 Okay my watch says three o'clock so I'd like to call the December 21st 2020 waterboard meeting to order. Heather could you please start with a roll call? Sure. Chair Williams. Here. Allison Gould. Here. Kathy Peterson. Here. Scott Holwick. Here. Roger Lang. Here. Ken Houston. Here. Nelson Tipton. Here. Wes Lowry. Here. Kevin Bowden. Here. Francie is not here yet. Jason is coming in. Councilmember Martin. Here. All right. Chair Williams you have a quorum. Great thank you Heather. The item three on the agenda is approval of the previous month's minutes the October 19th 2020. Does anybody have any questions or comments on the meeting minutes? I don't see any. If there's no comments does someone want to make a motion for accepting the October 19th 2020 meeting minutes? Kathy. Kathy Peterson here. I move that we accept the October 19th 2020 minutes as submitted. Okay there's a motion. Is there a second? Second. Okay sounds like Allison is the second. Any further discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. All those opposed same sign? Okay. Next item on the agenda item four is the water status report. Is that Nelson or Wes? Nelson. Yeah I'll go ahead. So the flow of the St. Grant Creek at Lyons at 8 a.m. today was nine CFS and the 124 year average historic average for this date is 17 CFS. The call on the St. Grant Creek is Puzzle Valley Reservoir and the admin number 7822 and the priority date is 81871. Call on the main stem of the South Platte River is the Riverside Canal. The admin number is 21031 and the priority date is 81907. The Ralph Price Reservoir at Button Rock Preserve is currently full in spelling and due to the scheduled outlet repairs that's why it's still full for this time of year and it's anticipated to be completed the outlet repairs by March of 2021 and Basin will go over that I believe in his update project update. So Union Reservoir is currently at 21.3 feet full is 28 feet so it's down approximately 4,500 acre feet and currently released in 10 CFS and I'll just what's going to touch base I think on more of the snowpack but but the current snowpack for the South Platte River Basin is 76% of normal and then the upper Colorado snowpack is at 73% normal and that completes my report. Any questions? Any questions? I'm sorry are there any questions for Nelson? I'm not seeing anybody with their hand up. Okay go ahead and move on the next item item five is public invited to be heard in special presentations and talking to Heather before the meeting it does not sound like we have any public invited to be heard. Ken is there any special presentations for today? Yes we have Sean Cronin and Jason Rautabusch with the St. Vrain and left-hand water Conservancy District. I'll let Kevin introduce the item and then let Sean and Jason take over. Okay go ahead guys. So today we have Sean and Jason here to discuss the the progress of the district's efforts on the St. Vrain left-hand water Conservancy District's stream management plan. For some of you this is an all-new item but the board last heard an update on this in July of 2017. So I will let Jason take it from here. Mr. Chair. Yeah go ahead Scott. Yeah before Sean and Jason kick off I wanted to disclose for the record for transparency's sake that I'm General Counsel for the Conservancy District. This is not an action item that we're entertaining here so I'm not playing to recuse myself for participation but just wanted people to know and understand. Thank you. Thanks Scott. So Heather if you just note that in the minutes and with that I'll turn it over to Sean. I sure will thanks. Thank you Mr. Chairman. I'm gonna turn it over to Jason our newest employee and then I'll I'll pick up the back end. So Jason you want to introduce yourself. Yeah you bet. Thank you all. My name is Jason Rada Bush. I'm a water resource specialist with the St. Vrain and left-hand water Conservancy District. I've been with the district for about six months now and I'm pleased to report that the SMP for both St. Vrain and left-hand creeks was completed in October. This project was a phase one effort which took nearly three years to complete and was formally accepted by our board of directors on October 12th. Next slide please. So phase one of the stream management plan was made possible with the generous support from the City of Longmont and we certainly want to thank you for that. This is the list of partners and as you can see you know support really came from a wide range of public, private and non-profit entities all with a common goal of improving our basin and I think that is fairly unique to this area of Colorado. Next slide. So why did the the district take on a stream management plan and what is it exactly? To answer the what of that question is is that this is really a process driven by the CWCB and it's to engage stakeholders and identify the current and future water needs of the water users in the basin and then through that stakeholder process and that stakeholder engagement you know come a lot of conversations a lot of actions and then some strategies for implementing the stream management plan and then eventual fundraising. Back to the question of why it's important you know for our major partners like Longmont I think it's important to understand how the CWCB builds the state's funding priorities through planning efforts. So if you remember way back that the first water planning efforts the first that I can remember at least you know started with the basin implementation plan where projects and processes were identified and prioritized for funding and as a part of that basin implementation plan the the St. Verena left hand stream management plan was one of those processes and because it was a major part of that stream management plan it was eventually funded by the state and then if you know the basin implementation