April 21, 2025 — Water Resources Advisory Board Regular Meeting

Transcript

Captions from City of Boulder YouTube recording.

[0:18] You started officially, there are no attendees online, so I'll let you know if somebody pops up. But I won't read the virtual meeting instructions unless I okay, well, we'll call the meeting before it is I guess we need to start off tonight with a couple of the administrative details. 1st I'd like to welcome Catherine and Joel here. Welcome, you folks, and we're looking forward to working with you and getting to know you better over the next few next few years. So glad to have you here, and we need to do the swearing in process for each of you. You handle that, Joe.

[1:00] Just ask Catherine to go first, st and she's got the oath of office in front of her, and she'll read that into the record. Great go ahead, Katherine. I do solemnly swear that I will support the Constitution of the United States of America, and of the State of Colorado, and the charter and ordinances of the City of Boulder, and faithfully perform the duties of the office of a member of the Water Resources Advisory Board, which I'm about to enter. Thank you. Welcome. I, Joel Smith, do solemnly swear that I will support the Constitution of the United States of America, and of the State of Colorado, and the charter and ordinances of the City of Boulder, and faithfully perform the duties of the office of a member of the Water Resources Advisory Board, which I'm about to enter. Thank you. We should have something to show up and take

[2:13] like. okay. And contrary to what it says right here we need to elect board officers. Hi, and so I am going to ask for any nominations for a board chair, to begin with. would like to nominate Steve. We have anybody that would like to second. I'll second that. Okay, thank you. And Joel. Hi, Hi, Evie, okay. Now, we also need to elect a vice chair. And in that regard I'm going to nominate Amy Brock. Second, I think we need to vote on. We have a vote on Steve Maxwell as the chairman.

[3:12] Anybody say Yahweh. Bye. Are you abstain? Okay, that passes. And for the vice chair I would nominate Amy for this coming year. Second thought, any objections? How about Kerry. Okay? Oh, it's for a vote, everybody in favor say, aye, aye, aye. Hi. And we also need to elect a secretary for next year. Do you have any nominations for that role? Can I interject on this one just for clarity. And good evening, everyone. I'm Joe Teddyichi, the director of the utilities department. The Board can really nominate or

[4:02] select anyone they want to, and in any random fashion. Rab's practice over the years has been to kind of do it by seniority with the most senior member. The 5 year member, the chair 4 year member being the vice chair, and then the 3 year member being the secretary. In this case we had 2 vacancies in a 5 year term and a 3 year term, Joel was appointed to the 5 year term. Catherine was appointed to the 3 year time, and so, if you were to follow your normal practice right. it may not be clear to everyone just how that works with feedback. Easy. So right? I mean, I guess my inclination would be to terminate Katie, since she's been here a while, and have some understanding of the procedures to be the secretary. If if anybody has any other thoughts, we can certainly discuss them.

[5:06] Anybody want to second that idea. I second. Katie is secretary. Okay, everybody in favor say, aye, aye, aye. Hi. Alright with all the formalities done. Next item on our agenda is approval of the January meeting. Minutes Joel and Catherine probably won't had a chance to look at those. But Katie or Amy. Did anybody have any comments or changes or suggestions on those. Not. You need a motion to approve those minutes motion to approve. Give me a second. Session. Okay on paper, bye, bye, great.

[6:00] So do we have any members of the public yet we do. We have one member of the public. Okay. so with your permission, I'll go ahead and read the virtual meeting rules. Please go ahead. Right? Hello. My name is Joanne Bloom, and I'm serving as the technical host for this meeting, we'll start with sharing a few slides of the virtual meeting rules that we follow. That are in place to find a balance between transparency with community members and security that minimizes disruptions. And we need a full name associated with each person's participation and open or public comments, and we cannot unmute you without it. If your full name is not currently displayed, please let me know, and I'll go ahead and change that for you. There is no chat feature for this meeting, but you may use the Q&A function to address zoom, connectivity questions or other technical issues. You may also text me at (303) 817-1742. If you need assistance.

[7:08] members of the public may be unable to control the audio or video features. Video is limited to city officials, employees, and invited speakers. Only I'll unmute you when you're recognized to speak, and I'll call your name when it's your turn to speak and announce that the 3 min timer will be displayed, and we'll start once you begin your comments. Thank you for your participation great. So if we do have members of the public that would like to speak, now is a great time to virtually raise your hand. Give it just a second. All right. Last call for any members of the public that would like to speak during public comment tonight. We have one hand.

[8:01] Well. Lynn, I see your name. We have Lynn Siegel and I. You should be able to unmute. Now, Lynn. gonna try one more time, Lynn. Are you able to unmute. It's it's stunning that no one ever speaks at these meetings but me. And guess what that's a reflection on you and your ability to engage the public because I hate my water bill. When I run into the homeless people on the Mall, I say, I'm saving for my water bill right now I'm having to heat my water up because it's not warm enough from a city of boulder. Administrated retrofit on my place.

[9:00] My water's not warm enough. So I have to heat it up with my gas stove. That doesn't make sense, does it? But I have, you know, a air source, hot water, heater air source, heat pump, which draws the heat from the air and embeds it in the water. The problem is, I only run my house at 54 degrees during the winter, because I haven't gotten money out of my kids. Climate change, you know, budget to spend. I have to save it all for them. So I'm cold. and as a result, my air source hot water heater is not working to the extent that it should be, and that someone from the city should have advised me, maybe not to get one. because, for one thing. since my furnace is too new and they didn't replace my furnace, I'm basically using a gas hot water heater, even though it's hybrid electric. I never have turned it to the electric use of it. But this is a problem like all the dimensions of how these things work.

[10:19] You know, I got a wash dryer. That was a big disaster. because that just means it takes 5 h to dry my jeans, which I usually don't dry, but like 10 min, and then let them just dry naturally. But I can't do that anymore. But the city of Boulder didn't advise me against getting that purchasing that product, and that I got on my own because the city was going to get me a stove and a refrigerator. But you know, there's a lot of problems with how things are actually done versus what the objectives are. And you know tonight you're going to be talking about water resources and how you can get it. And you know what should be 1st on your list tonight.

[11:05] Sundance Sundance is putting in a hundred 20 person hotel. They're putting in a 2,500 seat performance art Center. Where's the water? Gonna come for all this? You tell me where, for the development that's coming done. Okay, thank you, Lynn. There are no other members of the public that wanna we did just have one person show up online. So let me just offer again. We're at the public comment portion of our meeting, and so, if you would like to speak, you may virtually raise your hand. And I will unmute you to talk. I'll give it just a second to give you that option.

[12:04] I don't see a hand raise, so you should be set alright. Then let's move on to the the main part of the meeting tonight. We're going to hear from the staff about the water supply situation, and we also have some visitors from Northern water to give us an update on the Colorado. Big Thompson supplies to boulder, so I'll turn it over to Joe and the staff to make the evening's presentation. Thank you, Steve, and if the Board doesn't mind, that might just speak to the public comment that you heard tonight certainly cost of service and utility bills and affordability is something that is top of mind for us and for our newer board members. The May, June and July meetings will be talking about the capital improvement program and and rates, and one of the things that the the Board has weighed in on in the past is really encouraging staff and the utilities department and the city to have a

[13:00] a strong bill assistance program, which is something that we've had. And and we keep trying to build on it. And it is a priority in our in our work plan. So always appreciate that that feedback. And it's it's something that we're we take seriously and intends to work on. So with that, I'll transition to the water supply update. And 1st of all, Joel Catherine, welcome to the board! Glad to have you here, and glad to have a full 5 4 person board again. Congratulations on the election of officers. And, Steve, you're the chair, and you'll you'll guide us through this next year, so that'll be great. So for the water supply update. This is something we do with the Board every year in in the April meeting. It's for our. It's kind of our water operational year. It's like the the start of that year. It's if you think about it like a bank account. It's when we know the most about what we have in our accounts with snowpack and reservoir storage, and all the factors that matter, the amount that's available from the

[14:13] Northern water system, and so each year we brief the board on the on the situation in April, and we follow that with a brief written update to city council. and if we have a for the newer members, we do have a drought plan that the board weighed in on. We just updated a couple of years ago, and if it was a difficult year in terms of reservoir storage, or the amount in Cbt. Or snowpack, or all of the above. This conversation could be recommending what a discussion of recommended water restrictions. So we'll see what Crystal and Kim have in store. I'll be surprised if that's that's what we're talking about. But

[15:01] so that's what we've got for you tonight. I'll I'll I'll save some comments until later on the Colorado River situation. But we have 2 members of our water resources team here tonight. Jim Hutton, his senior water resources manager, oversees the the group. So she's here for support. But the item tonight will be led by Crystal Maury, who is a senior water resources engineer in our water resources group. So with that crystal. turn it over to you. Awesome. Good evening. Crystal Murray. As you mentioned, our water resources, team handles, operations and planning of the city's municipal water supply, and I'll be providing a quick update related to water supply and demand. This evening we'll be going over water supply and a variety of indicators for how the year might shape out. And then some updates tied to our water conservation programs. And I'll leave some time at the end for questions.

[16:02] Most of the city's water comes from snow melt so winter and spring is really important to us. and, as Joe mentioned early May is the time of year when we decide whether or not to declare a drought and implement water use restrictions. We're at the time when water supply indicators are really starting to give us a good picture of what that supply will look like this year. First, st I want to briefly walk you through our water supply system for some additional context on the screen. Here we have a map of boulder. The lower part of the map is the eastern side of the city. Then we move up to the west. On the upper part of the map, where the Continental Divide is shown. we have 3 sources of water for the city. 2 of those are in Boulder Creek, the North Boulder Creek, and Middle Boulder Creek watersheds, which are shown in blue in this map. and provide around 2 thirds of our water supply. We divert and store that water in Middle Boulder Creek and North Boulder Creek, and carry that water down to the Pitasso treatment plant through a series of pipelines which are shown as dark blue lines on the map.

