a lending institution, in such lending institution; (5) the interest that an officer, employee or relative has as a shareholder in a mutual or common investment fund in the holdings of such fund unless the shareholder actively participates in the management of such fund; (6) the interest that an officer, employee or relative has as a policyholder in an insurance company, a depositor in a duly established savings association or bank, or a similar interest-holder, unless the discretionary act of such person, as an officer or employee, could immediately, definitely and measurably affect the value of such policy, deposit or similar interest; (7) the interest that an officer, employee or relative has as an owner of government-issued securities unless the discretionary act of such owner, as an officer or employee, could immediately, definitely and measurably affect the value of such securities; or (8) the interest that an officer or employee has in the compensation received from the city for personal services provided to the city as an officer or employee. (jk) Officer or employee shall mean any person holding a position by election, or appointment or employment in the service of the City, whether part -time or full- time, including any member of the City Council and any member of any authority, board, committee or commission of the City, other than an authority that is: (1) Established under the provisions of the Colorado Revised Statutes; (2) Governed by state statutory rules of ethical conduct; and (3) Expressly exempted from the provisions of Article IV of the City Charter by ordinance of the City Council. (kl) Personal interest shall have the meaning given to this term in Section 9(a) of the Charter Article IV, which states: Page 607 Item 18. -4- Personal interest means any interest (other than a financial interest) by reason of which an officer or employee, or a relative of such officer or employee, would, in the judgment of a reasonably prudent person, realize or experience some direct and substantial benefit or detriment different in kind from that experienced by the general public. Personal interest shall not include: (1) the interest that an officer, employee or relative has as a member of a board, commission, committee, or authority of another governmental entity or of a nonprofit corporation or association or of an educational, religious, charitable, fraternal, or civic organization; (2) the interest that an officer, employee or relative has in the receipt of public services when such services are generally provided by the city on the same terms and conditions to all similarly situated citizens; or (3) the interest that an officer or employee has in the compensation, benefits, or terms and conditions of his or her employment with the city. (lm) Public body shall have the meaning given to this term in Section 9(a) of Charter Article IV, which states: Public body means the Council or any authority, board, committee, commission, service area, department or office of the city. (mn)Public services shall mean city services provided to or made available for the public's benefit. (no) Purchases from the city, as described in Section 9(b)(2) of Charter Article IV, shall not include payments by an employee to the city pursuant to an agreement for housing in which such employee is required to live as a condition of employment with the city. (op) Related entity shall mean any corporation, limited liability company, partnership, sole proprietorship, joint venture, trust, estate, foundation, association, business, company or any other organization, whether or not operated for profit, with respect to which an officer or employee, or a relative of the same, has a substantial ownership interest in, is employed by, is an agent for or otherwise represents in any legal capacity. (pq) Relative shall have the meaning given to this word in Section 9(a) of Charter Article IV, which states: Relative means the spouse or minor child of the officer or employee, any person claimed by the officer or employee as a dependent for income tax purposes, or any person residing in and sharing with the officer or employee the expenses of the household. (qr) Routine City matter shall mean a usual and ordinary registration, reservation, or other request or application, within a program or for public services or City approval, such as a registration for a recreation class, reservation of a park shelter, request for standard utility services or application for a building permit, development approval or variance, or an appeal, provided that the same is Page 608 Item 18. -5- carried out using a routine process or system or in a manner consistent with standard practices. (rs) Similarly situated citizens shall mean citizens in like circumstances having comparable legal rights and obligations. (st) Substantial shall mean more than nominal in value, degree, amount or extent. Section 2. Section 2-576 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby amended to read as follows: Sec. 2-576. Ethical rules of conduct—Officers and employees. . . . (b) Hospitality and Gifts: No officer, employee or relative shall solicit, accept, or give any gift related to the officer, employee or relative’s duties and responsibilities on behalf of the City. Except as expressly stated below, an officer, employee or relative must not offer or receive accommodations, tours, event tickets, recreation, entertainment, meals or other similar personal benefits when such gift could influence or be perceived to influence objectivity when interacting with, representing, or conducting business for or on behalf of the City. All officers and employees shall refrain from accepting payment for any speeches, debates or other public events and shall further refrain from accepting any gift or favor which, in the judgment of a reasonably prudent person, would tend to impair the officer's or employee's independence of judgment in the performance of his or her official duties. The following shall not constitute prohibited gifts or favors under this Section: (1) Campaign contributions reported as required by Chapter 7, Article V of this Code; (2) A nonpecuniary award publicly presented by a nonprofit organization in recognition of public service; (3) Payment of or reimbursement for actual and necessary expenditures for travel and subsistence for attendance at a convention or other meeting at which an officer or employee is scheduled to participate; (4) Reimbursement for or acceptance of an opportunity to participate in a social function or meeting which is offered to an officer or employee which is not extraordinary when viewed in light of the position held by such officer or employee; (5) Items of perishable or nonpermanent value that are insignificant in value, including, but not limited to, meals, lodging, travel expenses or tickets to sporting, recreational, educational or cultural events; and (6) Payment of salary from employment, including other employment in addition to that earned from being an officer or employee. (c) All officers and employees shall refrain from soliciting or accepting any gifts from a donor who has a matter pending before or expected to come before City Council. Page 609 Item 18. -6- (d) All officers and employees shall refrain from accepting payment for any speeches, debates or appearances at other public events. (e) Exceptions: The following gifts are not prohibited under this section unless the gift could reasonably be considered a bribe or a means of improper influence on a direct official action: (1) Campaign contributions as defined by law and re ported as required by Chapter 7, Article V of this Code; (2) Subject to the following conditions, an unsolicited item or items of value less than the dollar amount established in Colorado Constitution, Article XXIX, Section 3, from any third party in any twelve-month period ($75 as of January 1, 2025): (a) The cost of the gift is the retail value of the item unless the receiver has knowledge that the giver paid more than the retail value, in which case the cost is the amount actually paid. (b) For admission to a charity event, the cost of admission to the event is the amount the event organizer reports to the Internal Revenue Service as the non - deductible portion of the event. (c) It is not permissible to accept a gift where an officer or employee has paid part of its cost to reduce the value to less than the amount set forth in subsection (e)(1). (d) Relatives of officers and employees, except those of Councilmembers, may only accept a free or discounted event ticket if they attend the event with an officer or employee. Event tickets for elected officials are covered under subsection (e)(15) of this section. (3) An unsolicited, nonpecuniary token or award of appreciation that is reasonable in value and purpose, such as plaques and professiona l awards, publicly presented by a nonprofit or governmental organization in recognition of public service; (4) A component of compensation paid or other recognition given in the normal course of employment, appointment, volunteer services, or business, in cluding taxable employee benefits. (5) Any scholarship or grant or other financial aid for education given to any covered person or immediate family member for any reason. (6) The cost of admission to any charity event attended on behalf of the City or any of its affiliated organizations if the cost of admission is less than the dollar amount established in Colorado Constitution, Article XXIX, Section 3. (7) Any gift solicitation for a charitable purpose as determined to be appropriate by the City or its affiliated entities. (8) Any gift, whether solicited or not, given to and accepted on behalf of the City to benefit a public safety or community purpose. Page 610 Item 18. -7- (9) Awards or prizes given at competitions or drawings at events where no admission is charged and which are open to the public. (10) For Councilmembers, the City Attorney and City Manager, reasonable cost (e.g., fees, meals, lodging, registration or admission, and/or transportation) and attendance at conferences, seminars, events, or meetings, so long as the conference, event, or meeting is attended on behalf of the City and is documented, and the Councilmember, City