Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMemo - Read Before Packet - 5/9/2017 - Memorandum From Darin Atteberry, Jeff Mihelich, Wendy Williams, John Stokes, Jon Haukaas, Carol Webb Re: Adverse Impacts Of Potential Water-Related Ballot Initiative (Re-Sending From May 4 Packet)DocuSign Envelope ID: 618F756A-F7E2-40AC-B5E4-2072AC83D4C0 Mayor Troxell and City Councilmembers May 8, 2017 Page 2 of 3 Staff understands that the Initiative may be filed in the coming weeks, and could potentially be on the ballot in November. 2. Concerns re the Initiative The Initiative is worded in a vague manner that is open to interpretation. For instance, it is unclear what “actively oppose” and “work to stop” means. Is providing comments sufficient, or must the City litigate every water project meeting the Initiative’s ambiguous criteria of ecological depletion? What about when a water project proponent is entitled under the law to approval of the project? The Initiative is potentially extremely broad. Staff understands that the Initiative was drafted, in large part, in response to the proposed Northern Integrated Supply Project (NISP). However, the Initiative goes far beyond NISP. For instance, as discussed below, the Initiative would impact numerous City projects, operations, and goals. The Initiative would reduce the City’s ability to meets its goals. The Initiative would seem to require the City to essentially oppose itself – in the form of Fort Collins Utilities’ projects and regional water districts’ projects that would serve City residents. Water touches numerous aspects of economic and social like, and the impacts to water supply would translate into economic and social impacts. The City’s ability to seek creative and innovative water-related solutions – often with partners – would also be compromised. 3. Adverse Impacts of the Initiative 3.1. Halligan Water Supply Project The Initiative potentially impacts the Halligan Water Supply Project (Halligan Project) because it could be interpreted as a new dam and diversion. As has been discussed, additional water storage such as the Halligan Project is needed to meet future water needs of the City in the Fort Collins Utilities water service area and to provide protection for existing customers against drought scenarios and emergency events (e.g., pipeline failures, fires in our watersheds, etc.). The Halligan Project may also provide the opportunity to enhance river health on the North Fork. If passed, the Initiative could mean that the Halligan Project would need to be re-engineered (at significant cost and delay) or abandoned. The Initiative could also make any other storage project significantly more difficult. This would adversely affect the City’s water supplies – as well as create adverse economic and social impacts. 3.2. Water Supplies for the Growth Management Area The Initiative impacts new water supplies for the Growth Management Area (GMA) because such new supplies will likely require new diversions and pipelines. Regional water districts provide water service to portions of Fort Collins. These districts are acquiring water supplies to serve Fort Collins residents. If passed, the Initiative could mean that the City has an obligation to “actively oppose” and “work to stop” these new water supplies for Fort Collins residents. This would adversely affect the water Mayor Troxell and City Councilmembers May 8, 2017 Page 3 of 3 supplies needed to serve Fort Collins – and also create adverse economic and social impacts and frustrate City goals in areas served by these districts. 3.3. Expenditures of City Resources, with Limited Results The Initiative would seem to require the City to “actively oppose” and “work to stop” a wide range of projects. This would occur in various venues, such as Water Court and federal, state, and county permitting contexts. This would likely require additional and more intense participation by the City in more projects than currently is the case. Such “active opposition” is often not pursued by City staff on certain projects, such as because the proponent has a legal right to approval of the project, the small size of the project, or because the project furthers the City’s various water-related, economic, social, or other goals. If passed, the Initiative could mean that the City has an obligation to undertake these opposition activities – at potentially great cost. The City would likely need to hire additional staff, and/or retain more consultants and outside attorneys to complete this work. There would also likely be disputes regarding the scope of the Initiative and the adequacy and propriety of the City’s actions and inactions. 3.4. Relationships with Regional Partners The Initiative’s obligation for the City to “actively oppose” and “work to stop” various projects would make collaboration with regional partners (including those serving Fort Collins) far more difficult, if not impossible. Potential regional partners would likely see little to gain from trying to work with the City. If passed, the Initiative would likely mean that the City has to go it alone and may even prompt regional entities to take actions (legal or otherwise) against the City they would not have considered absent the Initiative. 3.5. Innovative Water Solutions The Poudre River is and has been heavily influence by humans for well over one hundred years and it is probable there will be additional flow depletions in the future (irrespective of the Initiative). These depletions are likely to deteriorate river health without a concerted effort at regional collaboration to creatively manage water to mitigate harm or to improve river health. Some of these solutions may well require dams, diversions, and pipelines. At a minimum, they will require regional collaboration and mold-breaking discussions and agreements. If passed, the Initiative would severely damage the City’s ability to pursue and enter into such agreements. pc: Carrie Daggett, City Attorney Eric Potyondy, Assistant City Attorney Donnie Dustin, P.E., Water Resources Manager Adam Jokerst, P.E., Water Resources Project Engineer