[17:10] Water is treated at Pitasso and distributed throughout the community, and our service area is outlined in red. We also receive water from the headwaters of the Colorado River through projects operated by Northern water. Who's here with us tonight? The Colorado Big Thompson Project or Cvt and the Windy Gap Project, and those areas are identified in yellow or tan on the map. In those systems water is collected on the west slope and brought over to the east slope and conveyed to water users in the South Platte Basin boulder specifically gets its water from Carter Lake through a pipeline that goes directly from Carter Lake to our boulder reservoir water treatment plant, which is then distributed throughout the community, and about 1 3rd of our supplies comes from that source.

[18:03] We have a drought plan. As Joe mentioned, that was updated in 2022 that provides guidance on whether to declare drought. And if we do, how to implement water, use restrictions to meet target water savings, goals. one tool available in the decision making process is what we call the psi, or projected storage index, and that comes from our drought plan. And it's a ratio of water supply available to boulder and demand. And we're looking at how much water we have in storage in our Boulder Creek watershed reservoirs. How much we anticipate to receive from the Cbt system, and we divide that total supply by our anticipated demand. and that demand is based on the most recent 10 year period. So it incorporates some sustained water conservation that we've seen in the community. This is a table from the drought plan related to the psi, or that projected storage index, and that relates psi to savings goals and associated responses.

[19:07] So, for example, if the ratio falls between 0 point 8 5 and 0 point 5 6 we would consider declaring a drought, alert stage one. and that would have a goal of saving up to 20% water by placing limitations on lower priority. Outdoor uses, which are further defined in the drought plan. Preliminary analysis indicates that the psi is around 1.4, which is comfortably above the 0 point 8 5, and at a level where we would not anticipate the need to declare job restrictions. The psi is just one tool we have in evaluating drought conditions, but we also support it with other data and observations. And so 3 additional indicators are snowpacks, stream flow and regional drought conditions. And I'll run through some data that we look at related to these indicators.

[20:03] So up on the screen, we have a map of snowpacked conditions, specifically snow water equivalent, or what we call Swede, and that's the amount of water present. If you were to take a column of snow and kind of melt it down so light and fluffy snow has less water than that wet, dense snow. And there's a network of sites all across the Western us, that monitor snow conditions, and we consistently monitor those in the South Basin and the Colorado River Basin, just to get a sense of how Snowpack is shaping up for Boulder Creek. We're in the South Platte Basin, which is towards the right top hand corner of this map and the South Platte Basin is currently at 88% of Median. and we also track the Colorado headwater system as an indicator of Cbt supplies. and the Colorado River Basin is currently at 77% of median. which is a bit lower. However, northern water has already issued an average Cbt. Allotment for the year.

[21:08] Here we have a graph of few snowpack sites that we have in the Boulder Creek Basin that we rely on for information. One of them, University Camp, is located on our property in the Silver Lake, watershed up North Boulder Creek, and then the other. One. Lake Eldora, is located above Barker Reservoir. The lines are showing 2025 snowpack, and the blue shaded areas are showing 30 year Medians. We're currently at 90% of Median at University Camp and 63% of Median at Lake Eldora. Lake Eldora is at a lower elevation, and has already hit its peak and started to melt for University Camp Peak. Snowpack is usually around May first, st so a couple of weeks away from that peak, and even if we don't hit that peak level, we're still in a good position.

[22:03] So we also look at stream, flow forecasts for the season. We're interested in stream flow forecasts because the snow melts and translates into stream flow, and then we either divert that water directly from the river or put it into storage. So we're really interested in how the snow translates into stream flow. There's a variety of sources we use for stream flow forecasting. And I've just added 2 sources on the screen here that are both showing roughly average stream flow, which is an indicator that our reservoirs will fill this year. We also look at regional drought indicators for context, and one great resource, though broad scale, is the weekly Us. Drought monitor maps in the map shown on the screen. White means no drought conditions, and as you get darker in color from yellow to orange to red, that's more and more severe drought conditions you can see in the South Platte Basin and Boulder County, within the upper right quadrant of the map

[23:04] drought conditions are starting to creep into the area, but not at unmanageable levels and still overall. The yellow color is not particularly severe in terms of impacting our municipal water supplies. So in summary, it's looking like near average snowpack average stream flow forecasts, and we expect our mountain reservoirs to fill this year, and Northern has set an average Cbt quota for the year. So we're in a good position for water supply this year, and we don't anticipate the need for water use restrictions. But we continue to monitor conditions over the summer to track. If there's a need to update that drought status in addition to monitoring water supply, we also monitor water demand trends and have a variety of water conservation strategies to help community members and conserving water. And I wanted to walk you through some recent water demand trends and then some water conservation.

[24:07] In this figure we planted. We've plotted annual water treatment plant production, which is the blue bars on the graph and per capita water production which is annual demand divided by residential population, and that's presented as the dark blue line. And, as you can see, water demand has dropped significantly since the early 2 thousands, which is tied to improvements in indoor water efficiency. But more recently it's reached a bit of a plateau 2023 is a bit of an exception to the rule due to remarkably wet growing season and 2024 returns back to the recent norm boulders. Conservation program has been in place since the early 19 nineties, and we've continued to adjust the program to meet community needs. Given the widespread use of water, efficient fixtures indoors, more recent conservation efforts have focused on outdoor use.

[25:08] In 2024, we continued working with our partners that interact with the community via education rebates and some other programs. We also started a few efforts identified in the water efficiency plans and those included taking off 2 pilot turf conversion sites along baseline road. Each of those is around 5,000 square feet, and one of which is being converted in partnership with resource central. The sites are being converted to native grass. and they're focusing on non-chemical conversion methods. We also began updates to our landscape code to make waterwise improvements. And a portion of those code updates are anticipated to take place this year. We also applied for free meter testing through the Colorado water loss initiative. and that verified the accuracy of our major water treatment plant meters.

[26:04] So in 2025, in addition to those continuing programs with our partners, we'll also be working on additional efforts identified in our water efficiency plan. and the most exciting new development is the addition of a dedicated staff member that we hired in March of this year for water conservation. Their initial efforts will focus on improving community education. We also have a number of pilot projects ramping up this year that include another turf conversion site over at Burke Park, and this one will be in partnership with Resource central. We'll be piloting efforts for a manufactured home direct fixture replacement program. We'll be developing an advanced metering infrastructure or Ami pilot to start leveraging real time data. And we'll also be evaluating the city's current water budget policy. So we're really excited about our additional capacity to enhance our water conservation efforts throughout the community

[27:07] that concludes the water supply and demand update thanks for your time, and I'll open it up to any questions you might have for the team. Thank you. Could could you go back to that slide earlier on? That showed the ratio that the calculation that you used. It's a little slow. Reminds me of Valc denominator there. What period of time is that calculated over that 10 year average, or it's a 10 year period. And it's the 90th percentile. What is the assumption about what we would get it from? Cvt of

[28:02] on the next page? There's a listing of what we assume. Would we would get there on the next slide? The next slide is tied to what the psi ratio is and what water conservation response we might have. I guess. Question is, what how do? How do we work into it? How do we incorporate into that equation? The assumptions about what we're going to get the actual amount. We're going to be allocated from. Cbt, yeah, we worked with Northern water when developing the drought plan to come up with a methodology that largely incorporates their current storage levels and anticipated inflows into their system. It's a little more complicated than just what their annual allocation to their allottes is, but it is looking at their system as a whole. How much storage is in their system they don't allocate every drop of water out of their system every year. So

[29:05] it's not. This is a a gross simplification of what we what we look at when we're at some point in time. You guys estimate what percent of the allocation users are? Gonna ask for this given year. And then at this this time of year. Sometime. You you tell everybody what to expect. We we do. Board made that decision a couple of weeks ago. Not that they can't adjust that going forward, but they were choosing 80% quota, which is, delivers from the Cbt system. This doesn't include Windy Gap 248,000 acre feet are made available to our various, both on the ag sector and the municipal sector. I apologize. I don't know how many units you have, but whatever number of Cbt units are held by the city. Times that 80% or point 8 would be the volume of water made available in this current water year to this

[30:05] windy gap is not a quota isn't allocated through a quota process. It's based on orders and not sure what the city might have ordered or requested from the Windy Cap Project, but that's administered differently. When was the last time we hit the lowest drought level right deep? We started. We have not never. So we, we 1st developed a drought plan following the 2,002 drought, and that was, that has been the only time that we've declared water use restrictions. I think during that that period that drought, maybe, would have fallen into potentially a category, 2 or drought level. 2. What about the I know you mentioned that trip replacement, the one that's currently going on. How is that going? Have you gotten public feedback? What's it looking like? Yeah. So we have 2 sites on baseline that are currently working on a conversion from bluegrass to a native grass. Mix

[31:17] for the we've done scraping on one site. So manual scraping there are high costs associated with the non-chemical weed management of that section. And we will remove the solarization and sheet mulching this year for the other site in partnership with Central. They did tilling, scraping, and steaming. The towing, and scraping. So far have been very successful, and the establishment is coming in. But the steaming has not been particularly successful after multiple applications. Oops. I've got a few questions. Some of these are more long term we can get into it. So it is interesting. And on that map that showed the water supply that if you see much drier to the south

[32:12] at my sense is that seems to be a long term trend. But I'm I'm curious about just the State of the Colorado particularly. You know. I know the negotiations are going on about allocation, and the big feature, of course, is a call right from the of a Southern or portion of the Colorado Basin. I'm just curious, though, in terms of you know short term, how close we may be to a call or or all that, or, you know triggering restrictions, or or your sense of the longer term, because it seems to be getting. It's funny, my sense is. And so I work on climate change. And and you know the projections are we're seeing well drier to southwest. wider as you get further northeast. Now, where does that switch? It's interesting, though. Northern Colorado has done pretty well, at least the last I don't know. It seems like 5, 10 years. But you know we see it drier in the South. And

[33:05] yeah, I'm just curious about obviously, we're we're good this year. But you know, is this something to worry? I mean, I'm supposed to be almost 5 years. So in my term, what's what's your sense of? But even beyond facetious? But I mean, you know, 1020 years, which is reasonable for planning horizons for the city. you know there could be a call of color. And then what would that mean? For for you know Cbt, and say the allocation folder gets so a lot of questions. And again, it's too complicated getting us another time. But well, if if we could, if you'll hold that thought, I think maybe I'll maybe not answer your questions here a little bit with some graphics, but at least I'll give you a little more to chew on, and maybe even a more complicated question. All right. A second, simpler question about the you mentioned that the the reduction and the reductions, by the way, very impressive tickets per capita is about a 3, rd right? From what I've seen.