Attorney or City Manager is scheduled to deliver a speech, participate in a presentation, participate on a panel, or receive an award, or they are wearing their City of Fort Collins name tag identifying them as a City representative; and (a) The cost of the conference, seminar, event, or meeting is paid pursuant to a vendor agreement or contract; or (b) The cost of the conference, seminar, event, or meeting is paid by a governmental entity or an organization to which the City Council has appointed the Councilmember, or an entity affiliated with or formed by the City; or (c) The officer has been asked by the City Manager’s Office to attend the event on behalf of the City. (11) Reasonable cost and frequency of City sponsored educational events, so long as the events are reported on the disclosures required under City Code section 2-656, if required. (12) For employees, reasonable cost (e.g., fees, meals, ticket to event, lodging, registration or admission and transportation) of attendance at conferences, seminars events or meetings attended on behalf of the City and documented and the employee is scheduled to deliver a speech, participate in a presentation, participate on a panel or receive an award; and (a) the cost of the conference, seminar, event or meeting is paid by a governmental entity or an IRC 501(c)(3) organization or an entity affiliated with or formed by the City; or (b) the employee has been asked by City management to attend the event on behalf of the City. (13) Perishable or consumable gifts given to a City department or group if the gift is: (a) approved by the City Manager; (b) not donated by a City service provider or vendor; or (c) the receiving department is not responsible for regulating or otherwise transacting City business with the donor. (14) Gifts accepted in an officer or employee’s official capacity that will become property of the City. (15) For Councilmembers and their relatives, reasonable cost and frequency of meals and event tickets pertaining to their official duties as members of City Page 611 Item 18. -8- Council so long as the gift is documented and is not intended to affect, and does not affect, a direct official action. (16) A non-pecuniary award of reasonable value and frequency publicly presented by an entity affiliated with or formed by the City or to which the City Council has appointed the Councilmember or the City has appointed the employee and in recognition of their service as an officer or employee. (17) Discounts that are similarly available to all employees, or discounts that are offered to the public generally or to a large segment of the public (i.e., all uniformed personnel, all government employees, or all first responders). (18) Reasonable cost of travel on behalf of the City (e.g., fees, meals, lodging, and/or transportation) to another City, whether in Colorado or out-of-state, to observe programs, projects or operations in that City and/or of its City Council. (19) Any other exception approved in an advisory opinion of the Ethics Review Board. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading on September 16, 2025, and approved on second reading for final passage on October 7, 2025. ______________________________ Mayor ATTEST: ______________________________ City Clerk Effective Date: October 17, 2025 Approving Attorney: Jenny Lopez Filkins Exhibit: None Page 612 Item 18. File Attachments for Item: 19. First Reading of Ordinance No. 158, 2025, Amending Chapter 2, Article VIII, Division 2 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins Relating to Financial Disclosure Requirements . The purpose of this item is to consider amendments to the City’s ethics rules related to financial disclosure requirements recommended by the Ethics Review Board. Page 613 City Council Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 1 of 2 September 16, 2025 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Council STAFF Jenny Lopez Filkins, Senior Deputy City Attorney Carrie Daggett, City Attorney SUBJECT First Reading of Ordinance No. 158, 2025, Amending Chapter 2, Article VIII, Division 2 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins Relating to Financial Disclosure Requirements. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to consider amendments to the City’s ethics rules related to financial disclosure requirements recommended by the Ethics Review Board. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION Under “other business” at its January 21, 2025, Council asked the Ethics Review Board (ERB) to review the City’s financial disclosure requirements. On June 2, 2025, the ERB discussed the City’s current financial disclosure requirements and consider whether to recommend amendments to the Council. City Code Section 2-636 requires any person who is a Council candidate to file with the City Clerk a written financial disclosure statement at the time of filing their acceptance of nomination with the City Clerk. City Code Section 2-636 also requires each Councilmember to file a financial disclosure, no later than January 10 after their election re-election, retention, or appointment, the same written financial disclosure. Similarly, the City Manager and City Attorney are required to file such written finan cial disclosure within 30 days of their appointment and each year by January 10. City Code Section 2-637 lists the financial interests that must be disclosed. City Code Section 2-638 requires a person subject to the disclosure obligations to, after their election, re- election, appointment or retention in office, file an amended statement with the City Clerk or notify the Clerk in writing that there has been no change in the information shown on the last previous disclosure statement. The statement must be filed on or before May 15 of each calendar year after the year in which their election, re-election, appointment or retention in office occurs. City Code Section 2-640 permits a person subject to the disclosure obligations to file a federal tax return in lieu of complying with the financial disclosure requirements. Page 614 Item 19. City Council Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 2 of 2 At its June 2, 2025, meeting, the ERB discussed the City’s current financial disclosure requirements and those of other Colorado municipalities and Colorado’s statutory requirements. The ERB expressed support for:  maintaining the current list of items to be disclosed;  not adding other disclosure requirements;  excluding compensation from the City from the obligation to report sources of income;  limiting the requirement to disclose real estate owned to property within the City’s growth management area;  limiting the requirement to disclose direct or indirect investment or interest in any business to businesses located or doing business within the growth management area;  limiting the requirement to disclose a list of businesses with which the person making disclosure or such person’s spouse to businesses that are located or doing business within the growth management area;  adjusting the threshold amounts identified in Sec. 2-637 from $10,000 to $25,000;  adjusting amounts stated in these requirements for inflation based on the applicable consumer price index; and  removing the provision that permits the filing of a federal tax return in lieu of financial disclosures. The ERB approved amendments to Sec. 2-636 to improve ease of readability and require those serving in the City Manager and City Attorney positions, even on an interim basis, to file a disclosure statement. The ERB approved the repeal of Sec. 2-640 and renumbering the current Sec. 2-641 to Sec. 2-640. City Council candidates who are on the November 4, 2025, ballot filed financial disclosure statements based on the existing financial disclosure requirements. The Ordinance includes a Section that delays the effective date of the changes to the financial disclosure requirements in Sec. 2-637 to January 1, 2026, so that it will apply to the financial disclosures that are completed in January. CITY FINANCIAL IMPACTS None. BOARD / COMMISSION / COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION The Ethics Review Board recommended the draft amendments to the financial reporting requirements for Council consideration. PUBLIC OUTREACH None. ATTACHMENTS 1. Ethics Review Board Meeting Minutes, June 2, 2025 2. Presentation for Items 18,19, and 20 3. Ordinance No. 158, 2025 Page 615 Item 19. June 2, 2025, 3:30 pm ETHICS REVIEW BOARD MEETING MINUTES COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Jeni Arndt, Councilmember Julie Pignataro, Councilmember Tricia Canonico STAFF PRESENT: Sarah Kane, Briana McCarten, Carrie Daggett OTHER PRESENT: Halee Wahl Call Meeting to Order Roll Call Approval of May 5, 2025, Minutes Councilmember Pignataro moved, seconded by Mayor Arndt, to approve the May 5, 2025, minutes. The motion passed unanimously. Gift Reporting City Attorney Carrie Daggett stated to the Ethics Review Board (ERB) that the purpose of the meeting is to review the City’s requirements around the acceptance of gifts, gift disclosures, and financial disclosures and to recommend changes. Daggett presented an overview of exceptions to gift restrictions that the ERB considered at its last meeting. Daggett provided an overview of Colorado law gift disclosure requirements. Pignataro expressed a desire to continue quarterly gift reporting. Pignataro expressed a desire to have the City’s gift reporting requirement mirror the gifts that are acceptable under the Code amendments. Items provided to councilmembers, such as memberships to a City facility and parking passes, are a benefit to Councilmembers and not gifts. The ERB all expressed their desire to revise the City’s code provision to set a gift acceptance threshold of $75 and mirror the State’s gift acceptance statute. The ERB discussed that items valued over $75 shouldn’t be accepted and that items under $75 in value do not need to be reported. Other gifts, as permitted by the proposed gift acceptance code amendments and over the $75 threshold, should be reported. Daggett suggested a councilmember does not need to report a charitable event ticket valued over $75 that is given to the City for the purpose of requesting representation by a