Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM - 10/30/2012 - RESOLUTION 2012-099 ADOPTING A WATER SUPPLY AND DEDATE: October 30, 2012 STAFF: Donnie Dustin Kevin Gertig AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL 5 SUBJECT Resolution 2012-099 Adopting a Water Supply and Demand Management Policy. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Fort Collins Utilities staff has been working on updating the City’s Water Supply and Demand Management Policy. The current Policy was adopted by City Council in September 2003 (Resolution 2003-104). Since the Policy’s adoption, the Utility has seen a significant reduction in water use while continuing to plan for future water needs. The updated Policy will provide further direction regarding the planning, management and maintenance of the City’s water supply system needed to assure a safe, reliable drinking water supply and provide for an appropriate level of water conservation. It will also provide guidance on how the City may use its valuable water resources to meet other beneficial purposes for its citizens and the surrounding community. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION History Since the Fort Collins Water Utility’s origin in the 1880s, the City has been focused on providing a high quality and reliable water supply to its customers. Policies that have supported the Utility in providing this water supply, as well as encouraging water conservation, have included the 1988 Water Supply Policy, the 1992 Water Demand Management Policy and the current 2003 Water Supply and Demand Management Policy. This Policy update should continue the objectives of providing a sustainable and integrated approach to ensuring an adequate, safe and reliable supply of water for the beneficial use by customers and the community, while managing the level of demand and the efficient use of a scarce and valuable resource. Much of the work on the Policy update was performed in 2011 and included educating and gathering input from a Community Working Group (CWG) that had diverse water related backgrounds and perspectives. After six meetings with the CWG, a draft Policy update was developed that incorporated many of their issues and concerns. The proposed Policy update was presented to Water Board at its November 17, 2011 meeting. After much discussion, the Board voted unanimously to recommend to City Council support for the draft policy. The Policy update was presented to City Council during a work session on January 10, 2012. Council did not feel the Policy update was ready for adoption and requested additional information. Much of the material developed for the Policy update, CWG and Water Board was provided to the City Council for the January 10, 2012 work session. Materials provided for that meeting are available for review on the City’s website at www.fcgov.com/cityclerk/agendas.php. One of the key updated Policy sections that was discussed during the January 10, 2012 work session (as well as by the CWG and Water Board) was the water supply planning criteria. The three main planning criteria used to develop the City’s water supply system are the drought criterion, storage reserve factor and planning demand level. These criteria determine the amount of water supplies and/or facilities the City needs (e.g., the amount of storage required) and should be somewhat conservative to account for uncertainties in water supply planning. The following describes each of these criteria separately. Drought Criterion The drought criterion defines the level of reliability for the City’s water supply system. In general, water supply systems yield less in more severe droughts. For example, a water supply system that can provide 30,000 acre-feet of water through a 1-in-50 year drought might only be able to provide 20,000 acre-feet during a 1-in-100 year drought. The City has used a 1-in-50 year drought criterion since the 1988 Water Supply Policy. This criterion has provided a reliable supply system to date, but not without issues during the early 2000s drought. October 30, 2012 -2- ITEM 5 Storage Reserve Factor A storage reserve factor is a criterion to have a certain percent of annual demand in storage through the design drought criterion (1-in-50 year drought). This storage reserve provides a short-term supply to address emergency situations, such as pipeline shutdowns (which can and have occurred during drought conditions). Acquiring storage in the Poudre Basin for meeting the storage reserve would help diversify the City’s water supply system, which is highly reliant on CBT storage. The storage reserve factor can be equated to the number of months of demand that can be met as shown in the following table: Storage Reserve Factor # of Winter Month Demands # of Summer (July) Month Demands 0% 0.0 0.0 5% 0.9 0.4 10% 1.8 0.7 15% 2.8 1.1 20% 3.7 1.5 25% 4.6 1.8 Planning Demand Level The planning demand level is the amount of demand the water supply system should be developed to meet. Since acquiring water supplies takes many years, projecting future demands is required to determine which supplies and/or facilities need to be acquired. The planning demand level is measured in gallons per capita per day (GPCD) and is used along with projected population and large contractual use needs to determine future demand levels (and thus water supplies and/or facilities to acquire). The planning demand level can be higher than current use or water conservation goals to account for uncertainties in water supply planning that might reduce the yield of the City’s water supplies. The City’s current average water use is 150 GPCD and the 2009 Water Conservation Plan has a goal to reduce use to 140 GPCD by the year 2020. The water supply planning criteria values initially presented in the updated Policy were those being used by the Corps in the permitting process for the Utilities proposed enlargement of Halligan Reservoir, which has been ongoing for several years. The criteria originally presented in the updated Policy were the values currently being used in the Halligan permitting process of the 1-in-50 year drought criterion, a planning demand level of 162 GPCD (2002-2007 average use), and a 15% storage reserve factor. Although there were some divergent views from CWG members on these planning criteria, the majority of CWG members felt that the water supply planning criteria (used in the Halligan permitting process) were set at reasonable levels. The Water Board also discussed and considered changes to these criteria during its November 2011 meeting, but decided they should remain the same to avoid potential delay to the Halligan permitting process. At the January 2012 work session, some Council expressed concern with having a planning demand level that is above our current water use level (150 GPCD) and water conservation goal (140 GPCD), and wanted a clearer explanation of the planning criteria and how they relate to the City’s water supply needs, the size of Halligan Reservoir and the City’s water use and conservation efforts. As a result, Council did not feel the Policy was ready for adoption. A summary of its feedback during the work session is attached (Attachment 1), along with staff responses to Council’s issues (Attachment 2). Following the City Council work session, Utilities staff contacted the Corps to ask how changes to the planning criteria in the Policy would affect the Halligan Reservoir permitting process. The Corps stated it conducts an independent study of the City’s water supply needs and that the planning criteria values being used in the process seemed reasonable. Prior to issuance of a permit, the Corps will revisit these values and make adjustments as necessary. This input allowed for some flexibility in the planning criteria values used in the updated Policy. Utilities staff met with the Water Board’s Water Supply Committee on April 16, 2012 and the full Water Board on July 19, 2012 to discuss potential options for changing the water supply planning criteria. Changes to these criteria focused mainly on revising the planning demand level (in GPCD) and the storage reserve factor (SRF). Several options for changing these criteria were presented by staff, including the previous 162 GPCD and 15% SRF, 150 GPCD and 15% SRF and 140 GPCD and 20% SRF. After some discussion, the Water Board voted unanimously to revise the updated October 30, 2012 -3- ITEM 5 Policy to include the planning criteria suggested by the Water Supply Committee of 150 GPCD and 20% storage reserve factor. The Board’s discussions are described in the attached Letter of Support and Water Board minutes (Attachments 3 and 4). In addition to the issues regarding the water supply planning criteria, Council wanted the updated Policy to include more focus on economic development and water innovation as well as a discussion on the relationship of population growth to water supply and demand planning. The updated Policy now includes these changes, along with the revised water supply planning criteria recommended by Water Board. The Council work session, scheduled for August 28, 2012 to further discuss the updated Policy (among other topics), was cancelled. Following the cancelled work session, Council Leadership reviewed the material provided and determined that an additional work session was not necessary and asked that the updated Policy be presented to City Council for formal adoption. Supporting Information Water Use The City currently delivers about 26,000 acre-feet/year of treated water and 4,000 acre-feet/year of raw water (which irrigates the City’s parks, golf courses, etc.). Demand levels have declined significantly over the last few decades from around 230 GPCD in the early 1990s to about 200 GPCD before the drought year of 2002. The average use over the last several years (2006-2011 normalized use) has been about 150 GPCD, indicating a 25 percent reduction in per capita water use from before 2002. The majority of these water use reductions have come from the City’s residential customers, but the commercial sector has also reduced its water use significantly. These reductions are a result of water conservation efforts by our customers that have been aided by the City becoming fully water metered in 2003 (along with tiered and seasonal rate structures) and the Utilities water conservation program. Utilities conducted a landscape preference survey with an online survey panel to gage customer’s desire for changing landscapes in Fort Collins as it relates to the potential for additional water conservation and its potential impact on existing landscapes. Results of the survey indicated general satisfaction with current landscapes in Fort Collins (especially trees) and support for additional xeriscape. Results indicated no strong opinion regarding additional water conservation, which coincides with recent general Utilities surveys that indicate the majority of customers believe water conservation efforts are at the correct level. Water Supply Sources The City’s water supplies generally come from two main sources: the Poudre River and the Colorado-Big Thompson Project (CBT). On average, the City gets about half its treated water supply from each of these sources each year. The City’s Poudre River water supplies include its senior direct flow rights, converted agricultural rights (mostly from shares in the irrigation ditches that run through the City) and the Michigan Ditch and Joe Wright Reservoir system. The CBT supplies are administered by the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District (NCWCD), which allocates the supplies to unit owners through a variable annual quota. The City receives delivery of its allocated water from Horsetooth Reservoir and does not own or operate that reservoir. Policies of the NCWCD limit carryover of unused CBT water in the project facilities (including Horsetooth Reservoir). The yield of the City’s water supplies is mostly dependent on snowmelt runoff, which is subject to high annual and monthly variability. Because the City plans for its water supply system to meet demands through a 1-in-50 year drought, there are adequate supplies in most years. The City can currently meet about 31,000 acre-feet/year of treated water demands through the 1-in-50 year drought without restrictions. Future Water Demands and Supplies The Water Utility is expecting a future projected need of approximately 37,400 acre-feet/year of treated water demands by 2050 (at 150 GPCD). The increase in demand is mostly from a projected increase in population of around 35,000 people in the Water Utility service area, but also includes an increase in large contractual use of approximately 3,000 acre-feet/year. This future demand should be near a build-out condition, since