[34:05] I don't know 2025% overall looking into this eyeball. It's impressive 20 years. But but he said, it's mostly from indoor use efficiency. What? What's happening on the outdoor? And what's the share of indoor versus outdoor use boulder? Oh, the so indoor to outdoors 60, 40, which one's it? 60 indoor. We're sort of trending towards 50 50. Okay, annual number like, average over the year. Yeah. 60, and I don't know if Crystal has she cut out a she cut out a graphic just for time's sake. But what we're seeing with the outdoor as you as you would expect. Outdoor water use really is reflective of weather conditions. And so what we've been seeing for outdoor water use when you compare it to how dry conditions you're not seeing really much of a trend in in the outdoor. Use over time.

[35:16] or I should say, downward trend. So that's where we're attributing most of the savings to indoor water use. And you do see that when we're when we just and maybe again, something I'd be interested in what programs Boulder has for encouraging more use of more water, efficient appliances. But also, you know, lower lower water demand vegetation or 0 scaping. you know. Again we can get into time. But curious about that. Think, Hub. really high level, I think a lot of the savings we've seen the indoor sector have really been related to plumbing codes and just the just the national efficiency standards. You can't. You can't buy, you know, high use water fixtures like you used to 20 years ago.

[36:02] Okay, the more efficient toilets and shower heads. That kind of thing. Yeah, okay, makes a difference. Yeah, it really does. Yeah. A question about the new full time employee dedicated to conservation and what they're going to be focused on. I guess there's some information around water savings and what was sent out in the packet. Some estimates on like the lawn removal program and slow the flow, and others. and what they resulted in. Do you have a sense of how the full time? I know it's just March, but where we see the best return when it comes to water savings on outreach and engagement in the community. If we're not talking about plumbing codes, but actual time from a boulder city of boulder employee. Yeah. So really excited about our new employee and our water efficiency plan, which was just finalized in January of 2024 to identify some key strategies that they'll be working towards. 1st and foremost, is like covering a baseline of. There's still a little bit of low hanging fruit out there in terms of community education and buy in on responsible use.

[37:23] But we also have targeted programs identified in our water efficiency plan, one of which is the Ami Pilot project that I spoke to another one is evaluating our water budget policy. and then another one that they'll be working towards is a direct fixture replacement program. Cool. Any other questions from the board.

[38:02] Okay, thank you very much for the presentation. It's helpful thankfully, for me. There were no surprises from when I saw the run through. Sure, so I might just start this next one kind of tag team with Kim. But we, as you know, we have some representatives here from the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy district, and I think these days the the Colorado River situation is national news. You can't. You can't go a week without seeing a newspaper article or something on one of the major networks where they're talking about it. Oh. and so it's of huge interest to us, because it's a it's a 3rd of our supply, and we are so fortunate that the Northern team members have been willing to come down and brief, the board on numerous occasions over the years. That's 1 of the things that I I really look forward to hearing the updates myself. And as city staff. We're wanting to track it closely as well.

[39:15] So we have Brad Wynn, who is the general manager of Northern water here tonight, and Kyle Whitaker, who's the water rights manager, and really an expert, in my opinion, from what I've seen in monitoring the Colorado River and presenting to us Kim, I don't know if you wanted to say more context for it. So yes, we've got. We got about a 3rd of our supply from the Colorado River, and these are through contracts that we have through through the Cbt. Or Colorado. Big Thompson Project, as well as the Windy Gap project Northern Water, Northern Colorado Water Conservancy district. That operates those 2 projects. And so we I don't know. I consider them a partner in in our operations. They they're doing all the operations, and we just order water from them.

[40:12] But because of the role that they have in operating the system managing the systems they have. They have been very integral in monitoring what's happening on the Colorado River, I think with the Colorado River there's both. You've got drought, hydrology, you know. Climate change considerations. But then there's also this administrative, legal component that's associated with the Colorado River compact. So it gets fairly complicated trying to to pre predict project what those 2 different legs. what the future might be in those 2 different areas. We we incorporate we've got a long range water supply model.

[41:02] And we're looking. We run simulations, say, 100 year simulations. And we're looking at trying to find ways that we can project what the Colorado River supply would be so where it gets complicated. It's it's 1 thing to incorporate drought and climate change we're getting. Think we're getting pretty good at that in our modeling. But when you have the this legal component, I don't think anybody really knows what what to do. So we're making some. You know, we're trying to do some sensitivity analyses when it comes to the Colorado. and we will be presenting a little bit more on those efforts later on in the year. July. that. Turn it over to Kyle and Brad. Well, thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. a few things before we get there. I feel like a little bit of a surrogate Boulder City boulder staff member. Today we've spent the afternoon talking about Boulder reservoir. There's a lot of different things Northern water

[42:02] and the city engage on every day on one of those boulder reservoir, and I'm sure you'll be briefed in future months about all the activity there around its operations, but we also not only share in the operational Cbt. Project, which might put a plug in for reclamation. so our Federal partners are extremely important and own most of the project, and they take a lot of pride as they should in operating this segment of the project essentially from the east portal. So from when water is on its way out of Grant County through the Continental Divide, reclamation is involved and instrumental in calling those shots as they run that water eastward down 5 power plants and generate power that's ultimately marketed to Western power, western area power administration. And then Northern water takes that back. Gets that water to Carter Lake and onto cities in agriculture, either windigap or Cbt. But we're also partner every day on the operation of the Southern Water supply project pipeline which.

[43:04] somewhat new to the city, hope that relationship still good. But we've been folks who have interest in those 2 pipelines. Swsp, one swsp. 2 is a key component of what we do every day, and getting water in an efficient manner to about 600,000 of our constituents within our district boundaries. So it's a big deal to us. I did want to mention Kyle. And I answer to a board of 13, and we do have 3 board members that represent both county very well. Our chair. Dennisantunis, who lives in Longmont. We have Sue Ellen Harrison, director for Northern water right here in Boulder long time employee of Northern water, and Todd Williams is a director representing Boulder County as well, and lives in the Longmont area. So with that I'll turn over to Kyle to talk more specifically about Carter River and get done, and there's extra time which there might not be. There would be a few other things I would just briefly touch on.

[44:02] Thank you. Thanks, Fred, thanks, Kim, thanks, Joe, for the kind 2 kind remarks. So as was mentioned. I hope maybe we can explain a little bit about what's going on. Answer. Maybe some of your questions, and maybe point out maybe there's not quite as much going on as some like to believe or is, is often portrayed in the media. Where's at the moment? We may get about 5 things going there. So the Colorado River Compact signed 1922 amongst the 7 States had to be ratified, not only by the 7 individual States and their legislatures, but also ratified by Congress. And what it does in in essence, is it? It's an equitable apportionment compact, it is not. And then I underline this this wording here exclusive use. So the upper basin, which is Colorado, is part of with Wyoming, Utah, New Mexico.

[45:20] and then the lower basin, which is California. Arizona, Nevada split the river half and half, and it's the upper basin and the lower face, and received exclusive use of 7.5 million acre feet. And again, it's equitable apportionment, and I'll probably say that a few more times, because it was not. The lower basin gets 7 and a half, and the upper basin gets whatever's left of, or the the upper basin has to provide the lower basin with their 7 and a half before we can do anything, and those are probably 2 of the most common misperceptions of what the Colorado River Compact did.

[46:00] Second part of it Lower Basin, primarily because of California at the time they had to use it was already developing. It was already starting. Everyone knew California was going to need a lot of water, and they were given in the compact. All 7 States agreed that they could increase. If there's extra from their 7 and a half to 8 and a half. and that's the the second big tenant of the the Colorado River compact the big asterisk, if you will, the caveat, and again, probably the most misperceived part of the Colorado of the compact is that the the upper basin will not cause the flow to drop below 75 million over any 10 year period, or on average, 7.5 million. And to the compliance point of the measurement point is what's known as Leaf Ferry. It's right below Glen Canyon Dam at the time. Obviously Lake Powell nor Lake Mead were not there, and so this was written into the compact.

[47:03] They knew hydrology would be good. It would be bad, it would be everywhere in between, and so they thought, extended out over 10 years, and the good and the bad will average out, and the upper basin will commit to not causing it to to drop below that 75 million. That doesn't mean we have to deliver. It's not a delivery obligation. It doesn't mean that we can't use our equitable apportionment part of the compact. It just means we how I would explain this, and and and we'll see a lot of legalities here. But we could not use in excess of 7.5 million, therefore, causing the flow to drop below 75 million over a 10 year period. The problem with the 10 year rolling average is if you have a big year and then yeah, you and it gets to the 11 years out you lose it. and you add in whatever comes in that year, and you'll see a little more about that graphically, how that has worked out couple of other things that are in the Colorado River compact that are important is does not affect

[48:09] prior perfected rights, meaning anything in use prior to 1922 not affected by the compact. And so there's a lot of that use in Colorado as well as other States in the basin, and then, lastly, there was not an agreement with Mexico. But there's a provision. If a treaty is entered with the country of Mexico. their water will 1st come from water in excess of the 7 and a half for the upper basin, 7 and a half for the lower basin, the additional 1 million for the lower basin. Then the extra water would 1st go to Mexico. and then, if there's not enough, it would be split, and that would be provided to Mexico half and half the upper basin and lower basin. We'll talk more about that, please. If you have any questions. Comments, please interrupt. Have a let's have a conversation. This is this is the the basis of the compact. And this is what. So if if there are a number of dry years

[49:09] and the flow is, let's say, over tenure period, well below the 75 million acre. But it's it's the hydrology. The use stays the same in the in the upper basin. Then that doesn't. Then that's okay. Then the upper basin is still in compliance. That is Colorado in the upper basin's position, and that is what has been believed to be what the combat is that the courts ruled on that, or they are. The lower basin, I assume, doesn't buy that Arizona right now would probably say they don't agree. Okay, so this isn't dispute. This is the northern. This is the Upper Basin position in Colorado's position, and hopefully, where we would land if it ever did go to Supreme Court. This would go directly to the Us. Supreme Court if there was ever a question about the compact.

