July 21, 2025 — Water Resources Advisory Board Regular Meeting

Transcript

Captions from City of Boulder YouTube recording.

[0:00] Yeah, okay, figure out how to record 6 o'clock. Are we doing? Be so clear writing that up one month. Okay, let's hold meeting to order grant meetings for July 21, st and my 1st order of business tonight is to look at the June meeting minutes. Did anybody have any comments or questions or changes to those minutes? If not, should I hear a motion to approve them? Motion to approve? Second, second, all in favor? Aye. okay. We learned a minute for Jimmy. and I think we have the signed copy here for Karen when we're when we're finished. And now we'll go to the public comment, Joanna, do you? Wanna thank you. Yes, I do. Thank you. So Hello. My name is Joanna 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, and I'm doing double duty. So I'll throw this up in just a minute. These rules are in place to find the balance between transparency with community members and security that minimizes disruptions.

[1:21] We need a full name associated with each person's participation in open or public comment, and we're not able to unmute you without it. You can go ahead and let me know what your full name is. If you're struggling to do that, I'll give you my cell phone number here in just a minute, or you can put it in the QA. There is no chat feature for this meeting and the QA. Function is enabled so that you can address any zoom connectivity issues as needed. As I mentioned, you are welcome to text me. If you have any technical issues. My phone number is (303) 817-1742

[2:02] 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 you'll have 3 min. Once you start your comments and I'll go ahead and try to call names, and let me know if you're on deck. If we have that many folks thank you so much for your participation. So I would invite those that are interested in speaking during open comment, to virtually raise your hands right now, if you'd like, the controls are generally at the bottom or top of your screen. Do you see one community member that would like to speak? You're ready. I will go ahead and ask her to talk. Lynn Siegel, you seldomly answer to any of the things that I bring up, and I bring up the most important things to this community for water.

[3:08] The biggest one right now is that diversion project in Cu South. That is unacceptable. 94 million dollars. We're in a deficit now, we don't need more. More is not better here. It's driving up the cost of housing, the cost of homelessness, and the cost of water for human beings to drink like they don't even have in Gaza. That's what it's going to be like in Boulder. This is unacceptable, that water diversion, groundwater diversion project huge, huge project that will deplete the groundwater in the adjacent grasslands, and then guess what it's more susceptible to. But flooding, isn't it? What are you doing? Why do you never answer back to me. you know. And why don't you even see my face? Amy can hardly recognize me when I see her around town.

[4:02] because she doesn't know who I am. She doesn't see me except when I go on the water tour. The infrastructure tour. How can you be promoting this kind of stuff in this community that that is completely unaffordable and unbelievable. This is water. This is your responsibility. You know what my name means. Water. My daughter is a water climate change. Artist, my brother is a water chemist. Water is everything, water is life. You all know that. Why can't you even answer to one member of the public. No one ever comes here except me, right. me and my little black box with my name on it. How insulting! I know it's not your job, but it is yours to talk to the city council and get people's actual faces on the screen. I'm not putting up anything, you know sex or anything.

[5:00] I'm a member of the public that is interested in water here, and you don't need to see me. You do. You need to see my face. You need to see me on the street. This is utterly ridiculous, and your behavior with preserving our water is disgusting with these projects like Cu, South Papellios, 30th and Pearl Mckenzie Junction, endless high-end housing and cheaper housing that no one wants to live in. So they got to get out of it. That's the demand on open space. Right? That's a different subject, right? You're not involved with open space, but you are involved with water, and the more density we need. What we need is for each person all the services they use. The most important is water.

[6:01] because you can't live without water. You can't live without water. How can you sit there in those seats and have a conscience. and be doing this in your jobs? Be allowing this, you are not exclusive from the planning board and the house. I apologize that I can't show the timer on the screen this evening, but I did time it on my phone, and your 3 min is up. If anybody else would like to speak this. And I can't afford my bill. Now is a good time to go ahead and raise your hand. Either virtually, or you can text me at (303) 817-1742. I don't see anybody else with a hand, Grace, so I think I can hand it back to you. The 1st item on on our substantive agenda tonight is to look back at the Cnp. From our more detailed discussion.

[7:03] Sorry. Amy raised her hand. I just saw a hand raised, and I was like. Sorry. I just. Go ahead and. I just wanted Lynn to to respond to Lynn for a second. You know I think we do here when we listen. When you participate in these meetings. We see you know your passion around this topic. You know. I think when I saw you on the street at bands of the bricks. You're out of context, and then I recognized you similarly, when I saw you downtown and I approached you, you didn't recognize me initially. It was no way intended to be construed as not recognizing you or being rude to you, and I apologize if you took it that way. I certainly don't! Don't always immediately recognize everyone at very crowded events. So again, thank you for your passion and your commitment to the community.

[8:11] You want to respond to it. Okay. our. Our 1st topic tonight is to look back again and to kind of finalize our discussion on the Cip. There have been a few minor changes made, I think, on the as a result of the discussion that we had a month ago. If if the staff would like to sort of highlight that now then, we can proceed to a discussion and ultimately to the public input and vote on that virtual yeah. Thanks for that. Good evening board and and members of the public. I'm Joe Taguchi. I'm the director of the utilities department for the city. We do have a brief presentation tonight here on the capital improvement programs. And as we discussed previously, we normally do the this in 3D. Of the board, May, June, and July. This is the 3rd of those.

[9:07] And so in June we we typically do a deeper dive and get the board's feedback and thoughts. And then, if we have any changes or any updates based on that feedback, the hope would be that we bring that back tonight. And after some discussion and a public hearing, we would ask the Board for a recommendation. And so Steph Klingeman is our principal financial analyst. She'll lead the brief presentation tonight, and with assistance and support from Chris Douglas, who oversees our engineering and capital Projects team. So before I turn it over, just for clarity, what's being asked of the Board is a recommendation to council on the 2026 cip. And Associated Utility rates. We do show you a 6 year window for context. But it's just the next year that you're making a recommendation on. So with that, I think I'll turn it over to Steph.

[10:15] Thanks, Jim. Good evening. Thanks for being with us. As Jill mentioned, my goal tonight is to provide any additional clarity on our priorities, projects, rates, and associated impacts that will enable a final recommendation. Following the information I share, we'll pause for any clarifying questions, and then move to the public, hearing portion of the meeting, and then end with wrap deliberation on the motion and recommendation. So I just quickly wanted to recap what we discussed in June. So we discussed capital prioritization and the need to sometimes adjust the timing of capital projects.

[11:05] These adjustments do allow us to optimize our financial planning and better align with our operational priorities. We also spent time reviewing our financial strategies specifically how we manage our reserve funds. As we discussed our reserves, help us absorb unexpected costs, smooth out the impact of large capital projects and rate increases, and they also keep our cash flows. Stable in terms of fund management. We monitor key indicators like our days, cash on hand, and the debt service coverage ratio. Keeping these metrics healthy not only ensures financial stability, but also positions us more favorably when we go to the bond market and then looking ahead at how we'll finance upcoming capital projects. Our approach will depend on a mix of available cash market conditions and our financial standing at the time we are planning to bond this year to support the Soft Boulder Creek project and longer term. We may also look at bonding in 2028, or 2029 for some of our water and sewer projects.