the Water Utility has a limited growth potential due to surrounding water districts. These districts will meet some of the future water demands projected within the City’s Growth Management Area. The City will continue to acquire additional water rights and/or cash in-lieu-of water rights through Raw Water Requirements, which requires developers to turn in water rights or cash to meet the water needs of additional October 30, 2012 -4- ITEM 5 development. The City has been working towards acquiring and/or developing storage capacity to help manage its current and future water rights. Operational storage is a critical need to help meet legal requirements associated with the City’s converted agricultural rights. The City is pursuing local gravel pits to meet these operational storage needs. Carryover and vulnerability protection storage can help meet the City’s projected future demands, as well as provide a storage reserve for disruptions to the City’s supply system. The City is pursuing the enlargement of Halligan Reservoir to meet these types of storage needs. Water Supply Planning Criteria As discussed above, these criteria determine the amount of water supplies and/or facilities the City needs (e.g., the amount of storage required) and should be somewhat conservative to account for uncertainties in water supply planning. The 1-in-50 year drought criterion defines the level of risk for the City’s water supply system. The 20% storage reserve factor provides a short-term supply to address emergency situations. This factor incorporates having 20% of annual demand in storage (through the 1-in-50 year drought), which equates to about 3.5 months of winter (indoor) demand or about 1.5 months of summer demand. Acquiring storage in the Poudre Basin for meeting the storage reserve would help diversify the City’s water supply system, which is highly reliant on CBT storage. The 150 GPCD planning demand level is higher than the 140 GPCD water conservation goal to account for uncertainties in water supply planning, such as the potential effects of climate change. Water supply planning is a long-term process with many uncertainties. The water supply planning criteria seek to balance the benefits and risks of developing a reliable water supply with the associated costs and impacts of doing so. These criteria determine the amount of supplies and/or facilities needed, but it is the City’s water use that mostly impacts the river system (except for construction and inundation impacts to the river). Planning for higher water use levels could provide the City more flexibility to use supplies for other benefits such as supporting local agriculture, if the City continues to reduce water use (e.g., meets the water conservation goal). Surplus Raw Water The City has surplus supplies in many years as a result of planning its supplies for meeting demands through a 1-in-50 year drought. Most of these surplus supplies are currently rented to agriculture on a year-to-year basis that generate revenue and help reduce water customer rates. The City recognizes recent interest in entering long-term arrangements with agricultural renters. Any unused or unrented surplus water is essentially left in the River, which is typically diverted by the next senior water right(s). Using the City’s surplus supplies for instream flows is currently difficult under current Colorado water law. However, Utilities staff is working with other City departments and the State of Colorado on initiatives to improve Poudre River flows. Environmental Considerations The City’s water use reduces flows in the Poudre River and other watersheds. However, most of the flow reductions on the Poudre River (between the lower Poudre Canyon and the middle of Fort Collins) are from irrigation company diversions. Most diversions for the City’s future uses will not reduce flows through Fort Collins, since the City will mostly use water from converted agricultural shares that have historically diverted upstream of Fort Collins. Key Policy Elements The Policy update has significantly changed from the current Policy adopted in 2003 and was developed with much input from the CWG, as well as some revisions from the Water Board and City Council. The following are the key updated Policy elements: • General Policy Language and Introduction In order to align with Plan Fort Collins and incorporate sustainability concepts, references to policies stated in Plan Fort Collins and incorporation of triple bottom line concepts (considering economic, environmental and social aspects) have been added throughout the Policy update, especially in the introduction. • Water Use Efficiency and Demand Management This section reduces the average daily use (water conservation) goal to 140 GPCD by 2020, compared to 185 GPCD in the current policy. This revised goal was developed in the 2009 Water Conservation Plan, which October 30, 2012 -5- ITEM 5 includes programs and measures used to reach the goal. Since it may be updated on a more regular basis (at least every 7 years), future conservation goals will be adjusted by subsequent Water Conservation Plans. The Policy also states the peak day use goal of 350 GPCD by 2020, compared to 475 GPCD in the current policy. In addition, this section mentions the use of water rate structures to provide an economic incentive to use water efficiently and how population growth is connected to water supply and use. • Water Supply Reliability This section uses the three main planning criteria discussed above to develop the City’s water supply system. The Policy states that the City’s water supplies should be maintained to meet an average demand of 150 GPCD through at least a 1-in-50 year drought, while maintaining 20% of annual demand in storage through that drought. These criteria are designed to deal with potential uncertainties in water supply planning, one of which is the potential effects of climate change. In addition, this section mentions maintaining a plan for responding to projected water supply shortages. • Additional Supplies and Facilities This section addresses alternatives for meeting the City’s future needs that best fit the City’s water supply system. It includes working towards long-term water sharing arrangements with agriculture and is not specific about the amount of storage capacity required. • Water Quality This section focuses on protecting our watersheds and maintaining the taste and quality of our treated water. • Surplus Raw Water This section includes a strong commitment to use the Utilities surplus supplies for beneficial purposes such as supporting local agriculture and supplementing flows in the Poudre River. • Regional Cooperation This section directs the City to maintain good working relationships with regional entities that are affected by the City’s water use and supply planning. Once the updated Policy is approved, Utilities staff and consultants will create a report that summarizes the updated Policy and provide supporting information. This report will be provided to City Council and others once completed. Summary The Water Board’s recommended changes to the water supply planning criteria and the options presented to it should provide an adequate and reliable water supply with only a slight change to the previously projected amount of water supplies and/or facilities required to meet the City’s future needs. Also, the updated Policy will provide further direction regarding the planning, management, and maintenance of the City’s water supply system needed to assure a safe, reliable drinking water supply and incorporates an appropriate level of water conservation. It will also provide guidance on how the City may use its valuable water resources to meet other beneficial purposes for its citizens and the surrounding community. FINANCIAL / ECONOMIC IMPACTS Reliable water supplies are essential to providing economic health and sustainability in Fort Collins. These supplies provide economic and social benefits to the City’s citizens, businesses and surrounding community by having adequate water for health and public safety; home, school and industrial use; and healthy landscapes. The updated Policy will guide the Utilities in preparing for future water supply needs and continued demand management. Most of the Utilities operations associated with the Policy update are currently funded, such as the Water Resources Division and the Water Conservation Program. Most of the actions, projects and/or programs that will be guided by the updated Policy are either already approved (including funding) by City Council or will be brought before them in future individual actions. October 30, 2012 -6- ITEM 5 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS The updated Policy will guide the Utilities’ actions, projects and programs that may have both positive and negative environmental impacts. In general, the City’s use of local and regional water supplies has adverse effects on its surrounding natural environments. However, actions taken through the City’s water conservation and other efforts help to reduce those impacts. The updated Policy seeks to balance the benefits of providing a reliable water supply with the environmental impacts associated with providing that supply. Individual actions, projects and/or programs that will be guided by the updated Policy will be brought before the City Council in the future, at which point the environmental impacts can be more fully described. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Resolution. BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION The Water Board unanimously voted to approve the updated Policy with adjustments to the water supply planning criteria mentioned above in the background section. The Board’s discussions are described in the attached Letter of Support and Water Board Minutes. PUBLIC OUTREACH Much of the work for the Policy update was performed in 2011, including an extensive public outreach effort mainly through the formation of a Community Working Group (CWG). Six meetings were held with the CWG to inform and discuss policy issues and their direct input was used to develop the updated Policy. Their input and discussions were documented in a memorandum that was provided with the January 10, 2012 work session materials, which is still available for review on the City’s website at www.fcgov.com/cityclerk/agendas.php. A letter from CWG member Gary Wockner (Save the Poudre: Poudre Waterkeeper), who requested it be given to City Council and Water Board, along with staff responses to those comments are attached for review (Attachments 5 and 6). The Water Board was involved throughout the entire Policy update process in order to provide City Council with its recommendations. In addition to the outreach with the CWG and Water Board, much of the Policy update information was posted on the City’s website, a landscape preference survey was conducted with a Utilities customer online survey panel, and presentations were given to 12 other City boards and interested organizations (22 groups were contacted). A letter from the Larimer County Board of County Commissioners is attached for review (Attachment 7). Through these various public outreach efforts, the three levels of the public engagement spectrum (inform and consult, involve and collaborate) were employed. Opportunities were provided in all these efforts for individuals to provide comments on the Policy update, which provided few comments which were similar to the CWG and Water Board input. Given this level of public outreach and since additional outreach was not requested during the January 10, 2012 work session, no additional outreach was performed. ATTACHMENTS 1. January 10, 2012 City Council Work Session Summary 2. Response to City Council Work Session Feedback 3. Water Board Recommendation 4. Water Board Minutes (relevant portion from July 19, 2012 meeting) 5. Save the Poudre Letter 6. Response to Save the Poudre Letter 7. Larimer County Board of Commissioner’s Letter 8. Glossary of Water Resources Terms 9. Powerpoint Presentation Utilities electric · stormwater · wastewater · water 700 Wood Street PO Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522 970.221.6700 970.221.6619 – fax 970.224.6003 – TDD utilities@fcgov.com fcgov.com/utilities M E M O R A N D U M Date: January 11, 2012 To: Mayor and City Councilmembers Through: Darin Atteberry, City Manager Brian Janonis, P.E., Utilities Executive Director From: Kevin R. Gertig, Water Resources & Treatment Operations Manager Dennis A. Bode, P.E., Water Resources Manager Donnie Dustin, P.E., Water Resources Engineer Re: January 10, 2012 Work Session Summary – Water Supply and Demand Management Policy At the January 10 Work Session, Kevin Gertig provided introductions followed by a brief executive summary presentation from Donnie Dustin. The summary presentation highlighted key points on an update to the Water Supply and Demand Management Policy (Policy) from a more comprehensive presentation that was previously provided. Councilmember Kottwitz was absent. Additional staff members present included Brian Janonis, Dennis Bode, and Laurie D’Audney. Consultants to staff present included Lee Rozaklis of AMEC Earth & Environmental, Inc. and Barbara Lewis of Catalyst, Inc. The purpose of the Work Session was to address Council member questions regarding the Policy update and see if the updated Policy was ready for formal consideration. The outcome of the discussion was that the updated Policy needs more explanation and is not ready for adoption. Council Feedback:  Provide a clearer explanation and display of the water supply planning criteria and how they relate to our water supply needs, the size of Halligan Reservoir and our water use and conservation efforts.  