HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES-08/10/1982-Adjourned1 COUNCIL..OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COLORA90
Council -Manager Form of Government
August 10, 1982
Adjourned Meeting - 1:00 p.m.
An adjourned meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins was held on
Tuesday, August 10, 1982, at 1:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers in the City
of Fort Collins City Hall. Roll call was answered by the following Council -
members: Cassell, Clarke, Elliott, Horak, Knezovich, Reeves and Wilmarth.
Absent: None.
Staff Members Present: Arnold, Huisjen, Davis, Lewis, Meitl, and M.
Smith
Discussion of
Poudre River Study
' Mayor Cassell stated that Councilmember Horak had requested this meeting be
held for. Council to determine what, if any, official position the City
should take at this time on the Poudre River Study.prior to the Colorado
Water Conservation Board's public hearings to be held August 11 and August
16. He further stated that the Water Board had indicated at the earlier
work session that it would not be making a recommendation to Council at
this time.
Councilmember Horak, a City representative to the Poudre Study Steering
Committee, stated that Council might be able to give some direction to the
Colorado Water Conservation Board on the study. He stated he would be
presenting his individual views at the Board hearings, and suggested that
he could also present any Council direction or position at that time. He
summarized his comments concerning the study:
(1) The scope of the study is not comprehensive enough, and it is not an
answer to the problems that we have.
(2) The alternatives proposed are not true choices and deal only with what
dam should be built.
(3) Fie questioned the use of a 100-year economic life, when in many other
studies this is not done.
(4) He stated that the use of a 7.5% interest rate could seriously impact
cost/benefit ratios.
-367-
August 10, 1982
(5) He questioned the use of a 15% opportunity cost interest rate for
producing power and a 10% opportunity cost interest rate for water
supply, instead of using the same 7.5% interest rate figure.
(6) Criteria used in the study are not standards, rules, or tests by which
to judge whether the project should or should not be built.
(7) There is no analysis or weighting of criteria and no statement of a
preferred alternative.
Councilmember Reeves asked for some clarification on the amount of new
water that would be realized from any of the projects, and about peaking
power. Specifically, she requested a comparison of this type of project to
a project such as Rawhide II.
Bill Green, representing the Colorado Water Conservation Board, stated that
new water developed would amount to 11,000 to 16,000 acre-feet per year on
an average annual basis. He also stated that hydropower is not the primary
objective, although it is the primary benefit of the project. The objec-
tive is to manage water resources and provide water storage to be released
downstream on demand. Hydropower, as a primary benefit, would provide
peaking power rather than baseload power as produced in other facilities.
Hydroelectric generation would provide supplemental power during four to
five hours of peak demand each day.
Councilmember Clarke asked if there would be diminished ability to generate
power in the winter.
Mr. Green replied that the study used the concept of year-round operation.
Councilmember Clarke asked about the costs of a new Seaman Reservoir,
compared to Grey Mountain costs.
Mr. Green replied that costs for Seaman might be less, but new water
storage capacity might not be as much as Grey Mountain.
Councilmember Clarke asked whether alternatives would need to be narrowed
before new studies could be undertaken.
Mr. Green stated that the decision on new studies would be made by the
State Legislature. The Colorado Water Conservation Board will need on
August 16th to discuss the next phase of the study.
Councilmember Knezovich asked if the State had ever funded a project of
this magnitude.
IM
August 10, 1982
Mr. Green stated there is a construction fund for loans for this type of
project.
Councilmember Horak stated that legislation has been recently passed to
create a Water and Power Authority to fund large projects.
Councilmember Clarke made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Reeves, to
recommend that the Colorado Water Conservation Board continue to study the
six proposed alternatives and look at other alternatives, and not to narrow
the alternatives at this time in order to keep the scope of the study as
broad as possible.
Councilmember Wilmarth stated he does not support any of the six proposed
alternatives and would not support the first part of the motion.
Councilmember Clarke and Councilmember Reeves withdrew the motion.
Councilmember Clarke made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Reeves, to
recommend that the alternatives not be narrowed at this time, and to
encourage expansion of the study to include other alternatives on a basin-
' wide basis and a study of other impacts.
Councilmember Knezovich stated that he believed the motion to be mis-
directed, since the State Legislature has already narrowed the study to
above the mouth of the canyon.
Councilmember Clarke stated that the City does not control the scope of the
study and can only encourage a particular action.
George Wallace, Water Board member, stated he would like Council to make it
clear to the Legislature that more information is needed to look at the
larger picture. This study is only one part of what needs to be done on a
statewide planning basis.
Mayor Cassell stated that he believed it to be premature to define the pro-
blem, and no action is the best stance until more information is obtained.
Councilmember Horak stated that comments should be made on this draft
study, and that the study is intended to determine the justification for
future funding.
The vote on the motion as stated was as follows. Yeas: Councilmembers
Clarke, Elliott, Horak, Reeves, and Wilmarth. Nays: Councilmembers
Cassell and Knezovich.
I
THE MOTION CARRIED.
-369-
August 10, 1982
Other Business
Councilmember Cassell made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Elliott, to
adjourn into Executive Session for the purpose of discussing legal matters.
Yeas: Councilmembers Cassell, Clarke, Elliott, Horak, and Reeves. Nays:
Councilmembers Knezovich and Wilmarth. '
THE MOTION CARRIED.
The meeting was reconvened following the Executive Session and was ad-
journed at 1:35 p.m.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
-370-