[12:07] And then, finally. but last meeting, we did touch on our projected 8% annual rate increases forecasted in the water fund, and whether they're enough to address the sizable capital backlog step does recognize that the backlog is significant but current rate projections are appropriate. In our opinion we do plan to perform a deeper review of the long term financial plan to anticipate. You know, further capital needs and make sure that funding and and staff are so. These are the recommended rates from last month. We are recommending an 8% increase in our water fund, a 6% increase in our wastewater fund and a 5% increase in our stormwater and flood fund for next year. And then we have productive rate increases for 27 and 28% for the water and wastewater funds, and then a 7% for the stormwater.

[13:10] And then, Steve, I think this gets at your question. Some of the capital improvement project timing shifts. So we did. We do have a handful here. I think the most impactful is the Pitasso project. So we are moving that up a year to align with our plan. That issuance that we have forecasted in our 6 year forecast. We are deferring the design and construction standard update, which is a shared project with transportation. And that's about $500,000 across all utilities funds. We are planning a utilities cost of service and rate study for next year, and we budgeted 110 k. For that the Chicago Infrastructure Improvement Project. That's a coordinated effort between utilities and other departments of the city that is currently underway. And we've added project funds in the water and Sonic flood fund.

[14:09] And then finally, we did. We did reduce the bonding need for 2029 in our wastewater fund from 69 million to 54 million. Just looking at the cash flows, we were able to cash fund more of those projects than we originally anticipated. So with that brief summary. We wanted to open it up to the board for any clarifying questions, feel free to ask about the proposed capital improvement program, and the Associated Revenue increases. Study that you added in what is it geared towards? And it's the time. So right now. We are working on developing a request for proposals. With the with the goal of issuing that hopefully by the end of the year. And it's really to look at all 3 utilities.

[15:06] our capital planning, and really the a comprehensive in depth. Look at all of the rates that we charge across the board. So it would include user fees. It would include our plant investment fees. And the intention is to hire an outside consultant to take a look at that that involve any kind of survey of the public. Or is that just sort of contrasting to other cities? Or, yeah. So it it's going to 1st take a deep look at our finances, and you know, allocate cost to the different types of rates that we charge. There is a public outreach element, and there will also be a benchmarking component to that as well to other. Yeah. And if I can add to, Steph said, thanks for that, Steph. Great studies are something that the municipal utilities do every so many years. I think the last one we did started in 2016 and completed in 2018.

[16:09] It's a a lot of it has to do with just the formulas and things that we use to charge for our services at the end of the day. It's use a cost of service model there has to be. We have to know what our costs are, and then we have to generate enough revenue to oh. pay for that. And I think we implemented a water budget rate structure back in 2,008. And we've learned a lot from that along the way. And so there's there's a couple of phases of that, and some things that we want to look at as staff with a goal of maybe simplifying. So we're in the time cycle. We're kind of due for an update, anyway. And there are some things we haven't. So it's really more of a for a effort to review how you

[17:02] calculate and set the rates than it is sort of a public input or a comparative, benchmarking type of it's an opportunity for public input. I would say, this time around our commercial customers are are really of interest. And wanting to work with them and come up with something that's hopefully simpler and easier to understand. The last time we did a rate study an example of the way we calculate stormwater fees, and when we look at properties and the amount of physical, impervious, or pervious area. Some of our larger property owners pointed out in terms of public feedback, some inequities in the way that we were doing that, and it actually had influence and changed the way we structured the charges. So there! There's absolutely the opportunity for the public to weigh in on that

[18:08] other questions. Commission work? Yeah. So the proposal. I guess it's not proposal. It's just in the planning that the wastewater and stormwater rates would go up 27, and 28, or the in grade of increase would be higher increase schedule for 26. I'm just wondering, can you comment on that, and why that's not being done so for the wastewater fund in particular. We do have a bump in our capital spending after this year. So that does, you know. Would we would really like to increase rates next year when we, when we really need that additional infusion, and then for the storm and flood fund. I think we will take a closer look at that next year. We had in looking at our audited financials for last year.

[19:00] We were really close on our debt service coverage ratio of getting that 2.0 times which we talked a little bit about this time, and just making sure that we are kind of staying in that 1.7 5 times 2.0 times debt service coverage, ratio of work. It's looking pretty good right now, and especially with that 7% increase. It would allow us to stay a little bit above that. So I think we'll just need to really see where rates. where our rate revenues come in next year for the storm and flood compared to some of our operating expenses, and then we may. We may adjust that back. But I I wanted to put the 7% in there just to be a little bit more conservative. So the wastewater. One sounds more likely to happen. Stormwater. You just have to kind of see how? Yeah, okay? And and these are, these are projections right for next year. So we'll just have to take a really a closer look next year. Once we get to the 2027 rates. Okay? And that money for the wastewater is obviously not needed.

[20:00] The 26% should be sufficient for next year. we had one. Can you kind of summarize for us? It might even be interesting to see this in sort of a chart, but so nice for us to the various major bonding efforts that you foresee over the next 3 or 4 years and and tie them to the individual sort of the big. You know the big projects that they're funding. Just so we have a kind of view of when those big ones will hit, or what could delay them? Or what might you know? What could delay or or accelerate those major bonds. Yeah, for sure. I wonder if it'd be helpful to pull up the attachments? I could do that quickly.

[21:08] Well, Steph is doing that. One of the projects that we have. That's in the current budget. Year 2025, I think there was a question last month about the South Boulder Creek flood project. It's a, I think, in the in the public comment it was referred to as being a 94 million dollar project, which is incorrect. It's actually a 66 million dollar project. and that is one that we're bonding for. And it's currently in in the middle of litigation. So some of the plaintiffs who oppose the the project have taken legal action, and so, until that is fully cleared up, the the bonds are on. Hold absent, that at what point would you if I see that book

[22:00] from an operational sort of perspective we already would have? We're we're going through the final permitting process right now. and also going through the bidding process. And on large projects like this. we manage all of those activities and are doing things concurrently with the hopes that they'll complete around this the same time. And so at the point that you go through the construction, bid process, when that gets to completion before you before a city can award a project like that, you need to have the funds in hand. And so when we get to that point, if it's not resolved. And if we haven't gone through the bond sale process oh, it it'll delay the project of the delay. Yeah. so I did go ahead, and I. I pulled it up. So we have about 26 million dollars in our

[23:00] transmission system, and Chris feel free to pop in here. If you want to provide any details. And then in our source water system, we have a 35 million dollar project for the for Barker dam. So those are the 2 major projects in the water fund and then I can go to the wastewater fund unless you want to add anything. Just some more specifics on those projects. And again, good evening. I'm Chris Douglas, the utilities engineering manager. But for the transmission lines we have a series of pipelines like the 16 person water line that we looked at a few months ago to those projects up and continuing that momentum and that specific excuse me, specific project is some work that we need to be doing with the transmission lines along in the area of Broadway, between Table mesa and baseline. So it's really significant high impact project. And then with the Barker gravity shooting with Barker Dam Outlet Works project is really it's the 100 year old outlet work skates that we're planning on rehabilitating to allow us more flexibility to take water out of Barker reservoir for both water supply and also some water quality uses.