councilmember at the event; the ERB agreed to such a provision. The ERB suggested to exclude the following from reporting requirements: Scholarships and financial aid for educational purposes; Page 616 Item 19. Tickets given to the City and distributed to councilmembers; Prizes given at competitions or drawings open to the public; Reasonable cost for conferences paid by for by the City, a City-owned entity, an organization to which the City belongs, or a governmental entity; Compensation for speaking engagements paid to the City; City-sponsored educational events; Perishable or consumable gifts given to the City or a City group; Gifts accepted in a person’s official capacity that will become property of the City; Discounts that are available to all employees or the public generally; and Exceptions approved by the ERB. The ERB suggests that the following should be reported: Unsolicited items of value over $75; Ticket or admission valued over $75 to a charity event attended on behalf of the City through an individual invitation; Reasonable cost for conferences not paid by the City or a City-owned entity; and Reasonable cost of meals and tickets above $75 if it does not affect a direct official action. Financial Disclosures Daggett presented an overview of the State’s and other municipalities’ categories of disclosure requirements. The ERB did not find value in reporting property owned outside of the growth management area and direct or indirect investment or interest, including stock investment, in a business located outside of the growth management area. The ERB believes the following should be reported: Direct or indirect investment or interest, including stock investment, in a business located within the growth management area with a value over $15,000 (there is a desire for this amount to automatically adjust for inflation to a rounded number); and Anything that could possibly impact a councilmember’s decision-making. The name of all offices and directorships held in a councilmember’s personal capacity The ERB discussed the requirement to report the name of each of a councilmember’s creditors. There is a desire to adjust the dollar threshold for the amount of credit owed for inflation according to the Consumer Price Index and to a rounded number. Daggett stated that the attorney’s office will review and propose new timing for when the adjustment should occur and will explain their proposal at the next ERB meeting. The ERB suggested that disclosures should only apply to the reporting person and their Page 617 Item 19. spouses because the charter definition of conflict of interest only applies to the councilmember and their spouses. Disclosures should not apply to all other members of a reporting person’s household. The ERB wishes to continue to report any business in which the reporting person or their spouse is associated with that is regulated by the City. Draft Gift Restrictions Code Amendment The ERB did not discuss draft gift restriction code amendments because time did not permit. Other Business The ERB did not discuss any other business. Next Meeting The next ERB meeting is scheduled for Monday, July 7, 2025. Adjournment The meeting adjourned by unanimous consent at 4:52 p.m. Minutes approved by the Chair and a vote of the Board on July 7, 2025. Page 618 Item 19. -1- ORDINANCE NO. 158, 2025 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AMENDING CHAPTER 2, ARTICLE VIII, DIVISION 2 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS RELATING TO FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENTS A. Under “other business” at its January 21, 2025, City Council meeting, several members of the City Council asked the Ethics Review Board (“ERB”) to review the City’s ethics rules related to financial disclosure requirements. These requirements apply to Councilmember candidates, elected Councilmembers and two appointed employees, the City Manager and the City Attorney. B. The ERB met on April 7, May 5, June 2 and July 7, 2025. On June 2, 2025, the ERB discussed the City’s current financial disclosure requirements and whether to recommend changes to the requirements. C. Section 2-636 of the City Code requires the City Manager, the City Attorney, and each City Councilmember who is elected, re-elected, appointed or retained in office, to file a written financial disclosure that conforms to the requirements of Section 2-637 of the City Code by January 10 of each year. It also requires any candidate for the office of City Councilmember to, at the time of acceptance of their nomination by the City Clerk, file a written financial disclosure statement. D. Section 2-637 of the City Code provides the categories of financial interests that must be disclosed. E. Section 2-638 of the City Code requires any person subject to the disclosure obligations to, after their election, re-election, appointment or retention in office, file an amended statement with the City Clerk or notify the Clerk in writing that there has been no change in the information shown on the last previous disclosure statement. The statement must be filed on or before May 15 of each calendar year after the year in whic h their election, re-election, appointment or retention in office occurs. F. Section 2-639 of the City Code requires the City Clerk to give written notice to each person required to file a disclosure at least 30 days prior to the deadline. G. Section 2-641 of the City Code permits the filing of a federal income tax return in lieu of filing financial disclosures. H. During its June 2, 2025, meeting, the ERB reviewed and considered the financial disclosure requirements of other Colorado home rule municipalities, inclu ding Arvada, Aurora, Colorado Springs, Denver, Louisville and Loveland. The state of Colorado disclosure requirements were also considered. Staff noted that many Colorado municipalities’ financial disclosure requirements are identical to the City’s or there are no such requirements. Page 619 Item 19. -2- I. The ERB agreed to recommend that an interim City Manager and interim City Attorney must also file financial disclosures. The change is implemented through an amendment to Code Section 2-636. J. In its current form, Code Section 2-637 requires that a person subject to the rule report the legal description of any real property interest owned by the person making the disclosure or such person’s spouse. It also requires a report of any financial interest in any business entity if valued at greater than ten thousand dollars. Another subsection of Code Section 2-637 requires the person subject to disclosure obligations to provide a list of businesses with which the person or their spouse is associated that do business with or are regulated by the City and the nature of such business or regulation. The ERB agreed to recommend that, for each of these requirements, only those properties or interests geographically located within the Growth Management Area should be included because only those within the Growth Management Area are affected by City Council decisions. These changes are implemented through amendments to Code Section 2-637. K. A person subject to existing disclosure requirements must report a financial interest with a value more than ten thousand dollars. This provision was made effective in 1972. Today’s equivalent to ten thousand dollars in 1972 is approximately seventy - seven thousand dollars. A person subject to existing disclosure requirements must also report the name of each creditor to whom the person owes more than ten thousand dollars. The ERB agreed to recommend that the dollar amount shift to twenty-five thousand dollars. L. The ERB also recommends an amendment to Code Section 2-637 that adjusts the dollar amounts included in the financial disclosure requirements based on the percentage change over a one-year period in accordance with the applicable Consumer Price Index. M. The proposed amendment to Code Section 2-639 removes the language that the City Clerk “shall” provide written notice to each person required to file a disclosure at least 30 days prior to the deadline and replaces it with “will”. N. The ERB also recommends eliminating the provision in Code Section 2-640 that permits a person subject to existing disclosure requirements to file a federal tax return in lieu of complying with the provisions of §§ 2-636, 2-637 and 2-638. O. The proposed amendments to City of Fort Collins Charter Chapter 2, Article VIII, Division 2 will allow Councilmembers, the City Manager, and the City Attorney to know which financial interests must be reported which will in turn offer more transparency for the public. P. The City Council wishes to amend Code Sections 2-636 through 2-641 to provide clarity around the categories of financial interests that must be disclosed. In light of the foregoing recitals, which the Council hereby makes and adopts as determinations and findings, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Page 620 Item 19. -3- Section 1. Section 2-636 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby amended to read as follows: Sec. 2-636. Financial disclosure required. (a) Any candidate for the office of City Councilmember shall, at the time of filing their acceptance of nomination with the City Clerk, file with the City Clerk a written disclosure statement that conforms to the requirements of § 2 -637. Such a written disclosure statement shall also be filed with the City Clerk by the City Manager and the City Attorney not later than thirty (30) days after their appointment, and then each subsequent year in office no later than January 10. (b) Each member of the City Council who is elected, re-elected, appointed or retained in office shall also file such a written disclosure statement with the City Clerk not later than January 10 next after their election, re-election or appointment, and then each subsequent year in office no later than January 10. (c) If an elected, re-elected, appointed or retained person’s reportable finances subject to these requirements changes in the intervening time between the date the disclosure statement is filed and January 10, they must update the disclosure statement by January 10. (c) The City Manager and City Attorney, including those appointed on an interim basis, must