Develop a sensitivity analysis on the impacts to the City from more severe droughts.  Provide a description or report on the City’s overall water supply plan.  Include more focus on economic development and water innovation in the Policy.  Provide information about the water districts that serve City citizens.  Include discussion on the relationship of population growth to water supply and demand planning in the Policy. Next Steps:  Staff will work to address the comments and feedback it received and will present this information at another work session with Council. ATTACHMENT 1 Storage # of Winter # of Summer Reserve Month (July) Month Factor Demands Demands 0% 0.0 0.0 5% 0.9 0.4 10% 1.8 0.7 15% 2.8 1.1 20% 3.7 1.5 25% 4.6 1.8 City of Fort Collins Utilities Water Supply and Demand Management Policy Update Response to City Council Feedback from January 10, 2012 Work Session September 19, 2012 The following provides staff responses to the City Council feedback as documented in the work session summary memorandum dated January 11, 2012.  Provide a clearer explanation and display of the water supply planning criteria and how they relate to our water supply needs, the size of Halligan Reservoir and our water use and conservation efforts. The three main planning criteria used to develop the City’s water supply system are the drought criterion, storage reserve factor and planning demand level. These criteria determine the amount of water supplies and/or facilities the City needs (e.g., the amount of storage required) and should be somewhat conservative to account for uncertainties in water supply planning. The following describes each of these criteria separately. Drought Criterion The drought criterion defines the level of reliability for the City’s water supply system. In general, water supply systems yield less in more severe droughts. For example, a water supply system that can provide 30,000 acre-feet of water through a 1-in-50 year drought might only be able to provide 20,000 acre-feet during a 1-in-100 year drought. The City has used a 1-in-50 year drought criterion since the 1988 Water Supply Policy. This criterion has provided a reliable supply system to date, but not without issues during the early 2000s drought. Storage Reserve Factor A storage reserve factor is a criterion to have a certain percent of annual demand in storage through the design drought criterion (1-in-50 year drought). This storage reserve provides a short-term supply to address emergency situations, such as pipeline shutdowns (which can and have occurred during drought conditions). Acquiring storage in the Poudre Basin for meeting the storage reserve would help diversify the City’s water supply system, which is highly reliant on CBT storage. The storage reserve factor can be equated to the number of months of demand that can be met as shown in the following table: ATTACHMENT 2 1 Reliability Halligan Size Criterion (acre-feet) 1-in-50 9,000 1-in-100 12,400 1-in-500 28,300 Planning Demand Level The planning demand level is the amount of demand the water supply system should be developed to meet. Since acquiring water supplies takes many years, projecting future demands is required to determine which supplies and/or facilities need to be acquired. The planning demand level is measured in gallons per capita per day (GPCD) and is used along with projected population and large contractual use needs to determine future demand levels (and thus water supplies and/or facilities to acquire). The planning demand level can be higher than current use or water conservation goals to account for uncertainties in water supply planning that might reduce the yield of the City’s water supplies. The City’s current average water use is 150 GPCD and the 2009 Water Conservation Plan has a goal to reduce use to 140 GPCD by the year 2020.  Develop a sensitivity analysis on the impacts to the City from more severe droughts. The specific request was to provide a sensitivity analysis for greater droughts and what that would do for some of the City’s needs and requirements. Staff conducted model runs to determine the size of Halligan Reservoir required to meet the reliability criterion at the 1-in-50, 1-in-100 and 1-in-500 year drought levels. The results indicate the following sizes of Halligan required: All model runs were made with the projected Water Utility service area population in 2050 of approximately 165,100, a 150 GPCD planning demand level and maintaining a 15% storage reserve factor. As another means of describing drought sensitivity, a model run was made with the same demands (165,100 population and 150 GPCD) and 9,000 acre-feet of storage at Halligan through the 1-in-500 year drought. The results indicate water supply shortages of about 10,200 acre-feet or about 27% of future average demands and all reservoirs would be drained (i.e., no storage reserve).  Provide a description or report on the City’s overall water supply plan. In general, the City’s water supply plan for meeting future projected water demands is to acquire additional storage through the Halligan Reservoir enlargement project and some operational gravel pit storage, as well as acquiring some additional agricultural water rights through the City’s raw water requirements. The additional storage will allow the City to better manage its existing (and future) water rights that have been acquired over many years, which will increase the firm yield of the City’s current water supply system for meeting projected demands as well as providing other benefits. The City will also explore other ways of increasing its water supplies, such as entering into water sharing arrangements with agricultural entities. A more thorough description of the City’s water ATTACHMENT 2 2 supply plan will be included in the Policy update summary report, which will be provided once the updated Policy is approved.  Include more focus on economic development and water innovation in the Policy. The draft updated Policy presented at the January 10, 2012 work session mentioned “the social benefits of having a reliable and high quality water supply for health and safety, economic prosperity and healthy landscapes, as well as a healthy natural environment” and “considering the effects (developing water supplies) has to our local and regional economies”. This language, along with some additional language that has been added to the introduction of the revised draft updated Policy, emphasizes the importance of economic development and water innovation.  Provide information about the water districts that serve City citizens. The water districts that serve City citizens include the East Larimer County (ELCO), Fort Collins Loveland, West Fort Collins and Sunset Water Districts as shown in the attached map. Currently, these districts serve about 21% of households within the current City limits and about 27% of households within the City’s Growth Management Area (GMA). By the year 2035, it is anticipated that these districts will serve about 35% of households within the City’s GMA. Although the area these districts serve is about 45% of the existing City limits and about 55% of the GMA, the majority of the City’s households are within the City of Fort Collins’ Water Utility service area. Most of the water supplies these districts currently use are from the Colorado-Big Thompson (CBT) project, which is delivered to their water treatment plant via Horsetooth Reservoir. In recent years, some of these districts have acquired agricultural rights within the Poudre River basin and converted them to municipal use. These rights can be taken off the Poudre River in summer months through the Pleasant Valley Pipeline. The districts will continue to acquire and convert additional agricultural rights in the Poudre River basin, as well as develop storage capacity to manage these rights and provide drought storage. Several of these districts are actively acquiring gravel pits storage in the Poudre River basin and the Fort Collins Loveland Water District is a participant in the Northern Integrated Supply Project (NISP).  Include discussion on the relationship of population growth to water supply and demand planning in the Policy. The revised draft Policy update now includes a section (Section 1.4) that describes the relationship of population growth to water supply and demand planning. ATTACHMENT 2 3 Utilities — Water Board Cityof 1(11) Wood St. I ‘C) Box dl() Fort CoLLins Fort Coflins CO 80522 tcyov.o,n fax MEMORANDUM DATI: August 16, 2012 TO: Mayor Karen Weitkunat and City Councilmembers FROM: Water Board SëBalderson, Chairperson, and Steve Malcrs, Vice Chairperson) CC: Brian Janonis, Utilities Executive I)irector Darin Atteberry, City Manager SUBJECT: Water Board Recommendations for the Water Supply and Demand Management Policy Update The Water Board is writing to inform City Council Members about the update to the Water Supply and Demand Management Policy (Policy). Executive Summary The Water Board reviewed the Policy at its July 19, 2012 meeting and after discussion unanimously approved the Policy, which includes the following criteria: • Drought criterion of 1 -in-50 year drought — This value has been used previously and is reasonable given experience and a review of guidelines of other municipalities. • Planning demand level of 150 gallons per capita per day (GPCD) — This level of use represents approximate Fort Collins demand subsequent to the drought of 2002 and therefore is a logical planning level. The previous updated Policy recommended 162 GPCD. • Storage Reserve Factor (SRF) of 20% of annual demand through a 1 -in-50 drought — This is an increase over the 15% SRF that was previously recommended, due primarily to uncertainty in potential extreme scenarios, and represents approximately 1.5 months of summer water usage and 3.7 months of winter water usage. Although the Water Board approved the updated Policy, it wishes to emphasize the importance of interrelated studies, plans, and City efforts, and the need to fulfill updates to these documents (updates are referred to in the Policy). Additional comments are provided in the following section. Background The update to the Policy utilized a lengthy process involving a citizens’ work group in 2011 and several presentations to the Water Board. The Water Board subsequently approved the Policy at ATTACHMENT 3 1 Fort Cityof CoLlins its November 17, 2011 meeting. I[owevcr, during the meeting and prior to voting to approve the policy, the Water Board was informed that changes to important criteria in the policy may result iii delays and additional cost to the I lalligan permitting elThrt; consequently, the Water Board felt that it had little choice hut tO accept the criteria used in the permitting. City Council did not feel the Policy was ready for adoption at its January 10, 2012 work session and provided staff with recommendations for addressing Council concerns. Council specifically questioned the use of a planning demand level of 162 GPCD. Subsequent to the November 17, 2011 meeting, the Water Board was informed by stall that the criteria in the Policy arc not required to agree with the Halligan permitting process and the US Army Corps oC Engineers will revisit the design numbers prior to the issuance of the I)rall lnvironmental Impact Statement (DEIS). Although the Water Board approved the updated Policy, it wishes to emphasize the importance of interrelated studies, plans, and City efforts, and the need to fulfill updates to these documents (updates arc referred to in the Policy): The study on which the 1-in-So year drought is based was completed in 1985. Although this study included an analysis of paleohydrology (tree rings) to consider a wide range of possible hydrology