[50:03] So after the the compact, and when, when Hoover Dam Boulder Canyon Project Act in 1928, it divvied up the lower basins. 7 and a half 1 million. What you see here. California got the lion's share, 4.4, Arizona, 2.8, Nevada 300,000. The then came the treaty with Mexico. So they did enter with the Treaty of Mexico. Some of you may have heard a lot about the Treaty of Mexico, because it's the same treaty on the Tijuana River in California, the Colorado River in Arizona. California border, and on into Mexico, and the Rio Grande in in Texas, Mexico, border, and Mexico has not been living up to their end of the treaty on the Rio Grande. They have been shorting the United States significantly over the last 5 years. So there's been some State Department action and and going back and forth.

[51:00] there's concern. It's gonna bleed over to the to the Colorado River in different ways. We'll talk later about where we're at on the fire on the Colorado River portion of the Mexico Treaty. and then, as you see here. The upper basin knew. They entered into the upper Basin Compact in 1948, not, and they understood, even back to the days of the 1922 compact. There was no way we were going to allocate set amounts in the upper basin. Mother Nature was just not going to be that cooperative. And so the upper basin, compact split the upper basins by percentages. What you see here, Colorado got just over 51% and the other Upper Basin States, Utah, Wyoming, and New Mexico, in that order got other amounts. and but it was percentages, because in a bad year the upper basin the river doesn't produce 7.5 million, and so you can say you have 7 and a half. It's just not going to be there. And and so they divvied it up by percentage basis.

[52:03] And so that in essence really is what divvied up the Colorado River in those 3 documents, and then the lower basins, allocations in the in the Bullard Canyon Act. And so that's that's kind of where the river is, and that's where it's been for the better part of 100 years. There is provision in the compact that I think is important to all of us, and it's kind of represented by the cross matching here, but it it contemplated at the time not just the gravity, not just the basin, the Colorado River Basin proper, but also areas that could be served by Colorado River water, including where we are here in northern waters district, the Denver Metro area. In other areas. If you go back, just go back real quick. If you look at California. There is just a sliver of California that actually lies in the Colorado River Basin Gravity Basin and most of California, and that 4.4 million goes out of the Colorado River Basin for use, either in the Imperial Valley which has a 3.1 million acre foot contract and then in the coastal area of Southern California.

[53:19] So how do we get that here? This is kind of the the the exports and imports. Here in Colorado, there are 24 systems trans. Mountain systems that bring water out of the Colorado into into the South Platte Basin or the the Arkansas Basin. There is a 25th that you see there at the bottom that diverts in Colorado, but delivers into New Mexico the San Juan Chama project into the Rio Grande in in New Mexico. All total. It's about 500,000 acre feet a year that is diverted from the Colorado River, and used here in Colorado. Cbt. Windy Gap represents about 220 to 230,000 of that number you see brought into the South Platte basin.

[54:10] So our our use here in Colorado, about 60% of it is pre compact. Pre 1922. That's almost exclusively West slope agriculture, and then of the remainder about split half and half the remaining 40% between the west slope use new uses. And then the trans mountain diversions that bring water into the into the front range, into the Arkansas and the south basins. We use about 2 and a quarter. 2.2 2.3 million. If you apply our percentage, our 51 and 3 quarter percent of our 7 and a half, it's about 3.8 million is what that math would work out if if it was allocated, and if it was available. so the one that you probably hear the most about as of late. And then this is what most people refer to, and it was mentioned earlier as triggering. A compact call it would be, are we in compliance with 75 million at Leaf ferry.

[55:13] So this is a history going back to the the late nineties. And you can kind of see we are at today. About 86 million is what has been delivered to that the compliance point on the on the compact. And there, you see the the 75 million. the individual orange bars at the bottom are individual years. And just to point out, you see that decline in the in the line from 2020 down to 2022. That wasn't really hydrology driven. That was just again 10 year rolling average. And if you look back at 2011, 2012, we lost those years. They went away. We replaced a 12.7 5 in 2011 with the 7 and a half.

[56:01] and then, and similarly in in 2012 and replaced with 7 and a half. And so you just it's simple math. I mean, it's just you're you're losing your 11 tiers falling off. And you're you're you're stuck with whatever point out a 10 year rolling average. It's tough because once you lose that there's no benefit. I mean, you release it. You have potential benefit for 10 years. Once you hear year 11, it doesn't matter what you did, and that's kind of what's happened. And that's a lot of what the negotiations are right now. So the the compact is not being renegotiated. All that's being discussed and negotiated right now is, how do you operate Lake Powell and lake me for the benefit of all 7 states in Mexico? In a way that's that's efficient and proper. And so we're not anything we just talked about on the compact. None of that's changing. It's just how do we operate those reservoirs to do the best? Does that kind of answer your question from earlier. That's the. And that's what.

[57:04] Now. if you if you overlay, we'll talk more about this, the Mexico Treaty, and if there wasn't enough in the Colorado River out of after the lower Basin and upper basins. Allocations then Mexico's on top of that, and if there's not enough it would be split between the 2 basins. And so if you split that, that's where you hear a lot instead of 75, you hear 82 and a half, and what that is is. Mexico was allocated a million and a half in the treaty. Not there each you split a million and a half, 750,000 a year. On top of the 77.5 million, and that's where you get 82.5 over a over a 10 year period. But back to the compact plus half the Mexico Treaty Water, and, as you can see, we're still in full compliance meeting that, even though I I would argue, we don't have to to provide half Mexico's water, and we'll get into more of that here in just a second. But as you projected out, it's pretty set now. The releases at leaf area are gonna be 7 and a half over the next couple of years. And so you'll see you see there where we'll be out in 2026. And

[58:22] so again, what's being negotiated? Now we've just been running on this razor's edge of meeting. Our demands. Demands have gone up. Irrigation demands kind of peaked out in the seventies. Eighties. Now we're just adding municipal demand. We've added roughly, 25 million people in the Colorado River Basin since the 19 seventies. And so we just keep adding demands and demands. And really, again, all that's being done right now is trying to figure out through different operating criteria. How do we? How do we get supplies and demands to mesh? Crystal talked a lot about it on the boulder system. It's same on the Colorado River, you know. There's municipal per capita is going down, but you're adding a whole lot of capital, and you know you get into a dry year. You need more irrigation, and the demands are are in a lot of years now are outstripping the supplies.

[59:20] And just how do we get to that? That strike that balance? And that's what's happening right now between the 7 States and the Federal government. So on the supply side these are decadal flows of the Colorado River. What you see there? This is above Lake Powell. What comes into Lake Powell, and then when you add on to that what comes in below Lake Powell, there's significant tributaries, the Little Colorado, the Gila, the Salt, the Verde, the Virgin rivers. There's significant inflows in the magnitude of 2 to 3 million. In most years you can see average decadal flows of the Colorado River are still about 17.5 million acre feet.

[60:03] And that's you know, again, that's over a 10 year period. You know. So you get balanced out some of the good and bad, but you can see the you know the 2 thousands were bad absolutely, but the thirties, the sixties were also not great. And then you see what what I refer to as a recency bias. Most of us, either in our careers or in our lives. Remember the eighties and nineties, and we'd like to remember the eighties and nineties as as what it should be. And I I think the eighties and nineties were abnormal in a lot of ways. So so where is water being used? Upper basin consumptive use just under 4 million. Again, Colorado is about 2 and a quarter of that the upper basin also pays for the evaporation off Lake Bell.

[61:00] It wasn't there when the compact, the main reason Lake Power was put in other than to generate Hydropower was to provide a shock, absorber away a savings account, if you will. Good years, talk some water away, bad years, release some out of storage to leaf ferry to the compact point. And so all total. That's the upper basin. Use the lower basin out of out of Lake Mead is averaging 7.3 million acre feet. These are over the last 25 years. They also. They don't like to admit this, but we feel they have to pay the evaporation off Lake Meat Lake Mojave Lake Havasu. As well as the delivery losses to get that water to their head gates, and it's about a million and a half acre feet in total between evap, most of that being evap. The lower base is using 2.1 2.2 out of those tributaries I mentioned. This is mostly out of the Gila River and the Salt River in Arizona, but also some in the in Nevada and slide a little bit in California, and then Mexico. They're 1 million and a half. They're using just just right at the 1 million and a half. That's in that treaty. So what that looks like is the upper basin allocated

[62:21] 7 and a half in the treaty in the compact been using 4.3 on average lower base and allocated 7 and a half, plus an extra 1 million. If it's available. They've been using almost 11, and Mexico's right up their their 1 million and a half. and so it adds up to just under 17 million, a use or last, on average, over the last 25 years in Colorado. and so going back to the Decadal flows. If you overlay current demands. And granted, this demand was not on the river, really with the Central Arizona project coming online in the eighties, and then completely in the nineties which developed another 1 million plus acre feet of demands on the river. But if you overlay current demands what they are.