also file a written disclosure statement with the City Clerk no later than thirty (30) days after their appointment, and then each subsequent year in office no later than January 10. Section 2. Section 2-637 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby amended to read as follows: Sec. 2-637. Requirements. (a) Financial disclosure shall include: (1) Excluding compensation from the City, tThe source or sources of any income, including capital gains whether or not taxable of the person making disclosure and such person's spouse; (2) Any financial interest in direct or indirect investment or interest, including stock investment, in any business located or doing business within the growth management area with a value in excess of ten twenty-five thousand dollars ($10,000 25,000) in any business entity; (3) The legal description of any interest in real property located within the growth management area owned by the person making disclosure or such person's spouse; Page 621 Item 19. -4- (4) The identity by name of all offices and directorships held by the person making disclosure and such person's spouse; (5) The name of each creditor to whom the person making disclosure or such person's spouse owes money in excess of ten twenty-five thousand dollars ($10,00025,000); (6) A list of businesses located or doing business within the growth management area with which the person making disclosure or such person's spouse are associated that do business with or are regulated by the City and the nature of such business or regulation; (7) Such additional information as the person making disclosure might desire. (b) Effective each January beginning in 2027, for all subsequent disclosures, the amounts identified in subsection (a)(2) and (5) will be adjusted based upon the percentage change over a one-year period in the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics Consumer Price Index for Denver-Aurora-Lakewood, all urban consumers, or its successor index, rounded to the nearest thousand dollars ($1,000). Section 3. Section 2-639 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby amended to read as follows: Sec. 2-639. Notice. To assist with compliance, but not as a condition of the obligation to comply with the disclosure requirements, tThe City Clerk will shall give written notice to each person required to make disclosure at least thirty (30) days before such disclosure is required to be filed. Section 4. Section 2-640 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby deleted in its entirety. Sec. 2-640. Federal income tax alternative. Any person subject to the provisions of this Division may elect to file with the City Clerk annually a copy of such person's federal income tax return and any separate federal income tax return filed by such person's spouse together with a statement of any investments held by such person or such person's spouse which are not reflected by the income tax returns in lieu of complying with the provisions of §§ 2 -636, 2-637 and 2-638 which tax return and any statement filed under the provisions of this Section shall be public information. Section 5. Section 2-642 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is renumbered to Section 2-641 as follows: Page 622 Item 19. -5- Sec. 2-6421. Penalty. Any person who willfully files a false or incomplete disclosure statement, amendment or notice that no amendment is required or who willfully files a false or incomplete copy of any federal income tax return or a false or incomplete certified statement of investments or who willfully fails to make any filing required by this Division shall be guilty of a violation of the Code punishable as a misdemeanor, and shall upon conviction be punished by a fine not to exceed the limits established in § 1-15. Section 6. The changes to Section 2-637 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins shall go into effect January 1, 2026. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading on September 16, 2025, and approved on second reading for final passage on October 7, 2025. ______________________________ Mayor ATTEST: ______________________________ City Clerk Effective Date: October 17, 2025 Approving Attorney: Jenny Lopez Filkins Exhibit: None Page 623 Item 19. File Attachments for Item: 20. First Reading of Ordinance No. 159, 2025, Amending Chapter 2, Article VIII, Division 3 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins Relating to Gift Reporting Requirements of the City’s Financial Disclosure Rules. The purpose of this item is to consider amendments to the City’s ethics rules related to gift reporting requirements recommended by the Ethics Review Board. Page 624 City Council Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 1 of 2 September 16, 2025 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Council STAFF Jenny Lopez Filkins, Senior Deputy City Attorney Carrie Daggett, City Attorney SUBJECT First Reading of Ordinance No. 159, 2025, Amending Chapter 2, Article VIII, Division 3 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins Relating to Gift Reporting Requirements of the City’s Financial Disclosure Rules. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to consider amendments to the City’s ethics rules related to gift reporting requirements recommended by the Ethics Review Board. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommend the adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION Under “other business” at its January 21, 2025, Council meeting, several members of the Council asked the Ethics Review Board (ERB) to review the City’s requirements related to the acceptance of gifts, gift reporting, and financial disclosures and consider recommended changes. City Code Section 2-656 requires Councilmembers who receive gifts, honoraria or other benefits in connection with the Councilmember’s public service to file a quarterly report consistent with state law. Section 2-656 currently does not provide sufficient clarification for officers and employees. At its April 7, 2025, meeting, the ERB reviewed the rules related gift reporting requirements to determine whether to make any recommended changes at an upcoming meeting. At its June 2, 2025, meeting, the ERB reviewed gift reporting requirements for several other Colorado home rule municipalities of similar size, including those of the cities of Aurora, Boulder, Broomfield, Colorado Springs, and Denver. The ERB also considered related gift reporting requirements of the state of Colorado. Several other Colorado municipalities’ gift reporting requirements are identical to the City’s or are silent on the topic. During the June 2 meeting, the ERB discussed issues and questions that Councilmembers and City staff frequently encounter in interpreting and applying the City’s current gift reporting obligations. The ERB reviewed the gift reporting amendments they supported during their May 5, 2025, meeting and whether those changes would influence changes to the current gift reporting requirements. The ERB expressed support for adding specific gift reporting obligations to the Municipal Code, like a few other large Colorado home rule municipalities. Page 625 Item 20. City Council Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 2 of 2 The ERB discussed the option to exclude reporting gifts and benefits that are given or paid by the City, an entity affiliated with or formed by the City or an organization to which the Council has appointed the Councilmember. The ERB recommends excluding such gifts and benefits from the gift reporting requirements. ERB supports adding the following specific gift reporting obligations to the City Code:  Any unsolicited item or items accepted pursuant to Code §2-576(e)(2), if valued at more than twenty-five dollars ($25); and  Costs of conferences, seminars, events or meetings (e.g., fees, meals, lodging, and/or transportation) and as described in Code §2-576(e)(10); and  Cost of City-sponsored educational events as described in Code §2-576(e)(11) if the value is above the dollar amount established in Colorado Constitution, Article XXIX, Section 3 (currently $75).  Costs of meals and event tickets given to Councilmembers and their relatives pertaining to their official duties as Councilmembers and as described in §2-576(e)(15) if the value is above the dollar amount established in Colorado Constitution, Article XXIX, Section 3 (currently $75). At its July 7, 2025, meeting, the ERB considered draft gift reporting Code amendments, provided input and approved a motion to recommend the changes reflected in the ordinance. Gift reports must be filed on a quarterly basis. The amendments to the gift reporting requirements included in the ordinance will go into effect for reports due after January 1, 2026. If a Councilmember files a report earlier than the due date, the Councilmember must update their report if they accept any gifts that must be reported in the intervening period. The amendments contemplated by the attached Ordinance depend on approval of the changes to the gift restrictions addressed by a separate Ordinance No. 157, 2025. If the gift restrictions changes are not approved or are delayed, the amendments to the gift reporting requirements will need to be revisited. CITY FINANCIAL IMPACTS None. BOARD / COMMISSION / COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION The Ethics Review Board recommends draft amendments to the gift reporting requirements for Council consideration. PUBLIC OUTREACH None. ATTACHMENTS 1. ERB Meeting Minutes, April 7, 2025 2. ERB Meeting Minutes, May 5, 2025 3. ERB Meeting Minutes, June 2, 2025 4. ERB Meeting Minutes, July 7, 2025 (draft) 5. Council Gifts and Favors Flow Chart 6. Presentation for Items 18,19, and 20 7. Ordinance No. 159, 2025 Page 626 Item 20. April 7, 2025, 3:30 pm ETHICS REVIEW BOARD MEETING MINUTES COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Jeni Arndt, Councilmember Julie Pignataro, Councilmember Tricia Canonico STAFF PRESENT: Rupa Venkatesh, Sarah Kane, Briana McCarten OTHER PRESENT: Halee Wahl A. Call Meeting to Order B. Roll Call C. Elect Chairperson Councilmember Pignataro moved, seconded by Mayor Arndt, to nominate Councilmember Canonico as Chairperson of the Ethics Review Board (“ERB”). Councilmember Canonico expressed her willingness to serve as chair. The motion passed unanimously. D. Agenda Review Carrie Daggett, City Attorney, provided an overview of the topics for the ERB to consider. Daggett stated that at under Other Business at the January 21, 2025, Council meeting, several Councilmembers supported a request that the ERB meet to review the City’s requirements around the acceptance of gifts, gift disclosures, and financial disclosures and consider recommending changes. The ERB may present any recommended Code changes to Council. Canonico noted she would like to see a better definition of which social events that must be posted. Venkatesh will supply a previously-drafted memo addressing this topic. E. Approval of May 22, 2023, Minutes Councilmember Pignataro moved, seconded by Mayor Arndt, to approve the minutes of the May 22, 2023, meeting of the Ethics Review Board. The motion passed unanimously. F. Agenda Item 1: Overview – Gift Restrictions Daggett noted that the packet includes basic overview information about each of the three topics the Ethics Review Board had been asked to review. The first item presented was review of the gift restrictions for City officers and employees. She noted that the meeting packet contains gift restriction language from the State Page 627 Item 20. Constitution as well as from other Colorado cities that have their own provisions. Pignataro commented that the ERB should consider what the issues have been with the gift restrictions. Pignataro questioned where the information on the Council Gifts and Favors FAQ came from because it isn’t from City code language. Daggett responded that the City Attorney’s Office (“CAO”) and City Manager’s Office (“CMO”) worked together to prepare the document to assist with day-to-day decisions related to accepting and reporting gifts. Assistant City Manager Rupa Venkatesh stated that Councilmembers should report any tickets to events received directly should be reported. She noted that at times donors give tickets to the City and then the City will redistribute the tickets to whoever will be representing the City at the event. When Councilmembers receive tickets from the City to attend and represent the City, those are not a “gift” and so do not need to be reported. Pignataro questioned who defines an event wherein a Councilmember is carrying out their role as a Councilmember. Arndt stated that the State’s approach is to distinguish attending to be part of the program or speaking at the event from just attending. The Board discussed different scenarios that are undefined and difficult to discern whether they are gifts that may be accepted. Daggett suggested adding provisions to City code that clarify these questions. Pignataro asked for a good way to distinguish when a Councilmember is acting as an elected official versus a member of the community attending an event. This will be discussed further by the Board. It was noted one indicator of attending on behalf of the City is wearing a City badge. G. Agenda Item 2: Overview – Gift Disclosures Daggett noted that the packet included background and comparison information about the gift disclosures requirements. Arndt expressed frustration with having to report gifts with a very small value. Pignataro suggested that a dollar limit would be helpful. Daggett stated that having parameters for gifts not significant enough to report would make reporting easier. The Board discussed instances wherein an official or employee could potentially accept gift before realizing that the gift is not acceptable. The Board discussed possibly changing the policy so that gifts received by one individual or entity are reported only once they meet a certain threshold in a certain period of time. Pignataro referenced the other municipalities’ code sections provided in the meeting packet for comparison and requested that data be provided in a table format that calls out the outliers. Daggett asked the ERB to consider the purpose and benefit of the requirement to report gifts. Page 628 Item 20. H. Agenda Item 3: Overview – Financial Disclosures Daggett again noted the packet included background and comparison information about the financial disclosures requirement. She explained that the financial disclosures required for candidates theoretically provides voters with information to evaluate conflicts of interest a candidate or elected official may have. Mayor Arndt confirmed that currently elected officials must submit their financial interests to the State via the State’s form. Daggett stated that different municipalities have different reporting thresholds. Daggett isn’t sure how the City decided on its $10,000 threshold. Pignataro was curious how long that threshold has been in place. Information about this will be presented when this item returns to the Board’s agenda. Canonico pointed out that a $10,000 threshold from many years ago is different than that amount today. Arndt expressed an opinion that a spouse’s financial interests are only relevant when that interest is jointly shared with the reporting person. Arndt went on to say that these financial disclosures may deter a person from running for office. Arndt discussed her preference for a requirement to report only real property located in the jurisdiction in which a reporting person serves. Pignataro asked if a personal address must be included on the disclosures and suggested reporting only the district in which the reporting person lives. Daggett explained that the requirement has to do with providing the public with information to evaluate a conflict of interest when an elected official is making a decision about a certain location in the City. Arndt expressed a desire to ensure the financial disclosures for all reporters, including City Attorney and City Manager, be made publicly available in the same way. Pignataro suggested the disclosures be made available to the public upon request to the Clerk’s Office. The group discussed that the disclosures are currently intended to be posted and available on the City’s website, but the links to the disclosures on the website do not work. Daggett suggested that considering the scope of interests that must be reported will be an important part of the discussion of this item. I. Discuss Work Plan and Schedule for Future Meetings Daggett suggested the Board discuss gift restrictions at its next meeting because the policy is the foundation for other requirements and applies to all City officials and employees. Daggett suggested discussing one topic per meeting, but that each discussion may require more than one meeting. The Board discussed summer schedules and decided to schedule meetings through August. Daggett asked if the Board would expect a Council Work Session on the Board’s recommentations to be needed. The Board thought it would want to complete its work in time for recommended Code changes to be presented to Council in August. Page 629 Item 20. Daggett noted staff will present information to the Board to assist in Board discussion of the gift restrictions recommendations at the May 5 meeting. The June meeting will finish the gift restriction discussion, if necessary, and begin the gift disclosure discussion. The July meeting should begin discussing financial disclosures. The goal is to have proposed code language ready for the Board to review once the discussion has proceeded to that point. J. Other Business None. K. Adjournment The meeting adjourned by unanimous consent at 4:32. Minutes approved by the Chair and a vote of the Board on May 5, 2025. Page 630 Item 20. May 5, 2025, 3:30 pm ETHICS REVIEW BOARD MEETING MINUTES COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Jeni Arndt, Councilmember Julie Pignataro, Councilmember Tricia Canonico STAFF PRESENT: Rupa Venkatesh, Sarah Kane, Briana McCarten OTHER PRESENT: Halee Wahl A. Call Meeting to Order B. Roll Call C. Approval of April 7, 2025, Minutes Councilmember Pignataro moved, seconded by Mayor Arndt, to approve the April 7, 2025, minutes. The motion passed unanimously. D. Gift and favors Restrictions Jenny Lopez Filkins reviewed the Ethics Review Board’s (ERB) desire to discuss gifts and favors restrictions in the Code that applies to elected officials and employees. Value Restrictions Lopez Filkins explained that the current City code does not provide for a value restriction and provided examples of other Colorado cities’ code provisions and other states’ statutes around gifts and favors restrictions. Some Colorado cities do not have a value restriction, some provide a dollar limit, some follow the Colorado constitution. Arndt clarified that no gift of any value is allowed under the current code. Lopez Filkins discussed that the City’s current code requires an official or employee to decide if a gift would impair their judgment. Some entities allow gifts under a certain dollar limit. Lopez Filkins asked if the ERB desires to use the examples as a model for changes to City code. The ERB clarified with the CAO that they would like to have a conversation about the topics for discussion rather than hear the CAO’s presentation and then ask for feedback. Pignataro asked what the CAO sees as the problem that these discussions and potential code changes address. Councilmember Canonico expressed their opinion that there is a lack of clarity and predictability around these topics and suggested an update to the code that allows for a dollar limit that adjusts with inflation. Arndt expressed frustration with the current practice of reporting every small value item received and the interpretation that an official may not accept items given to all attendees at an event. City Attorney Daggett explained that there is a conflict between the City’s gift restriction and reporting requirements in that there is a restriction on any gifts but that any gift of significant value Page 631 Item 20. must be reported. Arndt stated that the contradiction should be clarified. Lopez Filkins stated that staff has the same concerns. Pignataro brought up that a member of the public can always utilize the ethics complaint process if they ever question an official’s actions around the receipt of gifts. Arndt and Daggett discussed that an official may also ask the ERB for an advisory