sceiarios, it would be beneficial to include recent droughts (including 2002 and 2012), wet years (in particuLar 2011), and consider potential climate change impacts (such as indicated in the Front Range Climate Change Vulnerability Study, 2012, which was partially funded by the City). • Water Conservation Plan, February 12, 2009. This plan is required by the State of Colorado and is updated every seven years. The conservation goal presented in the Plan is 140 GPCD. It is important to recognize that conservation goals typically are more aggressive than planning demand levels such as the 150 GPCD level in the updated Policy. Although Water Board members generally agree that supporting a conservation ethic is important, several members expressed concern that increased water use efficiency ultimately will limit the “slack” in the system, which may result in challenges to further reducing water use during a drought. In particular, residential outdoor water use has been reduced by approximately 50% since the 2002 drought and additional evaluation may be required to understand impacts of additional savings on City and customer landscapes. The Water Conservation Plan will be updated in the next few years and will benefit from data collected up to that point. • Water Supply Shortage Response Plan, March 20, 2003. This plan does not take into account the updated Policy. Measured lower water use levels also shift the starting conditions from which a response plan can be based. The Colorado Water Conservation Board has recently published a number of guidelines and tools that can be used when planning for drought response. • City implementation of Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI). AMI is being phased in and will soon allow Utilities to collect water and electric use data on hourly or more frequent basis. This infonuation will be helpful in evaluating water use efficiency and ultimately serve as a mechanism to monitor conservation measures and customer response to weather, drought, and other factors. Although the Water Board approved changes to the WSDM Policy, there is some concern about the uncertainty in future scenarios. For example, Fort Collins receives its water from two ATTACHMENT 3 2 Ft°oL[jns sources (the Poudre River and the Colorado-Big Thompson Project) and a prolonged outage from either source, in particular during a severe drought, may exceed the criteria in the updated Policy. I lixtorical events such as the 1976 Big Thompson flood, landslides that (liSrUpt water supply, and the recent fires and subsequent disruption of Poudre river supply demonstrate that providing certainty in water supply requires using planning criteria that recognize uncertainty and provide redundancy in water supplies. Although the Policy has served the City well and the recent updates reflect new information, it is important to consider the relatioHship of the Policy to the above plans and efforts. The Water Board hopes that this summary information helps City Council understand the updated Policy as well as the need to remain vigilant in its effort to update other water-related plans. Again, such updates are anticipated by the Policy and should be addressed by staff as resources allow. ATTACHMENT 3 3 1 Excerpt from Approved Water Board Minutes, July 19, 2012 Water Supply and Demand Management Policy Update (Presentation available on request) Mr. Dustin presented an update on the Water Supply and Demand Management Policy (WSDMP). Staff is seeking the board’s recommendation on appropriate water supply planning criteria. This item goes to Council at an August 28th Work Session and October 2nd Regular Meeting. Mr. Dustin reviewed the updated policy elements: - A community working group was convened; they agree with the majority of the updated Elements; but had divergent views on the water supply planning criteria. - Council did not feel the Policy was ready for adoption as first presented and requested additional information from staff. - The Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) will relook at the water demand changes related to the permitting of Halligan Reservoir prior to issuance of the DEIS. - The 1-in-50-year drought criterion has been used for many years and provided a reliable supply of water. - The Storage Reserve Factor (SRF) will provide an emergency supply and lessen our dependency on CBT water. - The Planning Demand Level is the level of demand to plan our future water supply system to meet and can be higher than a water conservation goal to account for planning uncertainties. Staff advocated for maintaining the 1-in-50-year drought criterion. At their April meeting, the Water Supply Committee recommended a planning demand level of 150 gallons per capital per day (gpcd) and a 20 percent Storage Reserve Factor. Board discussion: Would fracking, energy extraction, and the water use involved in those processes ever affect our water rights? A board member would like to see this addressed in the Policy. The issue of fracking is not addressed in the Policy at this time and has not been discussed with the community working group, the Board, or Council. The City has not given any water knowingly to support fracking activities and has received the directive not to furnish water for these activities. A committee of Council is studying this issue. Mr. Dustin added that the Policy focuses the City’s surplus raw water use mainly for agricultural and instream flow purposes. The Water Board was asked to have two board members participate on the new Oil and Gas Committee. Board Members Bovee and Brown Brian volunteered to serve. The board discussed submitting additional names. 1-in-50-year drought criterion: Board members are concerned that the criterion is based on a 1985 study. With climate change and other influencing factors, when will the criteria be addressed based on more current conditions? All the facts on climate change are not in yet, but Mr. Dustin did not think that adding additional years to the 1985 drought study would change the drought criterion significantly. The study looked at tree-ring and other types of data designed to capture many types of drought indicators. In the next iteration of the Policy (in about ten years), staff will look further into climate change impacts on water supply planning. ATTACHMENT 4 2 Planning Demand Level (PDL): A board member feels 150 gpcd is a good target. 150 gpcd versus 140 gpcd as stated in the Water Conservation Plan: Belief in the ability to achieve 140 gpcd, which is a goal, was based on natural attrition of water use through fixture changes and a comprehensive list of ideas. It will come back to the Water Board in the next few years, as a new plan must be submitted to the State every 7 years. Storage Reserve Factor (SRF): A board member feels there is more value in a higher SRF to provide a margin of water during times of drought. Whether the SRF is set at 15 percent or 20 percent, it feels like an arbitrary number. The board would rather know how the factor fits into the calculations. Does the fire impact our sense of how much reserve we need? Senior water rights provide a base amount of water. Is it better to have a work session with Council to talk through some of these factors than submit recommendations? The Board can proceed as they see fit. It takes a long time to schedule an item on Council’s agenda and could account for a six month delay. Staff is satisfied with the new data and the collaborative process that was used to collect it from various stakeholders. Mr. Dustin noted this is a complex system and difficult to explain. The next planned update will take place in 2020 or as directed by the Utilities Executive Director (as stated in the Policy). Discussion on the motion: A board member is not good with the 20 percent SRF and doesn’t know how to get to the right number, but recommends future discussion on this. Circumstances such as the fire can introduce new data points. He might suggest adding language, “understanding uncertainty with this number and additional study will occur”. Another board member is okay with the number now that it’s been raised and noted that a memo to Council gives the board the flexibility to speak to all considerations. The board does not have a lot of influence over the proper sizing of Halligan Reservoir, but can advocate for additional study of the right Storage Reserve Factor. Vice Chairperson Malers suggested a friendly amendment, “It is recommended that recent events be considered, such as the fire, and the 2002 and 2012 droughts be used to further evaluate these numbers.” The future study should be included in the memo to Council. The memo will be due to Mr. Dustin no later than August 17th to include in the City Council work session materials. Motion: Board Member Garner moved that the Water Board revise the draft Policy to use a planning demand level of 150 gpcd, a 1-in-50-year drought criterion, and a 20 percent Storage Reserve Factor, and prepare a letter of support to City Council for the draft Policy, with assistance as needed from staff, and consider it for approval by the Board at its August meeting. Board Member Eccleston seconded the motion. ATTACHMENT 4 3 Vote on the motion: It passed unanimously. Amended Motion: Board Member Garner moved that the Water Board revise the draft Policy to use a planning demand level of 150 gpcd, a 1-in-50-year drought criteria, and a 20 percent Storage Reserve Factor, and prepare a letter of support to City Council for the draft Policy, with assistance as needed from staff, and consider it for approval by the Board at its August meeting. It is recommended that recent events, such as the fire, and the 2002 and 2012 droughts be used to further evaluate these numbers. Board Member Eccleston seconded the motion. ATTACHMENT 4 October 17, 2011 TO: Fort Collins City Council and Fort Collins Water Board FROM: Save the Poudre: Poudre Waterkeeper Statement on City of Fort Collins Water Supply and Demand Management Policy Save the Poudre (STP) greatly appreciates the opportunity to participate in the City’s Water Supply and Demand Management Policy (Policy) update in 2011. STP 100% supports the City of Fort Collins’ efforts to have a secure and sustainable water supply for the future. STP is especially interested in ways this policy can be implemented to also meet goals supporting environmental sustainability. The proposed policy has made some incremental progress forward on the path towards sustainability. In specific, the proposed policy has made the following incremental but important changes:  lowered the GPCD rate.  increased wording support for agricultural water sharing.  increased wording support for using surplus water for instream flows in the Poudre River. We look forward to continuing to work with the City of Fort Collins to help make sure the wording in the policy is implemented into actions. In addition to these changes in the policy, Save the Poudre would like to offer additional recommendations for how these and other sections of the policy could be further improved to more substantively move Fort Collins’ water supply policy along the path towards sustainability. Corresponding to the sections in the policy, our recommendations for improvement include the following: SECTION: Introduction and Objective The section states that the policy will "...meet our present needs and those of future generations without compromising the ecosystems upon which we depend." We ask the City how it can achieve this goal at the same time the City proposes to grow its population, build a larger dam and reservoir in endangered species habitat on the North Fork of the Poudre River, and take more water out of two of the most endangered rivers in America – the Cache la Poudre River and Upper Colorado River? The language in this section sounds very green, but if the actions are not likewise green, it may appear as “greenwashing.” We ask the City to consider if the language in this section should be changed, or if the policy should be changed to meet the language? ATTACHMENT 5 1 SECTION 1.1: Water Use Efficiency Goals for Treated Water Use STP believes that the water use efficiency goal of 140 gallons per capita daily (gpcd) is too high. Water use in Fort Collins has already dipped below 140, and will likely continue to fall. Some new urbanism developments in the Southwest demonstrate sustainable water use rates as low as 90 gpcd. Fort Collins should set a lower goal to shoot for – Fort Collins should lead forward on a path of aggressive water conservation that more responsibly and sustainably uses this precious resource. SECTION 2.1.1: Planning Demand Level Though the staff and consultants repeatedly tried, it was never adequately explained why the planning