[63:13] you can see in the early 19 hundreds. If you trust those those stream gauging the hydrology then, or in the eighties and nineties. Everything's good. We had spilling reservoirs. We were worried about overtopping Lake Powell Glen Canyon Dam in the mid eighties. Everything was good, as you can see. There, you're 3, 4, 5 million extra flow than demands. But you get into the times like we're in right now. Times in the in the fifties and sixties, we'd have been in the same position where we're using 2, 3, 4 million acre feet a year on average, more than Mother Nature is providing you start. We all know and understand what that does to reservoirs. We have almost 50 million acre feet of storage like PAL Lake, me if you're using 2 or 3 or 4 more than Mother Nature's influence. Those reservoirs are going to do exactly what we've seen to drop into about a 3rd a little more full.

[64:13] Today. There's total about 17 million acre feet in storage right now in in Lake Powell, like me. so real quick, what is in place right now. It's very simple. This is the operating criteria for Lake PAL, on the left lake meet on the right. you 1st of the year. What's the elevation? And it tells you what to release? It's pretty simple. And then on the right, like me. what's the level of Lake Mead? And it tells you. Either deliver 7 and a half or something. Last name you can see at the bottom there the the very bottom. When when Lake Mead is basically empty, they would reduce to 7, 9 acre feet instead of 7 and a half.

[65:04] That's been one of the problems is. It's just not not protective enough of of storage reserves. This is that 1st line. There's 2023 had a good winter in 2024 things bumped up significantly. But it's still, if you just find where you're at and that's how much you either release or that's much is how much is available for use in the lower base. And so that's kind of where we're at. The green line is for this this year. For 2025 started the year with 8.7 in. In Lake Powell, and almost exactly the same now like me. And so those are bumped up a little bit. Real quick reductions. I won't get into this, but this is the reductions again. It kind of bottoms or tops out if you will it just right at half a million acre feet. As you can tell. In this Arizona takes the biggest part of those hits. Arizona agreed to that.

[66:05] When they got authorization and funding for the Central Arizona project. They agreed to take most of the hits. California does not take any under the current criteria that was negotiated in the 2,007 interim guidelines which expire. They're a 20 year term, so they're expiring next year. Hence all the negotiations about what what takes the place of those those guidance and that criteria 2019 it was fell when the reservoirs got very, very low, the 7 States came together, agreed to take additional cuts on top of that. And you can see in this California does. Finally take some cuts when lake meat gets fairly low, as you can see there in that kind of middle orangish purple or rose colored column. But and then, as you can see, Mexico agreed to take more cuts, and you can see this, cut them down to

[67:03] 1.3 million that they would pay. Do we get copies of the slide? Absolutely, absolutely. So so what is being talked about. Now there have been multiple alternatives submitted by the upper base and the lower base of the Bureau of Reclamation. Ngos have submitted proposals on how they think Lake Powell and Lake Meat should be operated. Bureau of Reclamation is analyzing those modeling, those and that report and those analysis are starting to come out. None of them are are such that everyone's happy. Generally speaking, the upper basins trying to protect storage reserves allow for some recovery in Lake Powell. The lower basin wants to take less cuts. And so it's the the States are meeting. Becky Mitchell is our Commissioner for Colorado. And they are meeting every couple of weeks in person right now to try to figure out what to to put in place for the next term, whatever that is, there's a lot of disagreement on. Should it be very short? Term? 5 years ish? Or should we do another 20 year

[68:20] similar to what what we've been operating in since 2,007 in our guidelines. Similarly, this is worth pointing out. This was a proposal that had some traction, and what this is on the left is the lower basin is more or less agreed. They would take that 1st cut down to about a million and a half acre feet. They've agreed that they would do it to offset their evap and their losses, but then it gets into the gray shaded area or the peak from one and a half up to some of proposed 3.9. The lower basin is willing to take those cuts if the upper basin would take half of them.

[69:05] and so you could imagine if we were at 3.9, and and the upper basin was expected to take half of that when our use is 4.3 it would be very, very difficult to do so, and it's it's probably all of our post compact use, so that one has not been very popular amongst Colorado or or the Upper Basin as I mentioned. You know, this started in earnest a few years ago. States are meeting regularly with the whole goal of having something new in place by 2026. And we're we're we're hopeful so. And thank you all. I hope it maybe clarified some of your questions from earlier, but that so? Well.

[70:01] so for what share of of public Colorado just goes to agriculture? It's about 80 85 somewhere, like my understanding is imperial. Vat. Well, actually, alfalfa alone consumes more than all municipal and industrial in the basin I've been told, but I haven't seen that one thing that's interesting on the trend. And this. So I've been working on climate change since late eighties, and somebody from Usgs told me back. Then I won't name the person's name. Oh, Temp, you know temperature doesn't matter. It's all precipitation. I don't think so. There's, you know, new work. And Brad, who lives in Boulder and Jonathan overpeck, if at least they found a number of studies that there seems to be some effect of higher and temperature. Clearly not. Some effect of higher temperatures on reducing long term flows. Of course we're also in a Mega drought, and I don't know if that's you know, ending the good news about that is, at some point we'll be able to make a drought, so maybe there'll be some relief. But it just seems that watching those numbers, and if the

[71:04] you know, and I don't know if it's established science. But if people are sort of saying no temperature has an effect, and it makes some sense right? You just get more vapotranspiration. Precip doesn't seem to be going up or down long term, but you know, if and the the rise in temperature is inexorable. I mean, it seems that it might be pushing. you know, supplies down over I don't know exactly how soon, but you know, we might be facing a more dire situation. Coming, let's say decades. I mean, is that reasonable scenario? Yeah, I'll leave it to the experts. I think one thing that's been injected into the negotiations is, what if the Colorado River, instead of being 17? It's 13. If the average flows 13 or 11 or 9. I get nervous when you start talking low, low numbers, because what it would mean to achieve those would mean drastic drastic changes, and if ultimately the river is better than that.

[72:13] Then you know. What did you give up? You know what is, what is our national security, our food security? What are we willing to give up? And you know, if it's given up golf courses? Personally, I'm probably okay with that. But others are not. If it's you know agriculture. I've never met a farmer who said, Yeah, my my farms are not that important. you know, I mean. And so it's it's hard to make cuts in agriculture, too, because people are used to it. I mean, you know, even in Arizona they're going on 50 years now of this new supply with Central Arizona Project. It's it's hard to tell a farmer who's been at it for 5 decades. It's multi-generational at that point to give it up. And so it's, you know, and the alfalfa. I don't

[73:02] dispute alfalfa. Use a lot of water, but it's a very important forage crops for for some operations, and and most of the people that grow it are growing it because it makes makes sense to them from a business model 0 back down to more than the perspective of boulder. I guess I'm just wondering at you know at what what level of cutbacks would Northern have to undertake before it really began to impact us, because I mean from the from a very broad perspective, it looks like we could do with a whole lot less northern water if we had to most years. Right? I mean. our own internal rights are almost enough to supply our demand in in some of the wetter years. and so we could. We could kind of withstand a pretty good cutback from Northern before the city was in serious. Was that an accurate sort of gross overview, I think, for the near term. Yes, but our

[74:07] planning shows that our demands are going to be increasing over time. a big unknown though, is is climate change right. And we've got we model a range of scenarios. So if we're headed down the path or the trajectory of the more extreme or or less favorable conditions. We're certainly in a position where we're heavily reliant on what we're getting from the Colorado River as well as so any shortage in supply from that from the Colorado River would be. But those are the unknowns of climate change. I would just add one thing, what Kim said. You know, the one thing that's unique about Cbt. System is we don't allow direct reuse of Cbt. Return flows.

[75:02] And so you end up with, we have a changed South Platte River. We have a changed call. Regime on the South Platte and on the tributaries where reservoirs, because of all the Colorado river water cropping flows up, fills reservoirs which brings in junior reservoirs into priority earlier. So a lot of the junior reservoirs in the foothills and the tributaries now are getting more water than they probably used to because of the Colorado River return flows propping up flows in the South Platte and the tributaries. And it's it's complex to tease out exactly. But it's, you know, between Denver water system, Cbt and other Trans mountain. It's a couple 100,000 acre feet every year. That's in the South Platte somewhere. That's that's changing the flows and propping up those flows. And if we take away the initial delivery of it, you lose. Obviously you lose that return, and then you know, what? How does that trickle or snowball through a system? What's what percentage of your shares are owned by municipal

[76:05] and sort of ag users in general, roughly, 72%, 73% municipal is that is that sort of stable now, or do you expect that to continue to creep upwards over time up a little bit more. Now usage is closer to 50 50. It does vary drastically from year to year, but say over the last 5 years is pretty close to 50 50, even though the ownership is is more heavily weighted toward industry and municipalities. There's a piece I heard earlier about. Can you do with less with Northern water, with Cbt. And when you gap is, it's the reality, and your staff knows way better than I do. But something I think about when I think about boulder is the inability for good reason, that your demand points from your 2 treatment plant. They're not plum together, so you kind of can't do without Northern waters. I mean just getting water to your your polar reservoir plant, which is different than some utilities that can kind of push water for the demand points from any supply point.