opinion. Lopez Filkins reiterated that the City Council has a desire to enact a value restriction on gifts. Lopez Filkins gave an overview of several other Colorado cities’ codes. Lopez Filkins highlighted the City of Colorado Springs’s code exception for event tickets that are documented. Lopez Filkins clarified for Pignataro that “documented” means anything reported on disclosures. Arndt asked if the CAO found any of the cities’ examples particularly reasonable. Lopez Filkins stated her opinion that Colorado Springs has a well written and reasonable code. Daggett pointed out that Colorado Springs’s code specifies that a ticket given to an official’s guest is a gift. Arndt clarified that a ticket to an event given to an official for the purpose of the official to act in their official capacity means an event that the official wouldn’t otherwise attend. Lopez Filkins highlighted Colorado Springs’s provision around tickets or gifts given to the City. ERB and CAO discussed that Colorado Springs relies on Colorado’s gift restriction statute and automatically adjusts for inflation every four years. Lopez Filkins asked for the ERB’s opinion on value restrictions. Pignataro stated they liked the idea of relying on the Colorado constitution. Lopez Filkins moved on to discuss prohibited gifts and whether the ERB would like to enact a dollar threshold or specifically prohibit gifts from a donor who has a decision pending before the Council. Arndt and Pignataro discussed certain scenarios in which a prohibition on gifts from a donor who has a decision pending before Council and suggested that a code provision to this effect would be helpful. Additional Exceptions Lopez Filkins highlighted subsections of Colorado Springs’s gift restriction code that provide exceptions to its gift restrictions. Lopez and Arndt discussed a situation in which an official or employee wins a drawing at a conference. Canonico expressed a desire to allow employees to accept a prize. Daggett highlighted Colorado Springs’s provision about allowing the acceptance of the cost of attending a conference and suggested it would be helpful in the City’s code. Arndt expressed that they liked that provision. Canonico stated that a scenario in which the cost for officials and employees to spend the night in another city while visiting to observe that city and its council should fall into this category. ERB stated that they did not have concerns about any of the other provisions in Colorado Springs’s code. Page 632 Item 20. Additional Restrictions Lopez Filkins provided some examples of restrictions that appear frequently in other cities’ codes that do not appear in the City’s gift restriction code. ERB discussed scenarios that could fall into those categories. Definitions Lopez Filkins suggested that the City code would not need to expand its definition if the City decides to adopt a provision that specifically addresses gifts given to the City that will be distributed to officials or employees. Daggett clarified that the purpose of this discussion topic is to differentiate between gifts given to the City for the purpose of distributing to an official or employee versus gifts given to the City that will not be distributed. Pignataro expressed concern that for the City to accept event tickets and then distribute to officials or employees is a workaround to the gift restriction rules. Lopez Filkins described that the subsections of Colorado Springs’s code that address gifts given to the city that are meant to become property of the city would address the workaround described by Pignataro. Daggett agreed. Arndt and Canonico expressed that they liked the process of distributing event tickets given to the City. Role of City Councilmembers of In Official Capacity Lopez Filkins suggested that it would be helpful to add language to the code that clarifies when a councilmember is acting in their official role when attending an event. Arndt highlighted that Colorado Springs’s code and Colorado’s statute specifies that an official is attending an event in their official capacity when they are listed on the event program with their official title. ERB discussed when a councilmember is acting as a councilmember versus when they are acting as a political candidate. E. Other Business Daggett asked to confirm that the August 4 meeting is scheduled. Lopez Filkins stated that the CAO intended to have code language around gift restrictions prepared to present at the June 2 meeting. Arndt clarified that they would like to discuss the proposed code language as well as gift reporting at the June meeting. F. Adjournment The meeting adjourned by unanimous consent at 4:21 p.m. Minutes approved by the Chair and a vote of the Board on June 2, 2025. Page 633 Item 20. June 2, 2025, 3:30 pm ETHICS REVIEW BOARD MEETING MINUTES COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Jeni Arndt, Councilmember Julie Pignataro, Councilmember Tricia Canonico STAFF PRESENT: Sarah Kane, Briana McCarten, Carrie Daggett OTHER PRESENT: Halee Wahl Call Meeting to Order Roll Call Approval of May 5, 2025, Minutes Councilmember Pignataro moved, seconded by Mayor Arndt, to approve the May 5, 2025, minutes. The motion passed unanimously. Gift Reporting City Attorney Carrie Daggett stated to the Ethics Review Board (ERB) that the purpose of the meeting is to review the City’s requirements around the acceptance of gifts, gift disclosures, and financial disclosures and to recommend changes. Daggett presented an overview of exceptions to gift restrictions that the ERB considered at its last meeting. Daggett provided an overview of Colorado law gift disclosure requirements. Pignataro expressed a desire to continue quarterly gift reporting. Pignataro expressed a desire to have the City’s gift reporting requirement mirror the gifts that are acceptable under the Code amendments. Items provided to councilmembers, such as memberships to a City facility and parking passes, are a benefit to Councilmembers and not gifts. The ERB all expressed their desire to revise the City’s code provision to set a gift acceptance threshold of $75 and mirror the State’s gift acceptance statute. The ERB discussed that items valued over $75 shouldn’t be accepted and that items under $75 in value do not need to be reported. Other gifts, as permitted by the proposed gift acceptance code amendments and over the $75 threshold, should be reported. Daggett suggested a councilmember does not need to report a charitable event ticket valued over $75 that is given to the City for the purpose of requesting representation by a councilmember at the event; the ERB agreed to such a provision. The ERB suggested to exclude the following from reporting requirements: Scholarships and financial aid for educational purposes; Page 634 Item 20. Tickets given to the City and distributed to councilmembers; Prizes given at competitions or drawings open to the public; Reasonable cost for conferences paid by for by the City, a City-owned entity, an organization to which the City belongs, or a governmental entity; Compensation for speaking engagements paid to the City; City-sponsored educational events; Perishable or consumable gifts given to the City or a City group; Gifts accepted in a person’s official capacity that will become property of the City; Discounts that are available to all employees or the public generally; and Exceptions approved by the ERB. The ERB suggests that the following should be reported: Unsolicited items of value over $75; Ticket or admission valued over $75 to a charity event attended on behalf of the City through an individual invitation; Reasonable cost for conferences not paid by the City or a City-owned entity; and Reasonable cost of meals and tickets above $75 if it does not affect a direct official action. Financial Disclosures Daggett presented an overview of the State’s and other municipalities’ categories of disclosure requirements. The ERB did not find value in reporting property owned outside of the growth management area and direct or indirect investment or interest, including stock investment, in a business located outside of the growth management area. The ERB believes the following should be reported: Direct or indirect investment or interest, including stock investment, in a business located within the growth management area with a value over $15,000 (there is a desire for this amount to automatically adjust for inflation to a rounded number); and Anything that could possibly impact a councilmember’s decision-making. The name of all offices and directorships held in a councilmember’s personal capacity The ERB discussed the requirement to report the name of each of a councilmember’s creditors. There is a desire to adjust the dollar threshold for the amount of credit owed for inflation according to the Consumer Price Index and to a rounded number. Daggett stated that the attorney’s office will review and propose new timing for when the adjustment should occur and will explain their proposal at the next ERB meeting. The ERB suggested that disclosures should only apply to the reporting person and their Page 635 Item 20. spouses because the charter definition of conflict of interest only applies to the councilmember and their spouses. Disclosures should not apply to all other members of a reporting person’s household. The ERB wishes to continue to report any business in which the reporting person or their spouse is associated with that is regulated by the City. Draft Gift Restrictions Code Amendment The ERB did not discuss draft gift restriction code amendments because time did not permit. Other Business The ERB did not discuss any other business. Next Meeting The next ERB meeting is scheduled for Monday, July 7, 2025. Adjournment The meeting adjourned by unanimous consent at 4:52 p.m. Minutes approved by the Chair and a vote of the Board on July 7, 2025. Page 636 Item 20. July 7, 2025, 3:30 pm ETHICS REVIEW BOARD MEETING MINUTES COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Jeni Arndt, Councilmember Julie Pignataro, Councilmember Tricia Canonico STAFF PRESENT: Carrie Daggett, Jenny Lopez Filkins, Rupa Venkatesh, Briana McCarten, Sarah Kane (remote) OTHER PRESENT: Halee Wahl (remote) Call Meeting to Order Roll Call Approval of June 2, 