[24:15] So that's why, we're teaming up those large projects that need to bonding. And and really, where, again, what we tried to do from the bonding perspective is, we bond the water and the wastewater fund together, but they're still separate financially. But we try to package those larger projects in concurrent years at the bottom. Will that be the 2829, that'd be the 2829 correct. And that was even where Seth had talked about moving some of the bark. The excuse me, the Tasso Project work. We'll move that up a year, looking to try to combine that with the bonding all of those other projects as well.

[25:00] and although with splatter side at the work, we have the temperature regulation compliance project forecasted for 29, and then we do have some work in the collection and conveyance system specifically the, I think, the last phase of the Msi. And then the Arapaho truck service also. So again, continuing with those large diameter pipe projects that really, those are the things that serve. Obviously, the vast majority of the community in their individual sections. So that's why we're trying to advance those projects, because really they're doing the serving the greatest amount of people with that. And how we're evaluating. So as far as phones, we've got sub folder. 3. This 2829, one. And then from there. Is it? Just sort of assessing we don't right now, right now, that's all we have forecasted.

[26:01] Are there any kind of financial or operational constraints or issues that would drive you to get on for water and wastewater or floodwater projects together, or separately, or what drives that decision specifically between water and wastewater and storm flood is just because of they're they're different entities. And that's really why we're binding differently in the storm flood utility versus the water and wastewater utility. And traditionally we bonded. We've combined water and wastewater bonds. and that's really what the bond market has seen from us. I'm stepping into the financial world. So it's a little bit too much. Historically, we bonded with water and sewer together, but that's not to say that we couldn't bond separately. We've also issued sewer bonds without issuing our bonds, and actually, the way that I have it forecasted, because we have

[27:04] more water projects front loaded in the cip. We've got more projects in 28 for water. I actually have 2 separate bonds. if you look at the attachments. So there's a 28 bond for water, and there's a 29 bond for sewer and that storm and flood has just historically been bonded separately. I think part of the reason is because right now we just have one outstanding bond issue for our Storm and Flood fund. It was a 2,015 project. So we haven't historically bonded there. and maybe even the bigger effort on bonding is which we we're trying to limit the the times that we go out to the bonding market one. It's a big lift from a staffing, but then, also, the bond market likes to see that we're planning ahead. And we're not Co going out to the bond market year after year after year. There's this level of planning and stability that really, that's 1 of those things that does go into our really favorable triple a bond rate.

[28:06] What do we? What are the bond rates? Typically. so last year when we bonded in 2024, when we bonded for the watering store, it was about 3.8%, which is pretty favorable. So I'm just sort of covering one question. But I'm just curious what for the risk, for 26 go wrong would be a problem, or it keeps you up at night kind of questions. We've got a lot. We've got a lot of stuff, and we we have a lot of projects where we sit and make we are making difficult decisions as to which project to advance first.st So there's there's risk everywhere. And so you you get into that. Is it any one particular thing. No, but it's more along the lines of I think is, Joe said. A lot is the infrastructure doesn't care what our plan is.

[29:11] and so it's that other project that is, maybe it's 2 or 3 things down on the list that we'd like to get to. But from that overall aspect of between staffing and public coordination and funding that we can't quite get to yet. And so it's that that trying to have that balance. And so there's not one specific thing. This is more along the lines of, okay. If we have to pivot we, we can pivot a lot to to doing something new. But these these projects that we're doing are long scope. Multi year projects to be able to coordinate. So it's that. Frankly, it's or maybe the other end of that Member Smith, is that

[30:02] it's not making a decision and not advancing a project, because we've got lots of things. That's probably the scarier thing is, we're overanalyzed or not committing to advanced things because they take so long. So we need to keep that forward progress. And you know, frankly get one more thing off of the list where we can turn around and start doing the next thing, because we are in the foreseeable future. We have a loss. Many years of hard and difficult projects to do so we need to keep it. I I would echo what Chris just said. I think for me. It's not a specific part of our infrastructure that I'm worried is going to fail. I think the team is. I don't know just the the way they're looking at everything holistically in planning. We're we're not approaching the point where that's the concern. But if we don't, if we don't have an overall long term plan, and if we don't keep up with the funding

[31:06] we can get to that point. have appreciated the Board and Council support of the of the plans that we put forth since I've been city employee. More of a general comment. But I think you know, given what you just said, I think last week we asked a lot or last month? We asked a lot of like, Is this enough? Can we fund these projects? And I, I do just want to call out the flip side of that. I think this year especially. It is a tough time for folks and and thinking about the rate increase. And I just wanna say I appreciate you all said like, this is enough. We can get what we need done with this and stuff. I think you. The number in here was a little over $9 a month is the impact to the average monthly bill. And so just recognizing

[32:00] we what, Joe, you just said. Infrastructure infrastructure doesn't care what our plan is. I think, balancing that with the impact to people and just really appreciate, I think the perspective you all have taken on understanding it's a tougher folks, but we also want to live in city with water. So more just general comment of. Thank you for if I could just comment on that. The for the board in the past, the bill assistance program, so that there's a safety net for people who are having trouble. Paying has been a really important thing, shared principle with staff as well. That is a work plan. Item that helps balance helps with that balance. hey? Any other questions or permission board.

[33:04] Sorry I did want to just go back to the rate study question and sort of riffing on what Katie is talking about when it comes to the rate structures and balancing, incentivizing different behaviors through rate structures that encourage conservation. But still we end up having sufficient revenue to cover the investments and the operations and maintenance of the system. And so I hope that when we go through the process with the rate study, there's an opportunity to consider both that necessary behavioral change for our long term water planning around conservation. And then the yeah, the the affordability concerns. That's it.

[34:00] That's a perfect tee up for the item that's coming after this. No, definitely hear that. And and for sure, that'll be a factor. When we do the rate study. we need the revenue to pay for the infrastructure and to keep up with it. But we also want to encourage wise water use. And it's it's a tricky thing to balance. Sorry, are you? Okay? Do you want me to facilitate? Okay, so I do think we have an opportunity to provide public comment for folks to provide public comment on the Cip item. If you would like similar to open comment, we will go ahead and have you raise your hand virtually, if you'd like to speak, and we'll set a 3 min timer. You would like to comment on the cip. I'll give you just a minute.