[77:08] policy and process perspective with the negotiations. What does that look like? Is it just each state? Is it? Or basin? Lower Basin? It's each State, and then they're on 2 teams, the upper basin and lower basin, and so it is in the the upper basin in the 4 States, and their commissioners are as well aligned right now as I. I think they've ever been. So we have a very good team. the. It depends on the the meeting. It's a lot of times. It's 7 commissioners. Then they'll bring their attorneys, and then the room and the table grows a little bit. But yeah, it's it's it's 2 teams and the Upper basin we have what's called the Upper Colorado River Commission that was formed out of the upper basin compact, and that's kind of the representative body for the upper basin. The lower basin. They are pretty much individual

[78:08] and then within, because they have contracts they have in California is a great example, 4.4 million acre feet. But there's 8 or 10 significant water users that are at the table at a lot of meetings. And their Commissioner is, it's it's it's a challenge to represent them, because they have direct contracts for X amount of water coming out of Lake me. And so it's hard for California's Commissioner to speak for all of those and so it's a whole different thing with the lower Basin States. In in the Inflation Reduction Act. There was some funding set aside for Colorado River projects to help. you know, fund different conservation and other project projects. And I'm just wondering if you've heard anything from reclamation on

[79:04] what's happening with those efforts, or you know, the additional buckets of funding that were meant to be coming to folks along the Colorado River to support these projects. Yeah, it's a. It's a great question. So in the Inflation reduction act, they allocated 4 billion dollars for helping to withdrawt in the West, but most of it was headed for the Colorado River Bureau of Reclamation. Let out. I don't know the exact number somewhere around half of it in previous years, and almost all that went to Lower Basin ag operations, not to have any long term solutions, but basically to pay farmers to, not farm for a year or 2 years, and it was hundreds of millions to some of the bigger operators, and there in the upper basin was allocated 500 million of that. The upper basin implemented what was called system conservation pilot program. We've done it in 2015, through 2018, did it again, and

[80:15] 2423, and 22 have the cost of about a hundred and some odd 1 million, again, is paying farmers not to farm one year. I myself and many, many others have been very frustrated that that money did not go do anything for a durable solution. It was literally save water. One year, maybe gain a little in one of the reservoirs, but not enough to really change the the course of the system. The the last administration. On the last day allocated a bunch, just threw it out with verbal commitments all that has been pulled back by the new administration. It is pending for the review, so I don't know if that answers your question, Amy. But it's there's about, I think, a billion and a half that was somewhat promised or committed via verbal commitments, and that's being reviewed.

[81:16] And and that last tranche was really more for ecosystem restoration and water quality and sort of different types of projects than just paying farmers to not farm. It was in the upper base, and there was about a hundred 50 ish 1 million. That was mostly what they what they call bucket, 2 environmental projects, but the lower basin, the vast majority of that was committed to Lower basin agriculture on a related sort of thing that I mean just sort of generally. What level of decision making authority or power does the reclamation have in this? And what changes have you seen with the new administration in terms of this whole process

[82:01] they have a lot of authority in the lower basin. They have their hand literally. The contracts for lower basin use is with the water user with reclamation. That is, the contract. Reclamation takes the orders, re releases those out of lake meat. Now, other lower basin users like in in Arizona, the Salt River, Gila River. Those are different. I mean, those are tributaries is more like Colorado. There's not a contract. There's not a whole lot of Bureau of Reclamation, oversight or or control the so the lower basin, the water reclamation, is water, Master Upper Basin. Not not all. It's totally different. While our systems are operated where the lower basin I have another slide. I wish I had it in here. Lower Basin has basically 15 diversion points. The upper Basin has 6,000 diversions. It's because it's every little ditch. It's every little municipal system, you know. Cbt, Windy Gap, or 2 bigger ones. Absolutely. But there are thousands of others, and so reclamation has no connection to the vast majority of those they do have a connection to Northern water, other reclamation projects. But it's a different relationship. We have a repayment contract with them. We've satisfied all that.

[83:26] And so, you know, is there connection or reclamation with Cbt, absolutely. But it's all. It's totally different than the lower base. Is there a thought or a concern that at this administration Federal administration will try to drive this process one way or the other, or the timing of it one way or the other. Well, they're going to have to drive it, because there has to be something put in place by next year? And historically, it's been a driven and push people toward a conclusion.

[84:02] Is there a new head of Ui, yeah, it's a problem. Notice, there's been a Commissioner reclamation. Just curious. I mean, you saw what boulder achieved in 20 years. Are you optimistic about the potential for conservation, both for Ag and small industrial uses. I mean everything with the Ag. You say. I mean, there's a lot a lot of just technologies that they could put in right. They could use water a lot more efficiently. Right. The thing with efficiency in the municipal sector is happening everywhere, and you know what great work boulders done. I mean, you look at some of the work, Las Vegas Phoenix. It's phenomenal, but I mean it is costing a lot of money. But I always remind people Las Vegas. They were over using Nevada Nevada's allocation. They had to do something that they would continue to grow. They had to. That's why they pay X dollars per square foot of turf to remove it, because they were done. I mean, they had no water left to to develop and to supply

[85:11] Ag. Almost all the ag in the lower basin is out of basin. So even if you are, which they are very, very efficient because of how they operate down there. Their fields are laser plane. I mean they they're, you know, they are very efficient. But even if they're not, that water doesn't go anywhere, and the the good example of efficiency is the salt and sea. If any of you paid attention, Salton Sea was is formed and was propped up by inefficient irrigation. And now they've gotten very efficient. What's Assaultan Sea doing? And now you're exposing all this? This, the the old lake bed there, and so they're in a quandary. I mean, they're very efficient. And then in the upper basin, generally speaking.

[86:00] Ag, if it's not efficient that water makes it back to the river and goes down to the next person. And so you increase ag efficiency in the upper basin. Yeah, you'd leave more water in the river in that stretch, but it doesn't really move the needle on a basin scale, because all that gets back from return flows. Do we have time for could you talk more about how northern water makes decisions on how water is distributed in the event of a shortage, and how you would decide what how much water is going to the city of Boulder. I'll start and I'll let Brad correct. Now, I think Northern water has a very our quota system. Is very unique in the in the Colorado River Basin and throughout the West. And it's as is, I think, there was a question earlier, and it's a good example right now. Don't quote me on this, but I think we have in our storage reserve somewhere in the 600,000 acre feet range, 3 issues 2, 2 and a half issues.

[87:10] And so I think, answer your question about the denominator in there, you know, that's for you know. And that's Kim they'd hit on it is it's the Cbt system is is managed on a through quota and other tools on a 2, 3, 4 year horizon. Now, what would happen if we weren't able to provide quota we were Supply Limited. I don't. We don't know, because we've never there, because we've managed on the front end. Our board is managed on the front end to not short on the pill. I think it's fair to say that I I wouldn't see our board necessarily in that kind of a year. just to sun's not coming up kind of a year, is they? Still again to cause point? We have a very unique allocation process that can really like just kind of kind of pull back on the reins when you're having a really bad day.

[88:05] In my opinion they probably wouldn't go so far to say, Okay, we're pulling back on the range. We're gonna go low, low quota, even though it's dry. We're supposed to set high quotas, but for Supply Limited, I don't think. And I say this because we have such a a free market on annual leases, and the opportunities to do so, they might. Let's just say, don't let this get the news set of 40%, some something substandard. And I think it would let the marketplace kind of allow water to be pushed and pulled between those who are willing to lease it. To those who really need it. We're we're blessed by that in that foundational kind of economy kind of driving where the water ultimately goes. Any other questions. Thank you, general, thanks very, very informative. Thank you.

[89:01] Brad, might want to take about 5 more minutes. 1 min, Commercial, because I want to make sure you don't sleep like we don't sleep one, albeit the Colorado River is extremely important to all of us and to the State of Colorado and to all the other States as well. A. Our State's doing a phenomenal job we should. When we see Commissioner Mitchell, Becky Mitchell, every time we should thank her for what she's doing for our State. However, don't lose sight of what's going on in Nebraska, on the plat. It's I contend, that there'll be a day that can bite us equally as bad. It's issues around Nebraska's more recent desire to build the Perkins County Canal. coupled with a really important and overemphasize this, a really important recovery program for endangered species in Central Nebraska which Boulder was instrumental in in those negotiations. Back in the day that expires in 2032 that's all culminated around this Perkins issue recovery program compact, which you know by design, was not intended to reach up into the Front range.

[90:12] However, I think if things got really bad, the sheer administration drastically different, and could affect us all at all. So when you're looking west, don't forget about problems in the East. And then, secondly, you may be hearing from northern water. if you're watching our website, social media hearing me and a few others talk, we have a growing concern about water being extracted from our service area by the metro area. It's been a long standing challenge. It started in a big way in the mid 19 eighties, 1984, 85, when Thornton acquired a lot of water from areas around Fort Collins and east. That's happening more. Not so much by Thornton, but from other metro areas. And we're expressing concern about that that we have done, including the city of Boulder phenomenal job of building a water supply that is good now should be good in the future, we take care of it, and when those extractions happen, it lessens, are the value of newer projects

[91:17] or conservation. For that matter, where we're, we're really just backfilling for the loss of the supplies going to the Metro area. That doesn't make all people happy. I know I'm saying something that's somewhat controversial, but nonetheless that's the direction our board has set us on. So, you know, is Boulder County threatened by that there's some systems in Boulder County that could be eyed by the Metro area as their next water supply. It's probably more so in the northern front range, and certainly in Eastern Colorado. So you're going to hear that going forward until we're told otherwise that that's a concern and elevating that concern. Perhaps someday talking about what mitigation looks like when those kinds of extractions occur from primarily from our Ag land in Eastern Colorado.

[92:05] So where does the water for to fill gross reservoirs gonna come from. It's it's Colorado River's Moffitt phone assist. Thank you. Thank you. Huge huge thanks to Brad and Kyle for being here tonight. Always an enlightening presentation. Anytime little scary. No, someone informative and appreciated. Thank you very much. And I know they have to get back on the road to love with, so we'll we'll let them. Let's head out and thank you so much we'll be right back. Makes the chicken for the road.