2025, Minutes Councilmember Pignataro moved and Mayor Arndt seconded the motion to approve the June 2, 2025, minutes. The motion passed unanimously. Possible Board Recommendation regarding Gift Restrictions Code Amendments Senior Deputy Attorney Jenny Lopez Filkins reminded the Ethics Review Board (ERB) that at its June 2 meeting, the Attorney’s Office presented proposed amendments to section 2-576 of City Code, which addresses councilmember gift restrictions. Lopez Filkins explained that the Attorney’s Office is presenting further amendments to section 2-576 based on the ERB’s input from the June 2 meeting. Lopez Filkins explained that amendments to subsection (b) makes clear that a councilmember may not solicit donations on behalf of a board on which they are a member. Lopez Filkins explained that the amendment to subsection (e) clarifies its language. Amendments to subsection (e)(4) reflect the ERB’s desire to exempt any taxable employee’s benefits from gift restrictions. Subsection (e)(10) changes the reference to a non-profit organization to organizations with which the City is affiliated or to which the City has appointed a councilmember to. Other amendments make wording more consistent. The ERB agreed with the proposed amendments. Lopez Filkins and City Attorney Daggett stated that the Attorney’s Office has provided the proposed gift restriction amendments to certain City staff and asked for feedback. The Attorney’s Office will make any suggested changes and will explain anything substantive in the AIS that goes to City Council. Pignataro moved and Arndt seconded the motion to adopt the draft gift restriction amendments and recommend the draft amendments to City Council. The motion passed Page 637 Item 20. unanimously. Possible Board Recommendation regarding Gift Reporting Code Amendments Lopez Filkins explained that the Attorney’s Office drafted proposed amendments to section 2-656 of City Code based on the ERB’s discussions at the June 2 meeting. Lopez Filkins explained that amendments to subsection (c)(1) provides that items valued over $10 must be reported. Subsection (b) specifically excludes the requirement to report items that were given or paid by the City, an entity affiliated with the City, and organizations to which the City has appointed a councilmember. The ERB discussed the contradiction between the proposed amendments to the gift restrictions at section 2-576 that prohibit the acceptance of items valued over $75 and sections 2-656(c)(2) and (4) that requires reporting tickets to events and educational events valued over $75. Councilmembers may not accept any items valued over $75 pursuant to the gift restriction Code, and therefore, there would be no need to report items valued over $75. Pignataro suggested revising the proposed language in subsection (c)(2) to reflect the language in the gift restrictions with respect to the value being determined by the amount the charity reports to the IRS. Councilmember Canonico requested that the Attorney’s Office prepare an updated flow chart that reflects the amendments. Canonico recalled that, at the June 2 meeting, the ERB requested that the reporting requirement threshold be raised to $25. The ERB requested that the proposed amendment at section 2-656(c)(2) be removed because it would require reporting a gift that may not be accepted. However, the proposed amendment at section 2-656(c)(3) may remain because it refers to a gift restriction exception regarding costs of conferences, seminars, events, or meetings at section 2-576(e)(10). Similarly, section 2-656(c)(4) may remain because it refers to the gift restriction exception regarding City-sponsored educational events at section 2-576(e)(11). Lopez Filkins asked the ERB if they were interested in adding a section to subsection (c) that requires reporting business meals described in section 2-576(e)(13). The ERB requested to remove the business meals reporting requirements from the gift restriction and gift reporting Code sections. Lopez Filkins asked the ERB if they were interested in adding a section to subsection (e) that requires reporting of meals and event tickets for the reporter and family members with a value over $75 or the self-adjusted amount in effect at the time. The ERB decided that the reporting requirements for such meals and event tickets should apply to each recipient. Page 638 Item 20. The ERB requested that subsection (d) add a requirement that, if a Councilmember does not have any gifts to report, they will notify the City Clerk in writing. Pignataro moved and Arndt seconded the motion to adopt the draft gift reporting amendments and recommend the draft amendments to City Council. The motion passed unanimously. Possible Board Recommendation regarding Financial Disclosure Code Amendments Lopez Filkins explained that the Attorney’s Office drafted proposed amendments to section 2-636, 2-637, and 2-638 of City Code based on the ERB’s discussions at the June 2 meeting. The ERB requested that the disclosure requirements of certain interests be limited geographically to the growth management area (GMA). The ERB requested that section 2-636(d) add a provision that a City Manager or a City Attorney that is serving on an interim basis are also required to file financial disclosures. Lopez Filkins informed the ERB that the City set the debts, interests, and investments $10,000 disclosure threshold in 1971 and that the inflation-adjusted amount would now be roughly $76,000. The ERB requested that the disclosure threshold for debts, interests, and investments at sections 2-637(a)(2) and (5) be amended to $25,000. The ERB requested that this amount will self-adjust according to the consumer price index rounded to the nearest $1,000. The ERB agreed with the amendment to section 2-638 that clarifies the language around the City Clerk providing notice before the disclosure deadlines. The ERB clarified that it a part of the Clerk’s duties to notify reporters of the deadlines, but that it is not a requirement. The ERB requested to add sentence permitting a reporter to reply to the Clerk’s notification email stating that they have nothing to report. Lopez Filkins stated that currently section 2-640 permits a report to submit their income tax returns along with a list of investments in lieu of submitting a financial disclosure form. The ERB requested to remove that Code section. Pignataro moved and Arndt seconded the motion to adopt the draft financial disclosure amendments and recommend the draft amendments to City Council. The motion passed unanimously. The ERB requested an updated FAQ flow chart that depicts the code amendments. Cancel or Continue August 4, 2025, Meeting The ERB decided to hold the August 4, 2025, meeting on everyone’s calendar as a placeholder. If, after gathering input from other City staff, there are significant requested changes, the ERB will need to meet on August 4, 2025, if there are no significant Page 639 Item 20. requested changes, the meeting will be canceled and the proposed amendments will be recommended to City Council in September. Other Business The ERB did not discuss any other business. Adjournment The meeting adjourned by unanimous consent at 4:37 p.m. Minutes approved by the Chair and a vote of the Board on , 2025. Page 640 Item 20. Does the gift include any of the following: accommodations, tours, event tickets, recreation, entertainment, meals or other similar personal benefit in which you have a substantial interest and the acceptance of which could be perceived to influence your objectivity when conducting business on behalf of the City? Yes You may not accept this gift. This restriction applies to an officer’s or employee’s relatives. Is the gift offered by a donor who has a matter pending before City Council? You may not accept this gift. Yes Is the gift considered a payment for a speech, debate, or other public event?You may not accept this gift. Yes Does the gifted item have a value less than $75? (This amount is in effect as of 1/1/2025 and will adjust in accordance with Colorado Constitution, Article XXIX, Section 3.) Yes You may accept this gift as long as all gifts received from the vendor or third party total less than $75 per year. You must report the gift(s) if the cumulative value is greater than $25. Did you pay part of the cost of the gift in order to reduce its value to less than $75 (or as adjusted above)? You may not accept this gift. No COUNCIL GIFTS AND FAVORS FAQ When someone offers you anything of any value, you should evaluate if you are permitted to accept it. Some gifts may need to be reported to the City Clerk. The following flowchart can provide you with guidance to evaluate which gifts may be accepted and their reporting requirements. • City Code Sections 2-576(b)–(e) contain the gifts and favors provisions and list types of gifts or favors that you are allowed to accept. • City Code Section 2-656 requires Councilmembers to report gifts on a quarterly basis (by January 15, April 15, July 15, and October 15). If you did not receive a gift or benefit that is required to be reported in the previous quarter, you must notify the City Clerk in writing that you do not have a gift to report. • If you ever have a question as to whether a gift is acceptable, you may ask the Ethics Review Board for an advisory opinion. No Could the gift reasonably be considered a bribe or a means of improper influence on a direct official action? No Yes You may not accept this gift. No TRAVEL AND EVENTS Does the gift include any of the following: accommodations, tours, event tickets, recreation, entertainment, meals or other similar personal benefit in which you have a substantial interest and the acceptance of which could be perceived to influence your objectivity when conducting business on behalf of the City? Yes You may not accept this gift. This restriction applies to an officer’s or employee’s relatives. Is the gift an award or prize given at a competition or event where no admission is charged and which is open to the public? You may accept this gift as long as 1) there is no admission charge, and 2) the competition or event is open to the public. You do not need to report the award or prize. Yes For COUNCILMEMBERS, CITY MANAGER, and CITY ATTORNEY, whether permanent or