[35:07] Okay, I do see one community member, Lynn Siegel would like to speak. Lynn. I will go ahead and try to thank you. Twice as much water as I normally would. You'll be disturbed to hear that, Amy, and this is because the city of Boulder offered me this free $55,000, energy, improvement to excel energy for them to go more electric. So now my hot, my hot water is so cold that I have to warm it up with my gas stove. I can't get myself clean or get my clothes clean with the water. This cold from my from the water project that they put in, which was a air source. Heat, pump, hot water heater, which is a joke. Do not get one unless it's out in your garage or in it in a sequestered area, because it makes a huge, loud noise that drives you crazy. So people like you have to be dealt with on this board

[36:05] seriously. This is not tolerable for people. I'm 72 years old. This is elder abuse, that's what this is. and my bill going up constantly, and it's all for the storm water and floodwater and other issues. I know that. But you know what you are an important bill. $9 I cannot afford. I'm sorry I cannot afford that. This is my kid's future. Gone to a movie in 40 years. Everything I spend is it's nothing. Food. I get food stamps. everything is for my kids, for climate change. Everything is for them, because I can't anticipate when I hopefully, you know, they outlive me. But these projects

[37:00] are ridiculously expensive, and they're to fuel. And it's true what folks are saying, that it's the infrastructure that's the expense. Conservation is no big deal. It's no big deal that I'm using more water because of of the City of Boulders Energy project they put in my place that I won't even use that I don't even use except for my hot water. I need it, but it's not warm enough. This is an insult. It, you know. And this is because with the county, when I did, a retrofit 10 years ago, tried to. my contractor was dropped, and I asked why, and they wouldn't tell me, and I found out that it was because this county was forcing them to do a solar project under adverse conditions, and violate their warranty and be subject to damages. This is not how a county runs. This is not how a county that's giving me a retrofit system is going to run. I'm not going to use them, you bet! And then they they gaslighted me when I come for a free one, because it's affordable, you know. My unaffordability

[38:10] allowed me to get this stuff. They gaslighted me and sequestered me from my project. I can't even use any of the stuff they put in here. It's unbelievable. Hey? Thank you, Len, your time is up. If anybody else would like to speak, you may indicate, so by raising your hand virtually on the screen. Give it just a second. I guess I would just note here that we're we're trying to have availability of public input, on the Cip. And for next year not just general commentary. Don't see anybody else ever. Okay. Well, I think it's time to move on to a no other discussions or questions on the board. I think it's it's time for us to

[39:02] move on, to put together a motion to approve the the plan. And We actually have we? We need to do this in 2 parts, because, Amy is involved with a employed by a company that does have some work with the city, and so we split the promotions into 2 parts, so that she can use the call from that part that involves your company. And have you all looked at the motions that we put together in the get the sample together we have. We have any questions or comments about those, or changing the wording or intent of either of those motions. If not, then I think we can. We can go ahead and vote on those, and I would ask for promotion on the 1st one, as we as we see it on the screen here, checks package.

[40:03] Okay, we need to read this out loudly for them. A book. I think so. Okay. first, st the 1st motion, then, would be water resources. Advisory Board recommends approval. The Albion dam 2022, 26. Project Barker dam work 2024 to 2032. The worth phosphorus treatment, improvements, 22 to 26, and the worth Hvac improvements 2025 to 26 in the 2026 to 2031 cip for the water and wastewater utilities. There was his favorite sweetheart. Great. Any any other discretion? Okay, we'll go on to the second motion. Then

[41:00] this, this motion reads, the Water Resources Advisory Board recommends City Council through the 2026 capital improvement program for the remaining projects in the water, wastewater and stormwater and flood management utilities, including proposed rate adjustments to support 2026 revenue increases of 8% water utility, 6% wastewater utility and 5% of storm water and flood management utility. All right, bye, bye, great 96 motion passes. Thank you. Appreciate that vote, and I think for the record. The 1st one passed 4 to 0, and the second 1 5 0 good. The next item is an information item from staff on the water supply planning as part of the comprehensive plan. And I'll turn that back to Joe and Staff for that presentation.

[42:00] Well, thank you. Yeah. As you. As you just said, board Member Maxwell, this is an item on our water supply planning relative to the Boulder Valley comprehensive plan update. It's a big update. That's a multi process. And the the comprehensive plan involves a number of policy items, including some of which are related to water. So for tonight, this is an information item only it's not a public hearing, and we're not asking a formal action from the board. But we've got a presentation and opportunity for the Board to ask questions or provide any informal feedback afterwards. Our our hope with the info, the written information that we provided, and the presentation that we'll go through tonight that you leave with a decent overall understanding of what our situation is. Crystal will lead the presentation here see a number of different scenarios that we've looked at

[43:08] and we will likely be coming back to you in the future as part of the Comp plan process to discuss more specifically policies with you related to water supply. And I'll just an editorial comment from me on this. We we won't be able to get into the depths of it tonight. But this one of the really cool things about work, water utility in the city is just the but technical, scientific, climate change, information, and how we have integrated with our that with our water supply planning actually embedded it into the modeling so that we can see the effects of that, and so you'll see some of the a summary of that here tonight. But it's pretty cool stuff, in my opinion.

[44:01] So we have Kim Hunt here, who is a senior water resources manager in our utilities department. Crystal Maury is a senior engineer in water resources and online. I believe we also have Layla Parker, who's a senior project manager in water resources. Crystal will lead the presentation tonight, and with that I'll turn it over to crystal awesome. Good evening, rap excited to join you all again with the background. Joe's provided. I'll just dive right in tonight. We'll go through a lot of detailed information on the city's current. Comprehensive plan update boulders, projected water availability out into the future and future development of an integrated water supply plan. Please hop in and ask questions as they come up, and I'll also pause at some good stopping points for questions as well.

[45:01] To kick off. The comprehensive plan is an aspirational plan that's collaboratively developed with the city and county that describes our community's long term vision and goals for lands in and around boulder. It identifies policies that inform how we provide our services over the next 20 years or so. and our last major update to the comprehensive plan was in 2,015. The comprehensive plan update process kicked off late in 2024 to begin gathering information on current conditions and developing a shared understanding of community vision and priorities. The Plan development is currently in the policy options and preferred direction phase and the comprehensive planning team will be joining us in September at the Rab meeting to gather feedback from rab on priorities related to water issues and trade-offs among competing priorities.

[46:01] and they'll rely on your feedback when developing proposed land uses and other policy changes in the comprehensive plan, and then they'll come back to you all in quarter one of 2026. The focus of the comprehensive plan is really land use. But water and land use planning are inherently linked. So utilities has been actively involved in the comprehensive plan update. For example, brand new development. Oh, gee! For example, brand new development increases overall. Water demands and things like high density, housing and water. Wise landscaping can lower water demands per person direct outcomes from the plan will include a land use map that dictate how and where development can occur. and also population projections that help indicate when development will occur. and both of those things inform a wide variety of utilities, planning

[47:00] like water and wastewater treatment, capacity, conveyance, capacity, needs for water coming into and out of the city, and water supply needs. For example, if zoning maps in East boulder change from light industrial to mixed use or high density residential, then water demands will presumably increase. Utilities would then be interested in whether a transmission or distribution line needs to be resized to meet those demands. The comprehensive plan's high level lens also provides the ideal opportunity to appropriately weigh trade-offs and establish clear guardrails. Common utilities, trade-offs include affordability level of service and the built and natural environment. for example, is infrastructure required to increase our level of service worth decreased affordability for ratepayers.