[93:02] Excuse me. Oh, okay, check alright. Well, while we're transitioning here in my prior role. When I was when I was in water resources manager, I actually got to go. That was led by Northern water, and it was fascinating to see some of the big water users on that system. Some of the industrial agricultural mega projects. So that's whenever the time comes for me to retire. That would be so our next item here is a quick update on our long term financial strategy. It's a it's something that is a staff led work plan item across the across the organization. But it's also something that's been selected by our city council as one of their 11 priorities and

[94:15] organization wide. It's really looking at all the different funds that we have our true cost of service. And just how are we gonna have a sound financial organization and platform going forward. I think the Covid, years a few years ago really opened up our eyes to how reliant we were on taxes and things like that for our utilities. We we thought about that as well. Our our revenue is not driven so much by taxes, but it's more by precipitation, and how much water people are are using. But we can have our own version of shortfall. So I think the the organization is really wanting to take a look at that kind of what our

[95:05] true costs of operating the city are a lot of old buildings like this one that are are a challenge to keep going, and and take a lot of expenses. So Charlotte Husky is our is our budget officer. If you ever watch the city's budget process in the in the middle of the year and end of the year. It's like a Netflix series, and Charlotte has a starring home. Does a really nice job leading the whole organization. So she'll be doing a quick update on this tonight. Our, our own team and utilities is is tracking this as well. I'm I'm on the steering committee for this effort, and we're looking for ways to plug into it, even though utilities as an enterprise by design. We have to be kind of a separate financial entity, but we're still part of

[96:02] a larger organization and and have to end those partnerships as well. So, Charlotte, I hope that gave you enough time to get share. Alright. Thanks, Joe. Good evening. I am Charlotte Husky. I'm the budget officer for the City of boulder. Good to be here with you this evening and talk about the long term, financial strategy and the city's effort on creating a comprehensive financial strategy for the city of Boulder, and we've got a few slides here to talk about the effort that Joe is mentioning, and we've been working on this since last year. This was something that was indicated to top City

[97:06] Council priority in April of 2024 last year, at their council retreat, and before diving into the long term financial strategy. I'll just provide a very brief update on our financial forecast and some of our forecasting considerations for the 2026 budget just being very brief. We recognize our major revenue source, for the city of Boulder is sales and use tax as well as property tax supporting general purposes. And so we've seen in 2023 into 2024, a flattening of our sales and use tax revenues. And so what that means for us is limited ongoing additional enhancements for ongoing additive programs and services above our existing service levels. And we've also been impacted recently by property tax legislation. Both 2 pieces of legislation that impacted our growth last year. And we're actually revising our 2025 and 2026 forecast down for property tax. That makes up about 12% of our revenues. Again, a major revenue source for the city of Boulder

[98:13] Federal uncertainty, as I'm sure you all are well aware, there are a couple of items that we're particularly keeping an eye on for this moving into 2026. And throughout this current fiscal year that includes looking at our Federal awards. So our direct grant awards that we receive from the Federal Government supporting transportation projects affordable housing projects. for example, in indirect potential impacts for Federal funds that are received by organizations that help to augment and uplift the city's programs and services as well. The second item that we are continuing to look at is the implication of potential changes to tariff policies and consideration in particular, for cost of capital infrastructure, and then thinking about consumption, and then potential implications and subsequent implications on

[99:05] consumer consumer and business confidence and sales and use tax revenue growth. The final is looking at tax policy changes and continuing to monitor this. This is particularly thinking of our tax exempt status as a municipality and potential repeal or removal of this tax exempt status that we have as a municipality. So those are 3 key items that we're continuing to monitor throughout the 2026 budget development process. And one of the things that we're focused on with organizational resiliency is really looking at the long term financial strategy. And this is focused on funding of our underfunded services developing a five-year comprehensive financial plan having community conversations about service levels. And I'll talk more about that on the next slide. We're also continuing to focus on our flexibility across all of our funds. So the city of Boulder, as an organization and as a

[100:05] municipality, has one of the highest dedicated sales and use tax rates, or the dedication of sales and use tax across the front range. And so we're continuing to focus as part of the long term financial strategy. And in our budgeting process, looking at flexibility across all of our city funds. And then, finally, we've been on a journey as an organization to focus on outcome, based budgeting and understanding the performance of our programs and services. And so we're continuing to focus on that within the 2026 budget development process. So the long term. Financial strategy is a focus. What about the State? Because they're cutting back to? Is that also like Singapore revenues? Which which revenues are you considering or thinking about reducing that it was a billion dollar shortfall is way to make up.

[101:02] But I don't know. We are at this point in time. Not considering potential impacts related to the State and the budget that they just passed. Primarily considering the funding that we're receiving from Federal funds and Federal awards. So the long term financial strategy focuses on the development of a comprehensive citywide strategy to help guide fiscal decision making and long term financial health of the city. The long term financial strategy is building upon prior policy recommendations that came forward from Blue Ribbon Commission reports to reports that were published in 2,008 and 2010 as well as the 2019 budgeting for resilience report. And these reports generated 70 recommendations. And within the long term financial strategy. We're focused on implementing these recommendations that we have not yet implemented as an organization that includes calling for a comprehensive financial plan for the city of boulder, cautioning against the city's over reliance on sales and use tax and the dedication of funding sources

[102:10] recommending the identification of core city services and Service level prioritization and then finally encouraging the development of an outcomes based system for budgeting. The long term, financial strategy is focused on 4 primary work streams that we've developed, and we have 2 phases of work within this comprehensive initiative, and we received policy guidance from monthly financial Strategy Council committee meetings that comprise 3 Council members as part of that committee. We also recently provided an update to City Council at the April 3rd Council meeting. and are continuing forward with updates to council throughout this process, and we also have an internal steering committee that Joe helps to support and sit on as well. The long term financial strategy initiative really focuses on current and future state. So when we look at what is to come within this initiative and the development of this initiative, our current state is that we have a high amount of dedicated and restricted revenues within the city of Boulder, and what this means for us is reduced flexibility to address needs at the moment in the future state, in the work of the long term financial strategy.

[103:21] we're focused on increasing our flexibility of funding to be able to meet emerging and changing needs. Our major revenue sources mentioned sales and use tax reduces stability and predictability of our funding levels. And this was particularly seen and impacted during the pandemic period with a drastic decline of sales and use tax revenues. And so we're looking at within this initiative and project, increasing our stability and our diversity of our revenues as a city, so that we're able to obtain less reliance on sales and use tax as a whole. We have underfunded core city services as well as expiring funding services, particularly looking at our tax structure and tax terms. And so we're looking at increasing reliability through establishing guiding principles.

[104:07] revenue, identification and community prioritization to be able to meet service level demands. And then, finally, recent practice is focused on short term decisions without a longer term strategy. So this focus of this work is really focused on developing a long term financial strategy, looking holistically and comprehensively across the organization is that 60% on the previous slide. Does that include things like utility fees and things like that? It does. And that's 1 of the things when we look at our sales tax revenues. In particular, we actually have 56% of our sales tax revenue. So I don't have this slide here. But Boulder is the second highest when we look across the Front Range and other comparable cities in Colorado, of the amount of dedicated funding and that's just looking at our sales and use tax. But that total number is looking at the entire city revenues. Yeah. So our work streams within the long term financial strategy. I mentioned that we have 4 primary work streams that includes a long term financial plan, alternative funding mechanisms, core service levels. And then a multi-year ballot measure strategy within the long term financial plan. We've developed guiding principles, and we've performed a current State assessment against the recommendations that were provided by the Blue Ribbon Commission reports and budgeting for

[105:24] resilience report and our phase. 2 efforts will focus on the development of a five-year comprehensive plan within alternative funding mechanisms. We're looking at identifying alternative revenue opportunities, including looking at taxes, fees, and other revenues, such as grants and public private partnerships within core service levels. We're focused on identifying the levels of service that the city should provide for programs and services. And this will come forward with benchmarking analysis as part of phase. 2 of this work that's yet to come this summer. And we're also planning on community conversations to be able to understand the desired level of service for city programs and services across the organization and that work and those community conversations will be a part of what we're calling fund our future. And that is to come this summer and fall as well.

[106:14] And then, finally, the multi-year ballot measure strategy which focuses on the development of a framework, a two-year framework for consideration of potential tax ballot measures in 2025, and 2026. And what we're also planning on performing work and engagement and community conversations through fund our future as well, and there are a few slides that speak a little bit more to the multi-year ballot measure strategy for reference guiding principles that have been established. So I mentioned that we've been working with the Financial Strategy Committee, and they have been helpful in advising and informing on some of the development of this work within the long term financial strategy. And so these guiding principles are representative of that, including uplifting our sustainability, equity, and resilience framework through

[107:06] 3 guiding principles, including fiscal sustainability and sufficiency, equity and resiliency under fiscal sustainability and sufficiency. We're really focused on the stability and predictability again, of our core service levels. We're focused on the diversity. flexibility, and sufficiency of our revenues as an organization under equity, we're focused on identifying revenue structures and financial policies that aim to reduce tax and fee burdens on historically disadvantaged groups. And then, under resiliency, we're focused on our ability to be able to adapt as an organization and recover quickly to adversity and change that's supported both by a diversification of our revenues, as well as sufficient sufficient reserve levels that we have across all of our 41 budgeted funds in the organization. the multiyear ballot measure framework. So we performed analysis of tax ballot measure history. We took a look at our dedicated funding across the Front Range and the comparative analysis. And we worked with the Financial Strategy Committee in developing a multi-year ballot measure framework, including what we intend to focus on for potential 2025 tax ballot measures

[108:22] and 2026 tax ballot measures. And for the 2025 tax ballot measures, we're focusing on a more narrow incremental approach to potential tax changes that really focuses on taking care of what we have our existing assets at the city I hadn't haven't yet mentioned. But we do have a backlog of capital infrastructure, renovation, replacement, maintenance project needs that I think Joe spoke to in the lead in of this presentation. And so for the potential measures that we're considering for 2025, we're really focused on that for 2026, we're focused on a more expanded and creative and comprehensive approach

[109:05] to potential tax changes. And the key focus areas would be looking at unmet needs and taking care of what we have. In addition to additional investments and programs and services. So we worked with the Financial Strategy Committee, our internal executive steering committee. And then we've also presented these to City Council to the full City Council for consideration so far. But in looking at the potential options for the 2025 potential tax ballot measures, there are 2 options that are moving forward currently for full council consideration, and that includes an extension of the existing point. 3 community cultural resilience and safety sales and use tax from 2036 to 2050, or permanently to continue to support city infrastructure and maintenance projects as well as nonprofit capacity building and capital investments, and the second is looking at an exploration of the creation of a public realm tax which would increase the existing permanent parks. Property tax from 0 point 9 mils to 2.2 5 2 mils, and expand the use of this tax.