interim: is the gift a fee, meal, lodging, or transportation that is associated with your attendance at a conference, seminar, event, or meeting? No The cost of attendance is paid pursuant to a vendor agreement or contract; or The cost is paid by a governmental entity or an organization to which the City Council has appointed you, or an entity affiliated with or formed by the City; or The City Manager’s Office asked you to attend the event on behalf of the City. You may accept this gift as long as if you are scheduled to give a speech, participate in a presentation or panel, or receive an award and meets one of the requirements below. You do not need to report this gift. Is the gift the cost of a City-sponsored educational event?Yes You may accept this gift. You must report this gift if its value is greater than $75. No Is the gift an event ticket or meal pertaining to your official duties as a Councilmember?Yes You may accept this gift as long as 1) the gift is documented, and 2) the gift is not intended and does not affect a direct official action. This restriction applies to relatives as long as they attend the event with you. You do not need to report this gift. Is the gift the reasonable cost of travel on behalf of the City to another City, whether in Colorado or out-of-state? Yes You may accept this gift as long as the purpose of the travel is to observe programs, projects, or operations in that City and/or of its City Council. You do not need to report this gift. CHARITIES Is the gift the cost of admission to a charity event? Yes You may accept this gift as long as you attend on behalf of the City or any of its affiliated organizations and the value is less than $75. You do not need to report this gift. Is the gift the cost of admission to a charity event? Yes You may accept this gift as long as you attend on behalf of the City or any of its affiliated organizations and the value is less than $75. You do not need to report this gift. Is the gift a solicitation for a charitable purpose as determined to be appropriate by the City or its affiliated entities? Yes You may accept this gift. You do not need to report it. No FINANCIAL GAIN Did you receive a component of compensation paid or other recognition given in the normal course of employment, appointment, volunteer services, or business, including taxable employee benefits? Yes You may accept this compensation or benefit. You do not need to report it. Did you or a family member receive a scholarship, grant, or other financial aid for education?Yes You may accept this benefit. You do not need to report this benefit. Is the gift a discount?Yes You may accept the discount as long as it is similarly available to all employees or the public generally or to a large segment of the public (i.e., all uniformed personnel, all government employees, or all first responders). You do not need to report the discount. TO OR FROM THE CITY Is the gift given to and accepted on behalf of the City to benefit a public safety or community purpose? You may accept this gift. You do not need to report it.Yes No Is the gift a perishable or consumable gift to a City department or group that is: approved by the City Manager? Or not donated by a City service provider or vendor? Is the recipient is not responsible for regulating or transacting with the donor? Yes You may accept this gift and you do not need to report it. Will the gift become property of the City?Yes You may accept this gift and you do not need to report it. No Is the gift or benefit given by or paid by the City, an entity affiliated with or formed by the City, or an organization to which the City Council has appointed you? Yes You may accept this gift or benefit as permitted below. Reporting requirements are stated below. NON-PECUNIARY Is the gift a non-pecuniary award of appreciation such as a plaque or professional award? Yes You may accept this gift if it is presented by a nonprofit organization in recognition of public service. You do not need to report it. No Is the gift a non-pecuniary award?Yes You may accept this gift as long as 1) the gift is of reasonable value and frequency, 2) public presented by an entity affiliated with or formed by the City or to which the City Council has appointed you, and 3) the gift is given in recognition of your service as an officer. This restriction applies to Councilmembers and City employees. You do not need to report this gift. VALUE RESTRICTION GENERAL RESTRICTIONS No No No No No No No Page 641 Item 20. -1- ORDINANCE NO. 159, 2025 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AMENDING CHAPTER 2, ARTICLE VIII, DIVISION 3 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS RELATING TO GIFT REPORTING REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITY’S FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE RULES A. Under “other business” at its January 21, 2025, City Council meeting, several members of the City Council asked the Ethics Review Board (“ERB”) to review the City’s gift reporting requirements and consider whether they recommend changes to the reporting requirements. B. Section 2-656 of the City Code requires every Councilmember who receives any gift, honoraria or other benefit in connection with the Councilmember’s public service to file a report on or before January 15, April 15, July 15, and October 15 of each year as required by Colorado Revised Statutes Section 24-6-203. C. The ERB met on April 7, May 5, June 2 and July 7, 2025. On June 2, 2025, the ERB focused its discussion on current gift reporting requirements and whether to recommend changes to the requirements. D. At its June meeting, the ERB reviewed and considered the state of Colorado gift reporting requirements. The ERB also reviewed and considered gift reporting requirements of other large, Colorado home rule cities, including Aurora, Denver, Colorado Springs, Boulder and Broomfield. The ERB learned that many other Colorado municipalities have gift reporting requirements identical to the City of Fort Collins or their municipal codes are silent on the topic. E. At its June meeting, the ERB reviewed the gift reporting amendments considered at its May meeting and whether those changes would influence changes to the gift reporting requirements. The City’s current gift reporting requirements do not specify what types of gifts must be reported. The ERB expressed support for adding specific gift reporting obligations to the Municipal Code, like a few other large home rule cities. F. The ERB discussed the option to exclude reporting gifts and benefits that are given or paid by the City, an entity affiliated with or formed by the City or an organization to which the City Council has appointed the Councilmember. The ERB recommends excluding such gifts and benefits from the gift reporting requirements. G. At its June meeting, the ERB also considered whether to require elected or appointed officials to file gift reports more or less frequently than the current quarterly basis. The ERB agreed not to recommend changes to the frequency of report filing but expressed support for adding an exception to the gift reporting requirement that allows a Councilmember to notify the City Clerk in writing if they have no gift to report. Page 642 Item 20. -2- H. The ERB’s proposed amendments to Code Section 2-656 provide clarity about dollar amount thresholds and gifts that must be reported. This will provide more certainty for those subject to the reporting requirements and more transparency for the public. I. The City Council wishes to amend Code Section 2-656 gift reporting requirements to provide clarity and transparency about gifts received by Councilmembers. In light of the foregoing recitals, which the Council hereby makes and adopts as determinations and findings, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. Section 2-656 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby amended to read as follows: Sec. 2-656. Report required. (a) Every Councilmember who receives from any other person any gifts, honoraria or other benefits in connection with the Councilmember's public service shall file, on or before January 15, April 15, July 15 and October 15 of each year, a report covering the period since the last report about receipt of gifts, honoraria and other benefits. If a Councilmember files a report earlier than the due date, the Councilmember must update their report if they accept any gifts that must be reported in the intervening period. as required by Section 24-6-203, C.R.S. (b) Gifts and benefits that meet the criteria below and that were given or paid by the City, an entity affiliated with or formed by the City or an organization to which the City Council has appointed the Councilmember are excluded from these reporting requirements. (c) Reports of the following gifts and benefits must be provided: (1) Any unsolicited item or items accepted pursuant to Code §2 -576(e)(2), if valued at more than twenty-five dollars ($25); and (2) Costs of conferences, seminars, events or meetings (e.g., fees, meals, lodging, registration or admission, and/or transportation) and as described in Code §2-576(e)(10); and (3) Cost of City-sponsored educational events as described in Code §2- 576(e)(11) if the value is above the dollar amount established in Colorado Constitution, Article XXIX, Section 3; and (4) Costs of meals and event tickets given to Councilmembers and their relatives pertaining to their official duties as Councilmembers and as described in §2-576(e)(15) if the value is above the dollar amount established in Colorado Constitution, Article XXIX, Section 3. Page 643 Item 20. -3- (d) If a Councilmember has not received a gift or benefit that is required to be reported in the previous quarter, the Councilmember must notify the City Clerk in writing they have no gift to report. Section 2. The amendments to Section 2-656 shall go into effect for reports due after January 1, 2026. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading on September 16, 2025, and approved on second reading for final passage on October 7, 2025. ______________________________ Mayor ATTEST: ______________________________ City Clerk Effective Date: October 17, 2025 Approving Attorney: Jenny Lopez Filkins Exhibit: None Page 644 Item 20.