goal of 162 gpcd is so much higher than the water use goal of 140. There was concern expressed in the meetings that this number was inflated for purposes of supporting the Halligan enlargement EIS process. STP believes the planning goal and the water use goal should both be lower, and should both be based on sound scientific calculations. SECTION 2.1.2 and 2.1.3: Drought Criterion and Safety Factor When the committee discussed drought criterion and safety factor, the exercise was over-simplified – STP does not believe the committee was given adequate information to make a judgment on these numbers. The concepts of drought criterion, safety factory, planning demand level, and climate change were all inconsistently lumped together during the meetings and discussion. There was discussion in the meetings of “safety factor creep” – i.e., that all the numbers were being over- inflated non-scientifically. In addition, with the high water use goal, the drought criterion, the safety factor, the higher planning demand level, and the City's water response to climate change (more conservative and more proposed storage), it seems like the policy has a built-in quintuple safety factor. STP will require further scientific review of these numbers to evaluate if they are accurate. Additionally, the concept of “drought criterion” was not sufficiently addressed in the meetings. A city’s water supply portfolio is a critical factor in addressing drought – if a city has a secure portfolio with lots of senior direct flow rights, it is much more impervious to drought. This section, and the discussion in the meetings, over-simplifies the complexity of drought’s interaction with water supplies. More scientific analysis will be needed by Save the Poudre to evaluate the City’s drought criterion. SECTION 2.2 Climate Change “Climate change” was mentioned 20 times in the policy. Interestingly, in the former policy, “climate change” was mentioned zero times. Climate change was repeatedly used as a scare tactic in the committee meetings and in the policy wording – and for a good reason, climate change is scary. However, what is a rational non-fear-based response? Should we make reservoirs larger? Or should we lower water use rates? Which solution leads to greater resiliency, more adaptability, and more economic success in an uncertain future world? Consider this analogy – if oil is getting scarce and expensive, should your next car be a Hummer or a Volt? Should you invest in wider roads or should you invest in public transportation, electric car plug- ATTACHMENT 5 2 in stations, and bicycle routes? And then consider the same question for water – if climate change will cause water to get more scarce and expensive, what is a rational response? More bluegrass lawns and bigger dams? Or wide-scale water conservation and xeriscaping? STP has two recommendations for addressing the threat of climate change in the policy: 1. Use the best available science, quantify the likely impact, and then include that impact with margins of error in one spot in the policy. (As it is now, the policy just throws around the threat of climate change 20 times, sometimes without scientific backing.) 2. STP contends that Fort Collins will be more resilient, adaptable, and more economically competitive in the future if it significantly cuts its use of water and begins switching away from a high water-use economy. This policy update only offers one response to the threat of climate change – more water and bigger facilities. STP believes that other more sustainable responses to climate change were not adequately discussed or presented as options during the committee meetings. SECTION 2.4.2: Acquisition and/or Sharing of Agricultural Water Supplies STP believes that the potential to share water with farmers will be the water supply source of the future for Colorado. Over 80% of the water in the Poudre River is used by farmers – cooperatively tapping this source will be the primary path forward as demand for water increases. This section does not fully address this potential, nor does it fully address the conversation in the meetings. Sharing water with agriculture was supported by everyone in the meetings and should be a large part of Fort Collins future water supply; this section makes it more of an after-thought. SECTION 2.4.3: Facilities Because the policy's water use rates are high, planning demand level is high, drought criterion is not fully substantiated, safety factor is not fully substantiated, and response to climate change is to be more conservative, this section therefore assumes the need for more storage. STP will require a more thorough scientific analysis in order to evaluate this assumption. In addition, if more storage is required, additional options should be considered that were not mentioned in the policy including but not limited to “using farms as reservoirs” through leasing and sharing arrangements both for firm supply and for drought supply. As an example, Fort Collins weathered the worst one-year drought in history (2002/3) by leasing water from farmers – a proven and inexpensive option for future water supply that required no facility at all. As another example, the purchase of senior direct flow rights would also minimize the need for enlarged facilities. SECTION 4.2: Instream Flows This section is still too soft. STP believes that using the City’s surplus water for instream flows needs to be more of an imperative. Instead of the wording in the section that says "encourage," "pursue," and "explore," STP strongly recommends the City to work more aggressively to get it done. ATTACHMENT 5 3 MISSED SECTION: Population Growth Although a few people in the committee wanted to talk about population growth and its impacts on water supply planning and farms, the facilitators/consultants/staff did not allow this discussion to occur. STP believes that any discussion of future water supply planning should include information about population growth because it is the main factor influencing the need for more water and the destruction of northern Colorado’s agricultural landscape. Specifically, discussion should include: 1. How population growth is driving water supply policy. 2. How population growth is a policy that the City Council can consider, address, and control just as other cities in the Southwest have done. 3. How population growth and sprawl are inter-related – higher density human habitation (residential and commercial) uses significantly less water than sprawl and is significantly less expensive to supply water to than sprawl. 4. How population growth is also destroying northern Colorado's agricultural landscapes and agricultural economy. MISSED DISCUSSION: Most of the conversation in the meetings was about the details of the policy sections, but there was very little conversation about “cost” and “environmental impacts.” Because the City is involved in a permitting process for a proposed enlarged reservoir, cost and environmental impacts will be two of the biggest considerations evaluated during that federal permitting process. For example, many federal permitting precedents in the U.S. have occurred where water projects have been stopped because of their environmental impacts. Additionally, there are federal permitting precedents where the lowest costing project was denied a permit. Save the Poudre believes the policy update should have spent considerably more time on these two topics. Again, Save The Poudre thanks the City for the opportunity to be on the committee and provide input to the City about this important policy. We encourage you to act on our recommendations. We would be happy to help you move forward with these recommendations. Feel free to contact us with any questions. Respectfully, -- Gary Wockner, PhD, Director Save the Poudre: Poudre Waterkeeper http://savethepoudre.org 970-218-8310 ATTACHMENT 5 4 ATTACHMENT 6 ATTACHMENT 6 ATTACHMENT 6 ATTACHMENT 6 ATTACHMENT 6 ATTACHMENT 6 ATTACHMENT 7 1 ATTACHMENT 7 2 ATTACHMENT 7 3 1 City of Fort Collins Utilities Water Supply & Demand Management Policy September 19, 2012 Glossary of Water Resources Terms 1-in-50 Year Drought Criterion - criterion adopted in the current Water Supply and Demand Management Policy that defines the level of risk for the City’s water supply system; a drought is a period of below average runoff that can last one or more years and is often measured by its duration, average annual shortage and cumulative deficit below the average; a 1-in-50 drought corresponds to a dry period that is likely to occur, on average, once every 50 years; although the Poudre River Basin has several drought periods in its recorded history, it is difficult to assess whether any of these droughts were equal in magnitude to a 1-in-50 drought; the 1985 Drought Study developed the 1-in-50 drought used in assessing the Utilities water supply system; this drought period is six years long and has a cumulative deficit of 550,000 acre-feet, which represents annual river volumes that are about 70% of the long-term average for the Poudre River; see also “Statistically Based Drought Analysis” Acceptable Planned Project - refers to a term used in a 2011 report by Western Resource Advocates “Filling the Gap: Commonsense Solutions for Meeting Front Range Water Needs” where it is mentioned that the Halligan and Seaman enlargements have the potential to be Acceptable Planned Projects if urban efficiency measures are implemented first and Poudre River (particularly the North Fork) flows and water quality are protected and/or restored Acre-Foot or Acre-Feet (AF) - volume of water equal to about 326,000 gallons; one acre- foot can supply around three single family homes in Fort Collins per year; for storage comparison the maximum volume of Horsetooth Reservoir is about 150,000 acre-feet Active Capacity - the usable capacity of a reservoir for storage and regulation of inflows and releases that does not include any capacity below the reservoir’s lowest outlet (which is known as dead capacity) Carryover - used in reference to storage; it is the ability to save water in storage for use at a later time, most notably in following years Change in Water Right - used to refer to changing water rights under Colorado water law from agricultural to municipal water use; see also “Legal Return Flows or Return Flow Obligations” Colorado-Big Thompson (CBT) Project - a Bureau of Reclamation project that brings water from the Colorado River basin to the east side of the continental divide via a tunnel and the Big Thompson River to several locations including Horsetooth Reservoir; operated by the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District; Fort Collins Utilities currently owns 18,855 units of the 310,000 total units in the CBT project ATTACHMENT 8 2 Cubic Feet per Second (cfs) - volumetric flow rate equal to one cubic foot flowing every second; for comparison, an average peak flow rate on the Poudre River at the Lincoln Street gage (downtown) is around 1,900 cfs and a median winter-time low flow rate in December at the same location is around 7 cfs CWG - short for Community Working Group; an advisory panel convened by Utilities in 2011 to gather input regarding an update to the Water Supply & Demand Management Policy Direct Flow Rights - water rights that can be taken for direct use, as opposed to storage rights that can be taken for later use; see also “Senior Water Rights” DEIS - short for Draft Environmental Impact Statement; a report detailing the findings of the NEPA permitting process; report can be reviewed by public for their comments which are typically addressed in a Final Environment Impact Statement; see also “NEPA” ELCO - short for East Larimer County Water District; see also “Tri-Districts” FCLWD - short for Fort Collins-Loveland Water District; see also “Tri-Districts” Firm Yield - a measure of the ability of a water supply system to meet water demands through a series of drought years; for the Fort Collins Utilities, this means being able to meet the planning demand level and storage reserve factor through the 1-in-50 year drought criterion; see also “1-in-50 Year Drought Criterion”, “planning demand level” and “storage reserve factor” GPCD - short for gallons per capita per day; a measurement of municipal water use; for the Fort Collins Utilities, gpcd is calculated based on the total annual treated water produced at the Water Treatment Facility for use by all Water Utility customers (minus large contractual customers and other sales or exchange agreements) divided by the estimated population of the Water Utility’s service area and 365 days HSWMP - short for Halligan-Seaman Water Management Project Legal Return Flows or Return Flow Obligations - refers to legal requirements