[48:00] Finally, the comprehensive plan can identify specific strategies to carry out the community vision, such as changes to codes and design standards, plans, fees and rates or capital expenditures. For example, we're currently working on a waterwise landscape code improvement. And we'll report back to you all about that in September. And if there was another area of codes or designs that we felt needed to be updated, we could identify and prioritize that need in the update to the comprehensive plan. Zoom in just a bit closer on how the comp plan relates to water supply. Planning. The comprehensive plan informs master plans for all 3 utilities, water, wastewater, and storm and flood. and that water utility. Master Plan informs both the Treated Water Master Plan and the Source Water Master Plan. Boulder's Future Water Supply. Planning efforts have largely been governed by our 2,009 source. Water master Plan.

[49:04] Given the documents age, we recommend any significant shift in the community. Vision outlined by the comprehensive plan, be carefully studied through the development of an integrated water supply plan and an integrated water supply plan is the new standard for a source water master plan and more holistically considers supply and demand and the uncertainty tied to both. Many other cities, like Colorado Springs, Aurora and Greeley have recently developed integrated water supply plans probably actively involved with the development of an integrated water supply plan after the comprehensive plan is complete. and this is a good place to stop. If you have any questions about the comp plan. How was the sorry my father? How was the how were the previous plans not integrated? What? How this this is? Yeah. More historical water supply planning used to be very focused on how much supply do we have to meet a very conservative demand projection under like a very assumed this is the exact future that will exist. But now we have a lot more climate change, uncertainty, and we know we can leverage water conservation more.

[50:24] So. An integrated water supply plan can balance those things a little bit better. So you could look at different scenarios. Different edge calls, different response options. Okay. to provide just a little bit more context for a more focused water supply planning discussions. Tonight, I wanted to introduce you to the Colorado Water plan. This is a planning document that estimates a range of water futures by 2050 and develops statewide actions to mitigate anticipated water supply gaps

[51:05] because there's significant uncertainties tied to areas like climate change, growth and social values. The Colorado Water plan uses a scenario planning approach that focuses on a plausible range of futures rather than trying to predict one single future for the South Platte Basin, which is the Basin boulder, is located in the Colorado Water plan, projected a gap of 500 to 800,000 acre feet per year by 2050 across scenarios. This is around 30 to 50 times. Boulder's current water demand, or around 2 to 3 times. Denver's water demand. Folder also uses a scenario planning approach, and we've prepared 4 scenarios for you this evening that encapsulate a range of plausible futures out to 2050. This timeframe is similar to the planning timeframe of the comprehensive plan.

[52:00] But typically long range water supply planning is done on a 50 year time horizon. We really need to develop an integrated water supply plan to thoughtfully evaluate the impacts of any comprehensive plan changes. But we've prepared some analysis to help inform you all of our current risk, profile, and future trade-offs. So here are 4 scenarios that represent plausible ranges of futures. The optimistic and severe scenarios represent more extreme bookend scenarios. whereas the continuing trends and stress scenarios are more moderate projections. Our 1st future scenario is an optimistic one, where warming is less severe and doesn't impact our water supply. As much continued trends assumes climate change results in the Colorado Front Range as a whole, including Boulder beginning to experience minor reductions in water supply

[53:02] stress assumes the Western United States experiences significant water stress and that stress sparks policy changes on the Colorado River that reduce water supplies available to Colorado as a whole and boulders Colorado River supplies. and the last scenario is more pessimistic in nature and assumes intense warming that has a detrimental impact on regional water supplies. A severe scenario would really fundamentally alter our relationship with water. Not just boulder, but the entire Western United States. So for these 4 scenarios. We've identified 4 primary drivers, 2 of which represent supply focused drivers and 2 of which represent demand focused drivers for the climate. Driven stream flow changes stream flow changes range from around a 10% increase in an optimistic future all the way down to around a 30% decrease in a severe future.

[54:04] This range helps articulate how much future water supply uncertainty. All Colorado communities are dealing with. The 1st 3 scenarios encapsulate the extent of climate change risks identified in the Colorado water. and then the 4th scenario exceeds the severity included in the Colorado water plan for Colorado River impacts, as you all know, from Northern's discussion with us in April. There's significant unknowns as to how discussions currently happening at the 7 States and Federal level may impact folders. Specifically so with these extreme uncertainties in mind. Under 2 out of the 4 scenarios. we're assuming water stress under the Colorado River won't be significant enough to trickle down. And directly impact boulder's water supply, or there'll be mitigation projects that we could participate in

[55:03] under the other 2 scenarios. We do assume climate change will invoke enough water stress to result in moderate and major decreases to Boulder's Colorado River supplies for the demand focused drivers, climate driven irrigation changes, recognizes that crops on a farm and our urban landscapes both need more water to survive and thrive as the temperature increases. There's a scientific relationship between temperature, precipitation and plant water demand that's been used to determine. A range of anticipated increases in irrigation demands from moderate to major. and finally, additional water conservation recognizes for increased water scarcity, motivation and uptake of water conservation strategies would also increase water conservation. Achievements to date are already considered across all future scenarios

[56:03] under an optimistic and continued trend scenario. We'd anticipate increased efficiency largely tied to indoor water fixture replacements. This is the level currently contemplated by our water efficiency plan. and as water stress worsens from stress to severe. We assume water conservation efforts would ramp up to things like large scale, direct payment for waterwise landscape conversions. system-wide capital improvements to reduce distribution system losses and real time customer metering. Anything greater than that minor savings would require significant capital investment to support. So I'll get to the results shortly. But do you all have any questions before? I hop into those results. You mentioned that Boulder participate in mitigation projects depending on like the outcomes of the Colorado river negotiations in scenarios. You said 3 and 4. Do you know, or do you have examples of what those mitigation projects?