[110:16] and it would also allow debt, issuance to support capital infrastructure and maintenance projects that more broadly fell within the public realm, so that would help to support not only parks, but also open space. civic buildings and areas and public right of way, such as streets, sidewalks, bike lanes, and multi-use paths, a couple of items in terms of potential revenue generation after 2036, we would be looking at an additional 15 million in continued estimated annual revenues. We would also have the ability to finance capital projects earlier on utilizing the additional annual revenue that would be generated from the extension of a Ccrs tax. And then within the creation of a public realm tax.

[111:08] we're looking at approximately 7 million in additional annual revenues that, again, would be able to support funding of existing projects. But also we'd be able to utilize financing potential with that with debt issuance. and then finally, just to round out the presentation and then happy to take questions. We're focused on fund our future effort as part of this work within the long term financial strategy. And so we're going to be having community conversations on service level prioritization this summer and fall to be able to receive input from a diverse array of stakeholders on trade-offs of service level priorities for the organization, for our existing programs and services, and also looking at our unfunded needs, our unfunded and underfunded needs list. We're also focused on as part of this effort

[112:03] educating the public on the city's budget as well as our financial constraints that we're seeing. I mentioned earlier that our sales and use tax is flattening. Part of that is of concern for us, for a major revenue source that we're seeing. We also have a high amount of dedicated funds within the organization. And we're also planning as part of this effort to perform a statistically valid polling survey for 2026 potential tax ballot measures. And really the intent of this work is to have holistic engagement to be able to help support and inform potential 2026 tax ballot measures as part of that multi-year ballot measure strategy. And then, finally, our timeline within fund our future is looking at here. We're in this 1st box in April and May, where we're providing previews to board and commissions as well as community groups that we'll be having discussions with and supported by Council members.

[113:02] In May, June 12, th we are performing a framework discussion with City Council for the fund. Our future conversation that is planned to come, and that'll be in a community and council forum. That'll take place as part of a city council meeting from July through October, we'll have these community conversations that will include in person and virtual information and input sessions and as well as engagement through online platforms such as be heard boulder. And then in March, January, through March of next year is when we'll plan to perform the 2026 polling survey and complete staff revenue analysis, and then May of next year is when we'll be bringing forward an update to city council on the long term financial strategy as well as any considerations for 2026 potential tax ballot measures. So happy to answer any questions that you all have, and hope you all are able to to participate in the fund our future conversations that are to come this summer and fall.

[114:10] What was the rough breakdown again in terms of your city's sources of revenues. Could you just summarize that? Again, our primary sources of revenue, that fund general purposes are sales and use tax? I mean, in general purposes. If we exclude utility revenues or sales and use tax, that's about 40% of our annual revenues, and then 12 to 15% is supported by property tax. What percentage of the city budget does the utilities price roughly look at it on bar charts are because of the capital projects and the fact that the system we're operating is is several 1 billion dollars worth of infrastructure. Our our budget is the is the biggest of any of the city departments. It's A.

[115:07] We're. We're part of the broader city team as a department, but it is a separate financial model because of the enterprise status, and and we get our revenue from rate payers. If we we look at the past 3 years utilities, budget floats between 20 to 25% of the total city budget that's looking at both capital, the capital budget as well as the operating budget. There are rules on how that has to work. The gross majority comes from rate payers. Okay. Charlotte. you talked about how we're trying to create more flexibility in terms of the application of the city's budget, so that we can meet some more immediate needs. But then you also talked about how we've had maybe too much of a focus on short term

[116:06] and so I'm just wondering, like we go through this process annually with utilities where we have a capital planning process, and that is like we have a multi year. Look ahead in that during that. And so there's obviously a lot of decision making very measured and intentional decision decision making around these large projects. So it's just listening to you. Great presentation. Thanks so much. I was wondering what what kind of immediate flexibility this city is thinking about. And what that would look like in practice. Recognizing that it's it's helpful to not have everything earmarked because you can't predict things like the Covid pandemic, but just sort of what are some other use? Cases that we would, we would see that could be blended into the long term financial plan.

[117:04] Yeah, so that's a great question. And I I think it's been mentioned a couple of times, and you mentioned it. Just now that the focus of the long term, financial strategy is really looking holistically across the entire organization. And so when we're looking at long term financial planning that is really focused on the organization as a whole. Recognizing that some departments have already been focusing on long term, financial plans, on forecasts, on 6 year forecasts. And, as you're saying, with the capital improvement program and the development within the utilities budget year after year. And so within the long term financial strategy. We're really looking holistically underneath the alternative funding mechanisms as well as the multi-year ballot measure strategy. There are a blend of options that we're looking at. So we're looking at potential changes to taxes that's looking at both potential new taxes as well as our existing taxes.

[118:05] I mentioned that we have currently 56% of our existing taxes that are earmarked for specific uses. That is the second, highest, most the second highest dedication rate of any municipality across the front range, and and some examples of of that include specific dedication for transportation, funding for open space, for parks, for capital improvement, infrastructure and for arts, culture and heritage. And so, as part of the look forward and part of the comprehensive thinking for 2026 potential tax ballot measures, we'll be taking a look comprehensively across our tax structure and also looking at potential new taxes. So one of the taxes that was of potential interest to the Financial Strategy Committee was looking at an occupation or a head tax. There was also potential interest in looking at

[119:12] the potential of imposing a vacancy tax on second homeowners, for example. And so there are other options within the tax structure itself with, we're also looking at our existing fees that we have across the organization. And so part of the phase one work that we did within the long term. Financial strategy is perform a current state inventory across all of our 5,000 fees that we have, and looking at potential opportunities for analyzing our cost recovery levels. And so that's part of the work that's planning on coming forward as part of phase 2 of the long term financial strategy. And we're actually asking departments to develop a pathway for potential fee updates that might be looking

[120:00] at additional cost recovery levels. For example, across the organization. Yeah, I don't know if you were in the room, Charlotte, when Lynn called in, but she did bring up the Sundance Film festival, and I know that you know we don't. We don't have a great sense of what the impacts of that will be as yet. But there will be, you know, hotel rooms, car rentals, like the things that come along with hosting that type of an event, and if it increases a strain on utilities, you know, bumping up our Max day. You know capacities in the utility system, because we're bringing so many people into the city that can have an additional strain or require us to expand our system. So thinking about how the city will be collecting revenues you know, to to cover the type of expenses we might occur incur by hosting that which

[121:00] I'm sure there are lots of conversations going on about this, but it did come up earlier in the meeting when Lynn called in, and it does seem to tie into some of what you're talking about. It is absolutely something that we'll be considering as part of the additional projects that are that are going on across the downtown area in particular, and as part of the 2026 budget development process as well. Charlotte. One thing I would add as well is, I know you kind of mentioned, the dedicated funding sources, things like open space parks, transportation. And I think that proposed tax you throughout was also for infrastructure, public space parks. And so it would be really helpful just to understand where the gaps are to certainly want more flexibility. But I think, as I think about measures being able to point to specifics and what folks are funding and getting out of it, I think would be really, really helpful. Just yeah, I think that would be great for the sessions. Yeah, I appreciate the the recommendation. And it is something that we're planning on developing ahead of those conversations with community. We are, currently working on a refined, unfunded, and underfunded, needsless across the organization.

[122:21] So currently have a estimated, unfunded needs list of about 380 million that's looking at capital replacement, capital infrastructure for parks assets that includes looking at our city facilities. As Joe was mentioning earlier. So there's a long list that we currently have, and we'll be refining that as part of the 26 development process to then help to inform those conversations that are to come. Awesome thanks other questions. Thank you. Thank you.

[123:12] The next item is any other matters from the board? Does anybody have any other items to raise tonight? And Joe any any other matters from Staff. I normally have a few things to touch on with the board, but tonight I came up empty. So if it's okay with you. I feel good at this point. if it's okay with you, I can just upcoming schedule. So for the for the May June July meeting, we typically have a a 3 meeting series for the capital improvement program and rates. Charlotte's presentation is a great overall framework for that. In May we typically review with the board

[124:01] where we left off last year, and and where things stood. It's a great opportunity to kind of brief the new Board members on how the finances work. And then in June we clear the whole meeting agenda. Come back and do a deep dive into what we're planning for projects and rates. We look at a at a 6 year window as we were discussing in that last discussion, and then in July we come back and ask the Board for a recommendation to City Council, so that'll be for for this group with the new makeup of the 5 members you have. That'll be the 1st thing this year that you take action on. I don't think the presentation will be that long in in May, and so our thought is to have the meeting conducted at the Boulder Reservoir water treatment plant. We sometimes do have them at different locations, and then so combine the meeting with that presentation and overview of the budget, and then do a tour of our 63rd Street Waterline Project, which is in full plate right now.

[125:10] I live in that area. So I've noticed. But I actually think the team is doing a great job managing a complex project. And and the traffic impacts. So we'll do that in May, and then we'll hit June the cip and rates. As I discussed a recommendation on the Cmp. Cip in July, and then we'll also have an information item with some familiar figures to discuss water supply planning and the Boulder Valley comprehensive plan. Another big picture topic. So the next few months. There should be some good things for the for the Board to look at, and should be a good year that way.

[126:00] Everybody has a schedule of the meetings upcoming several meetings. Change them every year. January and February the 3rd Monday falls on holiday. So that's what we've got great alright. But any other issues. Okay, right here. Actually to adjourned any more seconds seconds, all in favor. Bye. Thanks for checking in Amy. Thanks. I I just got back from the Colorado river and the Green River confluence. So this was a very relevant conversation for me, so sorry to have to participate virtually, but welcome, Joel and Catherine, and we will see you soon.

[127:02] Thank you. Pardon. Bye.