when changing water rights from agricultural to municipal use; this process requires obtaining a decree from Colorado Water Court that involves detailed analysis of the historic agricultural water use, including the water diversions, amount used by the crops, and the return flow patterns of the water not used by the crops; terms in the decree to prevent municipalities from taking more water than was historically taken and replacing return flows in the right amount, location and time to prevent injury to other water rights NEPA - short for National Environmental Policy Act; federal legislation that established environmental policy for the nation; it provides interdisciplinary framework for federal ATTACHMENT 8 3 agencies to prevent environmental damage and contains “action-forcing” procedures to ensure that federal agency decision-makers take environmental factors into account NISP - short for Northern Integrated Supply Project Northern Water or NCWCD - short for Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District (NCWCD); Northern Water operates the Colorado-Big Thompson (CBT) Project and is involved in several other regional water projects on behalf of their participants NPIC - short for North Poudre Irrigation Company; a partner in the Halligan Reservoir enlargement project that supplies water to farmers north of Fort Collins NWCWD - short for North Weld County Water District; see also “Tri-Districts” Planning Demand Level - level of water use (demand) in gpcd used for water supply planning purposes that is a factor in determining the amount of water supplies and/or facilities needed; see also “gpcd” Storage Reserve Factor - refers to a commonly used engineering principle in designing water supply systems to address short-term supply interruptions; for the Fort Collins Utilities, the storage reserve factor incorporates having 20 percent of annual demands in storage through the 1-in-50 drought which equates to about 3.5 months of winter (indoor) demands or 1.5 months of summer demands Senior Water Rights - refers to Colorado water law’s use of the “prior appropriation” or priority system, which dictates that in times of short supply, earlier water rights decrees (senior rights) will get their water before others (junior rights) can begin to use water, often described as “first in time, first in right” Statistically Based Drought Analysis - refers to the 1985 report “Droughts and Their Effect on the Water Supplies for the City of Fort Collins, Colorado” (referred to as the 1985 Drought Study); the report was done primarily to study the effects of prolonged droughts and to define them in terms of the probability of their occurrence; synthetic hydrologic traces were produced based on statistical parameters of the historic data available, which allowed analysis of numerous artificial drought periods and a determination of representative droughts with calculated return frequencies; this report was done in conjunction with water resources experts at Colorado State University Tri-Districts - the combination of the three regional water districts ELCO, FCLWD and NWCWD; these districts share the same water treatment plant called Soldier Canyon Filter Plant, which is located adjacent to Fort Collins Utilities’ Water Treatment Facility Triple Bottom Line - refers to the Utilities for the 21st Century sustainability initiative to consider economic, social and environmental aspects in the decision making process ATTACHMENT 8 4 Water Rights Portfolio - the mix of water rights owned by a water supplier; typically includes water for direct use, as well as for storage for later use; for the Fort Collins Utilities, includes City owned water rights, owned and/or converted shares in agricultural rights, storage rights at Joe Wright Reservoir, and ownership in the CBT project WSDMP - short for Water Supply & Demand Management Policy Yield or Water Rights Yield - refers to the amount of water that is produced from a water right; the yield of water rights vary from year to year depending on the amount of water available (i.e., low or high river runoff) and the priority of the water right; see also “Firm Yield” and “Senior Water Rights” ATTACHMENT 8 1 1 Water Supply & Demand Management Policy Update City Council Meeting October 30, 2012 2 Water Supply & Demand Management Policy Finding the balance! Supply Demand ATTACHMENT 9 2 3 Why Update the Policy? Reliable supplies 0 50 100 150 200 250 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Use (gallons per capita per day - GPCD) Year Fort Collins Utilities - Per Capita Water Use Actual Use Normalized Use GPCD values do not include large contractual use. Use reductions Climate change Surplus supplies Storage 4 Policy Update Process • Community Working Group • Water Board • Additional outreach • City Council Work Session ATTACHMENT 9 3 5 Updated Policy Elements • Introduction: Plan Fort Collins and sustainability alignment • Demand Management – 140 gpcd conservation goal • Water Supply Reliability – Planning Criteria – Additional Supplies and Facilities • Treated and Raw Water Quality • Use of Surplus Raw Water • Regional Cooperation 6 Water Supply Planning Criteria • Determines water supply and/or facility needs – (e.g., amount of storage) • Critical for long-term planning (especially storage at build-out) • Initially used Halligan Reservoir permitting values ATTACHMENT 9 4 7 1) Drought Criterion • Defines level of reliability for supply system • Supplies yield less in more severe droughts • Currently using 1-in-50 year drought 8 2) Storage Reserve Factor • Percent of annual demand in storage (through 1-in-50) • Short-term emergency supply (e.g., pipeline or CBT shutdown) • Diversifies water supply system – Reduces reliance on CBT ATTACHMENT 9 5 9 Storage per Capita Comparison 10 2) Storage Reserve Factor # of # of Storage Winter Summer Reserve Month (July) Month Factor Demands Demands 0% 0.0 0.0 5% 0.9 0.4 10% 1.8 0.7 15% 2.8 1.1 20% 3.7 1.5 25% 4.6 1.8 ATTACHMENT 9 6 11 3) Planning Demand Level (GPCD) • Amount of demand the water supply system should be developed to meet • Lower demand level = less supplies to acquire • Can be greater than conservation goal – Accounts for future uncertainties 12 Potential Uncertainties??? • Modeling does not include: – Climate change – CBT curtailment – Reuse Plan issues – Water quality blending • Supplies could be reduced by: – River administration changes – Competing water rights ATTACHMENT 9 7 13 0 50 100 150 200 250 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Use (gallons per capita per day - GPCD) Year Fort Collins Utilities - Per Capita Water Use Actual Use Normalized Use GPCD values do not include large contractual use. 14 Planning Criteria Changes • Maintain 1-in-50 year drought criterion • Other criteria changes discussed with Water Board • Recommendation: 150 gpcd, 20% storage reserve – Concerned with climate change impacts ATTACHMENT 9 8 15 Criteria: Finding the Balance • Less conservative criteria – If supplies reduced by uncertainties, then higher chance of frequent/intense shortages • More conservative criteria – If supplies minimally reduced by uncertainties, then more reliable and flexible supplies – Other benefits: support local agriculture and stream flows • Recommended criteria tries to achieve balance 16 Policy Update Summary • Provides additional guidance for water supply and demand planning • Community Working Group input helped update policy to address many issues • Key changes: – Reduced water conservation goal – Acknowledge water supply planning criteria • Consider potential effects of climate change – Stronger commitment to using surplus supplies – Plan Fort Collins and sustainability alignment ATTACHMENT 9 9 17 Questions? ATTACHMENT 9 RESOLUTION 2012-099 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS ADOPTING A WATER SUPPLY AND DEMAND MANAGEMENT POLICY WHEREAS, a Water Supply Policy was adopted by the City Council in December 1988 to help direct the acquisition, development, and management of the City’s water supplies since that time; and WHEREAS, a Water Demand Management Policy was adopted by the City Council in April 1992, which set water use goals and provided for measures to help meet those goals; and WHEREAS, in 2003, the City Council approved Resolution 2003-104, adopting a Water Supply and Demand Management Policy to provide guidance regarding the future development and use of the City’s water supplies; and WHEREAS, since that time, there have been significant reductions in the City’s water use; and WHEREAS, it is a high priority of the City to provide an adequate, safe and reliable supply of water for our community, while considering the potential effects of climate change on those supplies; and WHEREAS, managing water use in Fort Collins to reduce impacts to the environments from which the City’s supplies come is an important community value; and WHEREAS, in light of the foregoing, and following discussions with interested citizens, stakeholder groups, the Water Board and City Council, City staff has developed a proposed Fort Collins Water Supply and Demand Management Policy, dated October 2, 2012, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit “A” and incorporated herein by this reference (the “Policy”); and WHEREAS, the concepts and principles to be incorporated into the Policy and a draft of the Policy were presented to, and discussed with, the City Council at a work session on January 10, 2012; and WHEREAS, a draft of the Policy was also presented to, and discussed with, the Water Board at the Board’s July 19, 2012, meeting, and the Board’s recommendations have been incorporated into the Policy attached hereto; and WHEREAS, it is the desire of the City Council to formally adopt and approve the Policy. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS that the City Council hereby adopts the Fort Collins Water Supply and Demand Management Policy, to provide general criteria for City decision making regarding water supply projects, acquisition of water rights, demand management measures, and other water supply and demand related issues. Passed and adopted at an adjourned meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins this 30th day of October A.D. 2012. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk 1 City of Fort Collins Water Supply and Demand Management Policy The City of Fort Collins’ Water Supply and Demand Management Policy provides a foundational framework for water supply and demand management decisions concerning the City’s water supply system. Operational and management actions and decisions by the Water Utility will be consistent with the provisions of this policy. Objective To provide a sustainable and integrated approach to 1) ensuring an adequate, safe and reliable supply of water for the beneficial use by customers and the community and 2) managing the level of demand and the efficient use of a scarce and valuable resource consistent with the preferences of Water Utility customers and in recognition of the region’s semi-arid climate. This objective aligns with the 2010 Plan Fort Collins that provides a comprehensive 25-year vision for the future development of Fort Collins. Policy ENV 21.2 of Plan Fort Collins states, “Abide by Water Supply and Demand Management Policy: Provide for an integrated approach to providing a reliable water supply to meet the beneficial needs of customers and the community while promoting the efficient and wise use of water.” This Water Supply and Demand Management Policy calls for a “sustainable and integrated approach” to water demand and water resources management. Sustainability is defined within the context of the triple-bottom-line decision making in Plan Fort Collins as, “To systematically, creatively, and thoughtfully utilize environmental, human, and economic resources to meet our present needs and those of future generations without compromising the ecosystems upon which we depend.” Aligning with Plan Fort Collins, the Water Utility will take a leadership role by incorporating the triple-bottom-line in its management of water supply and demand. When this core value is applied to the use and development of our valuable water resources, the Utility will strive to:  Avoid, minimize or offset impacts to our environment  Consider the social benefits of having a reliable and high quality water supply for health and safety, economic prosperity and healthy landscapes, as well as a healthy natural environment  Analyze the cost to provide such supplies, while also considering the effects it has to our local and regional economies Managing water supply and demand is a dynamic process that evolves along with changes in data management and technology, legal and political environments, economic