[57:06] We have not been approached regarding any sort of mitigation projects. And often Northern water is involved in those types of conversations. Okay. so one question, well, it's 2 questions. So the the when you're talking about those reductions in Colorado flow types of 1030% are those by 2050. Yes, these are all projections out to 2050. So I'd be curious. The nuts and bolts typically clients in here is my 5.th Don't want to work here to. If there's if it's if there is a backup material. It's not that. So let me see that. And then a question on the water conservation that can be independent of the client scenario. Could we could push those levers want to, regardless, even without trying to drive. So

[58:04] with water conservation, can you remind me what the split is between lands like external leaves. And then internal use. Yeah, I think it's about 55% outdoor presently and 45% indoor. And in the 1st 2 scenarios, we'd really be so focused on getting to work correct are the sources of information, or the statistical databases, or whatever that you use to calculate the climate. That's I mean, what information is going into those decisions or those calculations. A big, a big component of it is we're using so their climate, global climate models that the science community is using. And so we're not designing any of this ourselves. We're taking existing model

[59:01] modeling information, model output data and running that through our own system model. So basically this, the the data that's out there for climate change, there's, say, 2, 200, some all friends or climb climate models that are available that have been looked at by a lot of it's the Bureau of Rec. They've kind of process that information. They're kind of applicable to the the water industry. And then we take those. They talk about changes in temperature changes in precipitation on various timescales. And so we use the precipitation and temperature data in our models to see how the stream flow would be affected. Boulder how water demands might be affected areas. Yeah, you can again, it's nothing. It's not work that we do. But that data can be downscaled

[60:06] to. Jeez, I think it's it's yeah. I was, gonna say, like, it's I think we've got a few in in the Boulder Creek area. I think there were maybe 3 or 4 grids, I would say. So. This is the direct down skin data. Yeah. Okay. do you know, since we're diving into weeds, one of the issues is the clients scenarios. They're typically referred to as Rcp. Well, we don't get to what that means. But do you happen to know which the typical ones at 4.5 6.5 8.5, you know, and it or you can get that our climate change scenarios aren't directly comparable to Rcp, 4.5 or 8.5. But we did link a 2,019. Report in your all memo that goes through the detail of those assumptions, and in particular, our climate scenarios are consistent with the methodology used for the Colorado water plan.

[61:11] and they did a study in 2,019 that evaluated climate change, scenarios less on temperature and precipitation and more focused on stream flow impacts and irrigation demand impacts and grouped those climate scenarios based on that. And and the point of these scenarios is to come up with different set of scenarios that we can look at in terms of generating options to address potential futures and strategies and recommendations around addressing in terms of the way that we're managing our system. And like, when I think of an integrated plan for water supply. That means we're not just like, here's our water supply group looking at

[62:06] our traditional sources of water. But we're thinking about our water and our storm water and our wastewater. And we're looking more comprehensively at what all of our water moving through our system looks like is that maybe that's where you're going. But I'm just getting interested in kind of how this is. Gonna build out into more of that integrated planning. Yeah, I think so ultimately, what we're trying it. What we're trying to do like Crystal said, is like, what is a range of of possibilities, and we can't plan versus one future. But- but it's more like more more information is power. Right? So we know may maybe we're headed in this direction we could be headed in, you know, a little slightly different direction. But nonetheless, when we are making future decisions about investments in infrastructure is knowing that it could benefit us under a range of climate futures or investments in water conservation could could help

[63:14] offset the need to build more infrastructure, for example, and how, how the different scenarios could have different outcomes for, say, the benefit of conservation. That's kind of what we're looking at. And when it comes to the integrated component of it. Whoa. historically, like Crystal said, we've really just focused on water supplies. So the next step that we want to do is really just looking at. How can we balance, demand management and supply management? So that is more a more narrow focus, or scope, Amy, than what you were describing. This really is still integrate or focusing on just municipal, like drinking water. I guess you could say, I think from that point, once we, we better understand our supply management needs, we would develop a a supply and demand management strategy.

[64:16] That would potentially look different than what we have right now. I think that could feed into. you know, more, broader integrated like water resources plan. That's looking at stormwater and source water and waste water. But our our next step is really just to focus on supply and demand management. One other question on the observation line now. I know. But we've had something like a 30% per capita decline since oh, 2, or something which is probably a lot of well hanging fruit. But what- what would drive you say, major savings.

[65:05] there's the end of there. Would that be because the city puts a ban on outdoor watering, or what? I guess I'm trying to get at, you know. Have we already gotten all the easy games in conservation? And for here on it's gonna be kind of, you know. flat. Or are there opportunities for continuing significant gains. And from the conservation name. yeah. So the majority of conservation we've seen so far, a lot of other communities have seen as well. Even those that don't have aggressive water conservation programs. And it's really tied to indoor efficiencies. Right toilets are way more efficient than they used to be, and that's something that people can't even go and buy an inefficient toilet anymore. Whenever they replace a mixture it gets replaced with an efficient one. But when we're talking about like more aggressive long term savings that is heavily focused on landscape transformation. So converting from

[66:01] turf to maybe water, wise landscapes that don't require as much water. Also more aggressive, like real time. Customer metering is something that we can leverage and communicate with residents. So they understand. Okay, I have a leak. I need to address this leak doing like campaigns to promote water conservation with that real time data. those types of approaches where it's a lot more visible in people's daily life that they're concerned for. So we talked a lot about climate change. And I, I take it, is that the greatest source of uncertainty or or driving is different scenarios. I think that's the biggest driver. So tell me also about other. I'm thinking about population, growth, consumer behavior. or other other fact technological change, which probably timeframe is. But I'm just curious to how big

[67:02] a factor might they be going across these different scenarios. Yeah. So one thing you mentioned is just like water demand overall, and that can vary dramatically when we're talking about new growth. And here we've just presented kind of one scenario based on certain assumptions. But in an integrated water supply chain we can project more of a range of like. We don't actually know what 5,000 more people will live in while they live in single family homes, or will they live in? How will that interact with demand? So we can dive into those details more, and I will qualify some of the data I give you all just recognizing that future water demands are pretty hard to project these days. Some of that's coming up in in the next series of slides. You have your teeth correct? Okay, foreshadow. Okay. So we took our 4 scenarios that I just described and ran those conditions through our water supply system model to identify where there was a surplus or gaps.

[68:08] As you all know, river conditions are extremely variable. So in one year we could have way more water than what our community needs. But in a very dry year we might not have enough and might need to restrict certain uses of water. Our overarching water supply policy is called our reliability criteria. It's essentially level of service tables. and they were established in 1988, and aim to balance the costs and environmental impacts of increased reliability with the consequences of temporary shortages. Right now they dictate around 95% of the time we'd want the system to be reliable enough not to require any sort of restriction. Then in some years they allow for outdoor watering restrictions that range from lawns going dormant to landscapes dying.

[69:01] and in an extremely rare condition. We might consider indoor restrictions for the 4 scenarios I just described. Even if that scenario experienced a model shortage in one or a few years. as long as the shortages were less severe than the reliability criteria that's considered a pass. So here's an example of a passing model run. This is a historical reference scenario using hydrology from 1915 to 2,014, and the gray bar here represents average water demands associated with today's population. So no additional growth and the blue water supply droplet represents the sustainable water supply available under that historical hydrology. When the demand bar is well below the water supply, droplet like we have here that would indicate a surplus. and when the bar rises above the sustainable supply droplet that would indicate a potential gap.