development and water innovation, and as the State’s population continues to increase. Given these factors, it is important to maintain an up-to-date effective policy that is based on current data. The policy’s terms and conditions should be reviewed and updated by 2020, or sooner if desired by the City Council or the Utilities Executive Director. EXHIBIT A 2 1.0 WATER USE EFFICIENCY AND DEMAND MANAGEMENT The City views its water use efficiency program as an important proactive response to supply variability and climate change. Elements of the City’s conservation program include reducing indoor demand through improved technology, leak reduction and behavior change and reducing outdoor demand through improved irrigation efficiency and reasonable changes in landscaping. The City believes water use efficiency is of vital importance for many reasons, including to:  Foster a conservation ethic and eliminate waste  Demonstrate a commitment to sustainability  Provide water for multiple beneficial purposes  Reduce the need for capital expansion projects and certain operational costs  Prepare for potential impacts of climate change 1.1 Water Use Efficiency Goals for Treated Water Use The City’s 2009 Water Conservation Plan1 established a goal of reducing the City’s treated water use to 140 gallons per capita per day (gpcd)2 by the year 20203. The City will utilize water use efficiency measures and programs with the aim of reducing its water use to an average of 140 gpcd, subject to 1) continuing study of the water requirements of the City’s urban landscaping, 2) impacts on water demand due to changes in land use policies, building codes and housing trends, 3) additional studies on climate change, and 4) changes in the water use goal as may be adjusted by any subsequent water conservation plans. This water use goal is subject to change as discussed above and is intended as a goal that can be met while sustaining reasonable indoor and outdoor values of the City. The per capita peak daily demand4 will be reduced or maintained to be no more than 350 gpcd by the year 2020, but may be adjusted by any subsequent water conservation plans. 1.2 Water Use Efficiency Program Policy ENV 21.2 of Plan Fort Collins states, “Conservation measures should be implemented in accordance with the Water Conservation Plan and periodically adjusted to reflect new and effective conservation measures.” The City will optimize water use efficiency through the programs and measures specified in its Water Conservation Plan. These programs and measures include educational programs, incentive programs, regulatory measures and operational measures. Specific measures and programs are outlined in the Water Conservation Plan. 1 State guidelines are changing the terminology of Water Conservation Plans to Water Use Efficiency Plans, and likewise conservation is being changed to water use efficiency. For purposes of this policy, water use efficiency is referred to as water conservation; however, the terminology may be used interchangeably. 2 Gallon per capita per day (gpcd) calculations are based on the total treated water produced at the Water Treatment Facility for use by Water Utility customers (minus large contractual customers and other sales or exchange arrangements) divided by the estimated population of the Water Utility’s service area. 3 This goal represents an 8.5% reduction in water use compared to Fort Collins’ 2006-2010 average daily water use of 153 gpcd. It represents a 29% reduction in water use compared to Fort Collins’ pre-drought (1992-2001) average daily water use of 197 gpcd. 4 The peak daily demand is 2.5 times the average daily use water conservation goal and is based on historic ratios of average to peak daily use. 3 The overall effectiveness of these measures and programs will be evaluated on a regular basis and if necessary, modifications will be made to increase effectiveness or to modify the City’s water use goal. An annual water conservation report will be prepared to describe the status and results of the various measures and programs. The Water Conservation Plan will be updated at a minimum of every seven years, as currently required by the State of Colorado. 1.3 Water Rate Structures The City will have stable water rate structures with transparent accountability for all classes of customers. The water rate structures will provide an economic incentive to use water efficiently while also providing sufficient revenue for operational and maintenance purposes. Examples of structures that may be utilized include 1) tiered rates with increasing prices as water use increases, 2) seasonal blocks with higher rates during the irrigation season, and 3) water budget approaches based on appropriate targets for individual customers. The City will annually review the effectiveness of its water rate structures as part of its financial analyses regarding Water Utility revenue, expenses and rates. Specific studies or changes to the rate structure may be made upon identification of the need to revise it. Any changes to the rate structure will require City Council approval. 1.4 Population Growth Population growth is an important factor in determining the City’s water supply needs, since increases in population generally increase the need for additional supplies. Population growth projections and associated water demand are mostly a function of land use planning, development densities, annexation and other growth related issues that can be affected by City Council decisions. The Water Utility will continue to work closely with the Current Planning Department, which provides population projections that may be effected by changes in City policies related to growth. 2.0 WATER SUPPLY RELIABILITY The City needs to meet future water demands in an efficient and reliable manner. Policy ENV 21.2 of Plan Fort Collins states, “Water supply reliability criteria will take into consideration potential effects of climate change and other vulnerabilities. Water supplies and related facilities shall be acquired or developed after careful consideration of social, economic and environmental factors.” One of the Water Utility’s primary objectives is to provide an adequate and reliable supply of water to its customers and other water users. Key principles that need to be considered when addressing water supply for municipal use include:  Providing water supply system reliability and flexibility  Considering a broad portfolio of resources that do not overly depend on any one source  Maintaining a water storage reserve for unforeseen circumstances  Maintaining water supply infrastructure and system security  Being a steward of the City’s water resources, which includes watershed management  Collaboration with the City’s regional water providers and users  Maintaining awareness of state, national and worldwide trends and adapting as needed to meet our customer needs 4 2.1 Water Supply Planning Criteria An integral component of the City’s water supply planning efforts is to maintain computer models that estimate the yield of its existing and future water supplies. The following water supply planning criteria are key parameters used in these models that provide a foundation for planning future supplies. 2.1.1 Planning Demand Level The reliability of the City’s water supply should be maintained to meet an average per capita demand level of 150 gpcd5,6. This planning level provides a value that is higher than the water use goal to address uncertainties inherent in water supply planning. It is important to have a planning number that can be used for development of long-range water supply facilities. Because water supply system infrastructure may take many years to permit and construct, it is desirable to use conservative assumptions to size facilities that may be needed for the long-term. A planning demand level should be larger than the water use goal, primarily because of the uncertainties related to projected water demands, yields from specific water rights, climate change and other unanticipated effects. 2.1.2 Drought Criterion The reliability and capacity of the City’s water supply system should be maintained to meet the planning level demand during at least a l-in-50 year drought event in the Cache la Poudre River Basin. Water rights should be acquired and facilities (including storage capacity) should be planned and constructed sufficiently ahead of the time to maintain the 1-in-50 year drought criterion, considering the time required to obtain water court decrees and permit and construct diversion, conveyance and/or storage facilities. In using this criterion, the City seeks to provide a balance among water supply reliability, the financial investment necessary to secure such reliability and the environmental impacts associated with water storage and diversions. 2.1.3 Storage Reserve Factor The City’s water supply planning criteria will include a storage reserve factor that equates to 20% of annual demand in storage through a 1-in-50 year drought7,8. This factor provides an additional layer of protection intended to address dimensions of risk outside of the other 5 The 150 gpcd value is based upon the normalized 2006-2011 average daily use. 6 The average per capita demand planning level is used for facility planning purposes. Gallons per capita per day (gpcd) calculations are based on the total treated water produced at the Water Treatment Facility for use by Water Utility customers (minus large contractual customers and other sales or exchange arrangements) divided by the estimated population of the Water Utility’s service area. This number is multiplied by population projections developed by the City’s Planning Department to calculate future water demands. 7 For the Water Utility, 20% of annual demand is equivalent to around 3.7 months of average winter demand and about 1.5 months of average July demand. 8 In meeting this factor, it is assumed that the City cannot rely on the existing Colorado-Big Thompson Project (CBT) carryover program. This program currently allows each CBT unit holder to carry over up to 20% of its CBT unit ownership in CBT reservoirs for use in the following year. However, this program has varied over the years and there is no guarantee that it will be continued in the future. 5 reliability criteria, including emergency situations (i.e. pipeline failure) and droughts that exceed a 1-in-50 year drought. 2.2 Climate Change Climate change could significantly impact the reliability of the City’s supplies and/or the amount of water required to maintain existing landscapes9; however, there is a great deal of uncertainty related to current climate change projections along the Colorado Front Range and its impact on municipal demands and water supply systems. The City’s planning criteria and assumptions are conservative in part to account for climate change based on the information to date. The City will continue to monitor climate change information and, if necessary, will revise its water supply planning criteria and assumptions to ensure future water supply reliability. 2.3 Water Supply Shortage Response Plan The City will maintain a plan for responding to situations where there are projected water supply shortages, either because of severe drought conditions (i.e., greater than a 1-in-50 year drought) or because of disruptions in the raw water delivery system. When needed, the Water Supply Shortage Response Plan will be activated based on the projected water supply shortage. This plan will include measures to temporarily reduce water use through media campaigns, regulations, restrictions, rate adjustments and other measures. The plan may also include provisions to temporarily supplement the supply through interruptible water supply contracts, leases, exchanges and operational measures. Reducing the City’s water use during supply short situations may lessen adverse impacts to irrigated agriculture and flows in the Poudre River. The plan will be reviewed periodically and, if necessary, updated to reflect changes in the City’s water use and its water supply system. 2.4 Additional Supplies and Facilities In order to meet projected growth within the Water Utility’s service area, as well as maintain system reliability and operational flexibility, the City will need to increase the firm yield of its current water supply system. The following policy elements address ways of meeting these needs. 