[70:06] So the demands represented in the gray bar under all future scenarios, include a 10% factor of safety. and that factor of safety is important to encapsulate risks that can't be effectively modeled, like natural disasters and infrastructure outages. And, as I mentioned previously, these demands have also been adjusted up for climate change and down for water conservation. and that volume of anticipated savings has been outlined in light gray, and it's just not shown for reference there. Here we have all 4 future scenarios along with that historical reference scenario. as you can see. In 3 out of the 4 scenarios there's sufficient supply to meet demands associated with Boulder's current population. Out to 2050 the severe scenario might look a bit intimidating, but those conditions would fundamentally alter the Western United States. Relationship with water and boulder is in a far better position than many other communities.

[71:12] We also anticipate that the community will continue to grow, and additional water demands out to 2050 based on current growth. Trajectories are shown in orange. We understand our current population. Water demands really well, but water demands tied to growth, particularly in boulder, where infill and redevelopment is the primary mode of development occurring can just be a lot more variable. That's 1 reason that we continuously monitor how our demands compare to our projections, and we report those changes in demand to all. Each April. So based on this data, boulder has a robust water supply that can reliably meet near term demands that include anticipated growth. But there's still risks that should be considered when planning for the future.

[72:04] we may need to consider additional water supplies to maintain or improve our current risk profile. So the best path forward would really be determined in a future integrated water supply plan. So under a couple of those future scenarios, there's still surplus water that we can grow into. and our 2,009 source Water master Plan encourages the use of surplus water for other benefits, and recognizes that the city surplus will decrease over time. As the city grows. boulder uses the majority of its water for municipal purposes, and the relative intensity of other uses are shown on the screen when we talk about growing into our supply. Further, the primary non municipal uses that would be reduced include agricultural leasing and water left in the stream for downstream users, and to a much smaller extent water use for in-stream flow only if we were to declare drought more often.

[73:11] and then there may be some situations where we have a water supply gap. and under those situations we'd want to obtain new water supplies. Developing new supplies in our dry region involves a few trade-offs to consider and weigh against the benefits of additional growth. And I've laid out a few different levels to talk through the stretch level encapsulates, making our current supplies go further with water conservation automation changes to level of service and recapture of reusable supplies. Some of these changes can be quick to implement like changes to level of service goals. But others may take around 20 years. These types of improvements can be expensive and impact the environment. We're already actively working in this realm. But additional pressure from growth may warrant the need to pick up speed on many of these efforts.

[74:07] Partner means working collaboratively with others. To develop or acquire new water supplies. These types of projects can be expensive impact the environment and may also impact neighbors who are trying to develop water compete is a level some cities are already operating at, but Boulder is not. It's really racing and bidding against others to develop or acquire. New water supplies. This would be a big shift from Boulder's current policies and can be expensive impact. The environment reduce supplies available to neighbors and impact local agriculture. New water supply isn't unlimited, and it'll be hard to come by and take a long time to develop. But the smaller amount of new water we need the better chance we can obtain it while limiting trade-offs and staying closer to those stretch and partner levels.

[75:04] Ultimately, where we fall within these levels is what an integrated water supply plan would establish. So a lot of information in one go around to summarize some key points, water and land use are inherently linked, and the comprehensive plan provides an opportunity to identify water, related priorities and weigh trade-offs associated with water. Second, boulder's in a good position, with its water supply right now, and even considering moderate climate change and anticipated growth. but due to extreme uncertainty, there's still risk to its supplies that should be considered when planning for the future. And finally, the information presented today hopefully provided a sense of risks that can impact our water supply and trade-offs to developing new supplies. But much more detailed planning and clear. Next steps can come from an integrated water supply plan.

[76:06] So, thanks for diving into the weeds of it, and I'll pause a moment here, if you have more questions for the team. Well, a couple of just some observations for this very impressive, I mean, I think you're really going about it. I think the water, the scenario approach. My professional experience as a consultant is kind of one of the best approaches. There are some really more sophisticated, crazy things. But I this way, it would be expensive to advise you go that way. So I think this is good couple of thoughts. One is always on extreme scenarios. That's always hard, because. you know, if it's there's a lot of assumptions that go in. But don't you know? Don't assume it's the worst case possible. It could be worse. The probability of that would by definition be lower. But it's just always good to be thinking about extreme situations, but it is good. You have one in there. It strikes me it's probably 30% job by 2050.

[77:04] Pretty extreme. The other thing is, and and repeat the mistake that I made over much of my career is we tend to focus climate change. We just focus on long term average changes. But don't leave out variability. you know, and we're seeing more. It's you know what? When one actually lives on extreme, wet, extreme, dry years, particularly in California, I think they're seeing a lot of other places, too, and I don't know. Again, it's a question of how well the system can handle that. In Colorado river we have multi year supply is better able to do it. But if you supplies are shorter than we could have shorter, you know, shorter term droughts, flash droughts, also natural variability. We and I'm not sure we're out of it. We've found in a mega drought in the Southwest multi decade drought out. you know, based on think both was actually seems to be doing pretty well. But nonetheless, you know, it's not clear. You know, these things can still happen. It could be affected by long term. Climate change could happen for other causes. But

[78:11] I would advise thinking about variability as well. Good question. I guess 1 1 thing from sort of this integrated perspective that you you're, you know, kind of focusing, moving towards seems like. Traditionally, you probably focus a little bit side. And what are our options, and what are the different sources, and so forth, but in terms of trying to integrate the demand? What what what kind of range of scenarios and data are you using to sort of project a population basic spending? I know there's several projects out there that could be in big chunks of additional demand in the future.

[79:01] Sort of what are the general assumptions that you take in terms of just purely a population, part of the driven, you know, population driven part of the demand in the future sit. So we we get those numbers from our planning department. So they're the ones putting out those projections for population employment. And what they're currently based on is the the ones that we've used in this analysis here really is based on historical trends. So I think we're looking at about on average of 1% growth rate that folders experienced over time. And the planning department looked at that historical growth rate. But they've also looked at other factors that might in the future affect whether that trend would change and ultimately landed on, they think the one to 2% growth rate is appropriate. But that's where sort of the Comp plan

[80:00] can be influential. So if there are significant land use changes identified in the comp plan, or policies that would affect development that could then affect what those population projections would look like feature. So I think we we want to see, where does this call plan? End up? Have the the planning department, make some new projections, and then we'll revisit that our work again after that happens? Other questions. So what's the what's the game plan on this figure item? And going forward, we're we're gonna revisit it again in a couple of months. Yeah, I believe the planning team will be looking at. Some of the policy things that I mentioned in August and in September and Council will be indicating the ones that they wanna really focus on

[81:05] some of those likely related to water. And so I would envision the team coming back sometime later this year to check in with the board those types of things we don't know exactly what that will be. Next September. There will be a check in with the planning department, and they'll I think that's when they'll start asking presenting sort of some results of what we're seeing from the community engagement and just get your feedback on policies or values should be considering when developing alternatives. And also just a note. We're we're also going to council on July 31, st to give a similar presentation to them. Just so again, we we provide. They have this foundational information about water supply that will inform some of their decision making when it comes to any policy changes that they may be wanting to make in the.