2.4.1 Raw Water Requirements for New Development The City shall require developers to turn over water rights as approved by the City, or cash in- lieu-of water rights, such that supplies can be made available to meet or exceed the demands of the Water Utility’s treated water customers during a l-in-50 year drought. Cash collected shall be used to increase the firm yield and long-term reliability of the City’s supply system. Potential uses of cash include acquiring additional water rights, entering into 9 Current research indicates that changes in precipitation in this area are uncertain but that temperatures will increase and therefore it is likely that runoff will come earlier and in a shorter amount of time, precipitation may more often come as rain, and higher temperatures will increase outdoor demands and change growing seasons for existing landscapes. 6 water sharing arrangements with agricultural entities, purchasing or developing storage facilities and pursuing other actions toward developing a reliable water supply system. Consideration will be given to providing a diversified system that can withstand the annual variability inherent in both water demands and supplies. The balance between water rights being turned over and cash received by developers should be monitored and adjusted as needed to develop a reliable and effective system. 2.4.2 Acquisition and/or Sharing of Agricultural Water Supplies The City currently owns and will acquire additional water rights that are decreed only for agricultural use. The City will periodically need to change these water rights from agricultural use to municipal use to meet its water supply needs. The City will change those rights that come from areas upon which the City is growing, or from areas where the irrigation has ceased, when needed. For water rights that were derived from irrigated agricultural lands that remain in viable agricultural areas, the City will refrain from converting agricultural decrees to municipal use as long as other water supply options are available or other factors make it prudent to do so. The City will also work towards water sharing arrangements that provide water for municipal uses when critically needed and that allow for continued agricultural use of water at other times, in a manner that preserves irrigated agricultural lands over the long-term. 2.4.3 Facilities The City will pursue the acquisition or development of facilities that are needed to manage the City’s water rights in an efficient and effective manner and enhance the City’s ability to meet demands through at least a 1-in-50 year drought. These facilities may include storage capacity, diversion structures, pipelines or other conveyances, pumping equipment, or other facilities that increase the firm yield of the City’s supply system. Additional storage will be acquired or constructed considering 1) the City’s return flow obligations incurred from changes of water rights, 2) the City’s need to carryover water from wet years to dry years in order to meet its drought criteria, 3) operational flexibility, redundancy and reliability of the City’s water supply system, and 4) potential multiple-use benefits (i.e., environmental flows, recreational uses, etc.). The City will analyze the potential environmental impacts of developing storage along with other associated costs and benefits, and will develop that storage in a manner that avoids, minimizes or offsets the effects to the environment. Storage capacity options include the enlargement of Halligan Reservoir, the development of local gravel pits into storage ponds, the acquisition of storage capacity in new or existing reservoirs, the development of aquifer storage, or some combination of the above. 3.0 TREATED AND RAW WATER QUALITY Policy ENV 21.1 of Plan Fort Collins states, “Develop and adhere to drinking water quality standards, treatment practices, and procedures that provide the highest level of health protection that can be realistically achieved.” In addition, the City will take an active role in protecting the quality of water in the various watersheds from which the City’s raw water is derived and maintaining the taste and quality of the City’s treated water. This may include mixing of the City’s source waters to maintain high water quality and require collaboration with private, county, state and federal land owners and managers. The acquisition, development, and 7 management of the City’s raw and treated water will be consistent with the City’s Drinking Water Quality Policy and other applicable policies related to watershed protection and water treatment. 4.0 USE OF SURPLUS RAW WATER The City will use its existing supplies to meet municipal obligations with the following priorities: 1) to meet water demands by the City’s treated water customers, and 2) to meet the City’s raw water needs as well as other City raw water obligations. Raw water needs include use for such purposes as irrigation of City parks, golf courses, cemeteries and other greenbelt areas. Additional raw water obligations include primarily water transfers to other entities because of agreements or exchanges made to manage the water supply system more effectively. Water not needed for the above purposes is referred to as surplus water and may be made available to others in accordance with decrees and other applicable policies. Since the City plans its water supply system using a 1-in-50 year drought criterion, it typically has significant quantities of surplus raw water in many years. This surplus water may be available on a year-to- year basis or through multi-year arrangements that do not significantly impair the City’s ability to meet municipal demands. The City will continue to rent its surplus supplies at a fair market price that helps offset the cost of owning such supplies and benefits the Water Utility ratepayers. 4.1 Commitment to Other Beneficial Purposes Acknowledging that the City’s use of its valuable water resources has impacts to the environment and the region, the City will commit to using its surplus supplies for other beneficial purposes such as supporting irrigated agriculture, supplementing flows in the Poudre River or providing other regional benefits. The City’s surplus supplies come from a variety of sources, each of which has unique characteristics. These sources include CBT water and shares in several irrigation companies. Some sources are more suitable and available than others to meet beneficial purposes. Whether the surplus raw water can be used for these other purposes is dependent upon a number of factors, including the type of water, place of use and other decree limitations. Any potential use of these supplies should consider, and will likely require coordination with, other water users, state agencies and other groups. Some uses of the surplus supplies, such as maintaining an instream flow according to the State’s Instream Flow Program, may require a change of water rights through the water court process. The City will engage in a thorough evaluation of these issues as part of assessing the use of its surplus supplies for these beneficial purposes. Utilities will evaluate implementing a program to allow voluntary contributions from its ratepayers (i.e., Utility bill “check-off box”) for programs that are designed to support the following purposes: preserving local agriculture, supplementing flows in the Poudre River, or meeting other beneficial purposes that our community may desire. 4.1.1 Agriculture and Open Space Policy SW 3.2 of Plan Fort Collins states, “Participate in and follow the Northern Colorado Regional Food System Assessment project and other Larimer County agricultural efforts, and implement their recommendations at a local level, if appropriate.” In addition, Policy LIV 44.1 8 of Plan Fort Collins states, “Maintain a system of publicly-owned open lands to protect the integrity of wildlife habitat and conservation sites, protect corridors between natural areas, conserve outstanding examples of Fort Collins' diverse natural heritage, and provide a broad range of opportunities for educational, interpretive, and recreational programs to meet community needs.” To the extent that surplus water is available, the City will continue to support the local agricultural economy and help preserve the associated open spaces by renting surplus agricultural water back to irrigators under the respective irrigation companies. The City will explore long-term rental and sharing arrangements with irrigators10 in order to support the regional food system, encourage agricultural open space and other benefits provided by irrigated agriculture, as well as benefit the Water Utility ratepayers. 4.1.2 Instream Flows Policy ENV 24.5 of Plan Fort Collins states, “Work to quantify and provide adequate instream flows to maintain the ecological functionality, and recreational and scenic values of the Cache la Poudre River through Fort Collins.” Recognizing that its water use depletes natural streamflows, the City will seek opportunities to improve, beyond any associated minimum regulatory requirements, the ecological function of the streams and rivers affected by its diversions. The Water Utility will take a leadership role in working with other City departments, local and regional groups and agencies towards the following objectives in accordance with Colorado water law and the administration of water rights in Colorado: 1) encourage flows in local streams to protect the ecosystem, 2) pursue the operation of its water supplies and facilities in a manner that avoids, minimizes or offsets the effects to the environment while meeting customer demands, and 3) explore projects or measures that would provide flows in streams and water in reservoirs for recreational and aesthetic purposes. 4.1.3 Other Arrangements The City will consider and participate in other surplus water supply arrangements with other entities that provide mutual benefits and support the region. These may include other rental agreements, augmentation plans and other cooperative arrangements with regional partners. These types of arrangements should be limited to unique opportunities that are mutually beneficial to the parties and provide significant social, economic or environmental benefits to the region. 5.0 REGIONAL COOPERATION The City recognizes the importance in maintaining good relationships with regional entities and coordinating efforts to achieve mutual goals. The City also recognizes that growing Colorado municipalities are currently struggling to define a way to meet future water supply needs in a manner that minimizes negative impacts to agricultural economies and river ecosystems. The Water Utility will endeavor to be a leader in demonstrating how water supply can be provided in a manner that respects other interests. 10 The City’s largest irrigation company ownership interest is in the North Poudre Irrigation Company, which still has substantial lands in irrigated agricultural production and has a unique mix of native water and CBT water that lends itself to these types of partnership arrangements. 9 5.1 Working with Other Municipal Providers The City will continue to work with the water suppliers throughout the northern Colorado Front Range to assure that adequate supplies are maintained in the region. When benefits are identified, the City will cooperate with area entities in studying, building, sharing capacity and operating water transmission lines, distribution systems and storage reservoirs for greater mutual benefit. The City has common interests and the potential to cooperate with regional entities including the water districts around Fort Collins, the City of Greeley and the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District, as well as other Colorado water providers. In particular, the City should work closely with water districts that serve Fort Collins residents to encourage similar policies regarding drought protection, conservation and to provide mutual assistance during emergencies. 5.2 Working with Local Irrigation Companies The City will continue to cooperate with local irrigation companies regarding the use, exchange and transfer of water in the Cache la Poudre River Basin. As a major shareholder in many of the local irrigation companies, it is necessary and desirable that the City work closely with these companies. Much of the water supply available to the City is through the ownership of shares in local irrigation companies. 5.3 Working with Others City Departments will work together and also cooperate with local, state and federal agencies, civic organizations, environmental groups and other non-governmental organizations when common goals would benefit City residents and the surrounding community. Examples of goals that may involve City water supplies and be worthy of collaborative efforts include support for existing and development of new local food sources, promoting open space, improving river flows and supporting the local economy. Such efforts should identify appropriate entities and sources of revenue for specific goals or projects.