[82:03] And then, after September, I think there will probably be another check in from the Comp plan team, probably early 2026. But I think we'll have that schedule nailed down a little bit more. Come, September. you'll hear more about it then. And the work on the Integrated water plan. You said, after Comp plan. Yeah. So the Comp plan is, it's updated every 10 years. But it takes a couple of years to update. So where we 2025, I think the goal is to have the Comp plan complete by end of 2026, and then after that we would start our work. So 27 we would serve. Make another reservation. Go ahead. Sorry. Go ahead. No go ahead, Joel! I was just gonna say that I think in some ways you're providing. So one another way, you know, there's a scenario approach which I think, doing a good job. The other.

[83:04] or which is called stress test. We can just figure out how much of a change, even in supply or demand starts to stress the system. I think you can back down on the supply what I've seen, probably how much would would be a problem. But it might be interesting to think about in terms of population, growth or water. Use whatever those things, just to see that there are rates of change, something that someone is at least these do not sustainable. Given everything else. Yeah, I mean, I and I agree. But it for these, the scenarios that we ran we didn't have a lot of time trying to find information. for this comp plan update. But I will say, you know, there's a lot of questions people have like with, how will administrative changes on the Colorado River affect our our supply? Then there's climate change and the so many variables it's like, how do you. How do you capture? You can't capture them all. So I think that's that's the beauty of this.

[84:13] But I think that figure answered my question on population versus fly. Okay, it's like a surreal effect. Anything else on this topic, please, and maybe. Yeah, I I also you know, just commend you for this. It's complicated. There's a lot of, you know, potential ways. This presentation could go, and you did a great job simplifying it and making clear kind of what the direction was. And I'm assuming it sounds like you're going to be using a similar presentation with Council. I just one thing. And I also thought that your briefing for council was very clear, and did a great job of

[85:00] explaining kind of where we are providing the right amount of context. You. You might break up the text a little bit, given the the audience, but I I think it's you know the narrative itself just nails it. I wonder if there isn't some way to help the Council, and also the Rab kind of understand where you're going with the integrated water supply plan in terms of outputs. So not. I know you can't produce them already, because there's going to be all of this analysis. But, like an illustrative example of what a map might look like that helps to quantify what demand is based on different land use patterns, and what that kind of analysis analysis might ultimately produce from a visual perspective. And I I don't. You know, that may be an impossible, but I think it would be helpful in understanding kind of

[86:04] the value of the integrated water supply plan, as it is kind of a next step, but maybe not the ultimate step. If you come to a conclusion that additional water resources, integrated water resources, planning needs to be done as well. Yeah, thanks for that feedback. We'll give that some thought. That's a great suggestion. Okay, thank you very much for very interesting presentation. Thank you. Okay, and we will move on to the next topic. If there's matters from the board. I have one minor matter that I'm going to be out of the country at our meeting in September. So I've asked Amy to chair of that meeting, which she has agreed to do. So.

[87:00] Okay, and thank you, Amy. Any matters from the staff? Just one. And it's it's kind of a broader one I just wanted to mention and acknowledge the devastating flooding that's happening around the country. And I I know everybody shares and hearts going out to those communities and with and the people affected, and in in the city of Boulder, with all the drainages and flood risk. There's such important work to be done. And our our team takes that responsibility very seriously at at all different levels. It affects our maintenance team, our capital projects team and the those pro. Those capital projects are important, but some of them are very large scale and can take years sometimes decades to come to fruition. So it's it's really important. The community preparedness. And just everyone in the in the city, being ready and knowing what their options are, and what to do in a flood, and planning for that before it happens. And I I

[88:11] shared a link with Joanna and Karen. Maybe we can put that in the chat tonight, but just felt to mention that it's I remember the 2013 Florida year. and it's surreal when you see these natural disasters in other places in the country. But then, when it's happened, it's It's really devastating some of those images that we're seeing on the national news that was happening. Boulder. Yes. So if you'd like to move to the upcoming data, let me know. Let's see here. So as has kind of been our pro practice doesn't necessarily have to be that way. August, we're not scheduled to have a meeting then in September. We have an action item, I believe, on grain water policy.

[89:17] and we have an information item on water, wise landscaping policy and code update sounds like that might be combined with some discussion on the Comp plan that Kim was just talking about. I would say, October is a little bit more up in the air. We thought about doing an information item on the city's broadband efforts. Our utilities department is actually there's a lot of similarities to what we do. And so the next phase of construction. We're actually lending some of our leadership support and have hired a few staff to help out, so might be good to share with the board at some point on that, if not October, maybe another time, and then working with Chris Douglas and his team, and just the feedback from the Board of the interest that you've had, and seeing some of the projects. We're thinking about another

[90:16] identifying another project for a tour. possibly, and then, I think, kind of related to some of the discussions we were having during the cip on the rate study and water budgets. I asked Joanna to do a brief update under upcoming schedule of what's coming up on. It was open. Yeah, thank you. Let me turn on my camera real quick. Hi, again. I'm Joanna Bloom. I'm the technical host. I'm also deputy director of policy and planning and thanks Joe for teeing up the item. So one of our 2025 work plan items is the combined evaluation of our water budgets, and along with our rate study. And so we're splitting it into 3 phases and phase. One is kind of starting now

[91:05] we're going to do some internal discovery with staff and begin some community engagement on their experience, both with water budgets and rates. And then, and primarily looking at, are the water budgets achieving the desired goals, and also are they administratively sustainable in the long run, so pretty complicated? And so there's a administrative lift there as well. So we'll do that now, and we'll come to you in October. With an information item that kind of lays out some of the themes that we've heard from that initial information gathering and get some feedback from you all about. What are some of the options that we could look at as we proceed. and then we'll come back in January and introduce some of the preferred options. After doing some further analysis kind of transition into official phase, 2 which will focus more on rates. and then phase 3 timing Td will be implementation of whatever we land on which.

[92:05] depending upon what we have on, will take longer or shorter. So stay tuned. And the so the things we're talking about tonight, the Comp plan, the policy updates, the rate study that we do every so often those are things that the Board will will have a role weighing in on. We've had some years where there just hasn't been as much of that kind of thing. And and I've even received some feedback from the board of like Wow, seems like a lot of information items, and not as much for us to act on. And I'm I'm I'm pleased that just the natural ebb and flow of the work plan. There'll be more. There should be a good work program for the Board to chew on few years. So that's what I have for upcoming schedule, and we have meetings. Plan for November and December. Maybe the probably not December. That's 1 that we usually take a break just because of availability. But it's possible. As things move around, we may need one in November.

[93:14] Great. Anybody have anything else. Think we'll ask for a motion to adjourn the meeting at some point one second. Okay, okay, alright. thanks, Amy.