plan was up and rolling for a few years and that eventually led to the Colorado water plan which resulted in some legislation the construction fund and the result of that was bringing millions of dollars to the basin or to the state for water projects and our basin has received some of that. As we keep progressing most recently we have the passing of some new legislation Proposition DD which is to collect proceeds from gambling and that's ready to hit this summer and to fund big water projects. So really as we've worked through the progression within our basin here I believe that our timing is excellent with the completion of this plan. You know our next step is to bring forward projects and other efforts to the state for funding and you know we anticipate a lot of that funding to start hitting in July depending on you know the impacts to the state budget from COVID but from what we're understanding that that money is going to start to be made available in July for projects. Next slide please. So this SMP was a big bite compared to some of the other plans in Colorado and in total we addressed an entire watershed at about 500 square miles and underneath that large umbrella the stakeholders established desired conditions and management goals and what was different about our basin and this SMP is that in some of the smaller stream management plans like the upper Colorado it really focused on you know single elements of the basin like trout the cold water fishery in the upper Colorado. Now because our basin is more of a working river than say the upper Colorado we took a more holistic approach to tackling the stream management plan. So for example a desired condition for water management on the St. Vrain is and I can quote here to achieve a balance amongst the needs of the natural environment non-consumptive and consumptive users. So we really left the door wide open for a number of different projects from ag to municipal to conservation and wildlife and then underneath those desired conditions the water management goal for say the infrastructure component at least and I quote work with water rights holders to ensure the water supply needs are met and not interrupted explore issues and concerns and find opportunities for mutually beneficial management improvements. So we've really taken into account all of the stakeholders in this basin and we want to move forward holistically with this approach. So stepping off from the established desired conditions and management goals our consultant completed a stream health evaluation and then utilize that to determine opportunity areas and this is really chapter five the meat and potatoes of this report and I'd encourage you to get into it. You know that data was then used to come up with strategies for for implementation. Next slide please. So if you've had a chance to flip through the report I'm not sure if you have you'll notice that there are four central areas focus areas and that was flows habitat water quality and water management slash infrastructure. You know from chapter four the report on the report follows this organization and so as you move on from chapter four the meat potatoes of the plan which we don't have a ton of time to get into this afternoon but I'd be happy to get into some side conversations or to come back for a deeper dive. Slide six please. So chapter six and seven of the report present the strategies and potential projects for both near-term and long-term implementation. In the near-term we have a laundry list of specific items to focus on for each of the central themes and as you can see flow dominates nearly all of these items outlined here. So it's important that Longmont you know have it have a seat front and center at the table so that we can continue this great partnership and really move into phase two. You know we have just a laundry list of items here. Some of these are going to require a deeper dive you know with some focus groups. Others we think we have some projects that are ready to be funded here. So with the next slide as we start to look to the next steps I think it's important to take a step back and survey the landscape with regard to partners in this basin. You know many areas of Colorado struggle to bring folks to the table for big endeavors big water projects like this but that's certainly not the case with our basin. We have highly motivated folks at the county with Trout Unlimited with left-hand watershed center and then of course with Longmont and then the district and amongst many others and you know everybody wants to take control wants to write grants for implementation and so we're going to have to be very strategic with how we approach implementation and you know there's going to be instances where the district is best suited to lead and other instances where we're you know we have our best fit is in a supporting role and this is certainly the case with everyone. So I'm excited to use this SMP as a launching point to go fundraise to to bring money to our basin to to really make a difference and to to bring us forward with you know not only modernization of a lot of our infrastructure our aging infrastructure in the basin but to continue that strong legacy of of conservation in the same rate of left hand. Now with that I'd be happy to answer some questions. Great thank you Jason are there any questions and please feel free to speak up I can't see everybody on the screen at one time here. Jason I do have I guess I'll start off with a question. You mentioned in terms of you know flow and trying to meet objectives and stream health and management and flow obviously is key to that. Have you been working with Longmont staff in terms of button rock operations or is that going to be part of a future kind of phase in the project just kind of curious how that that fits in given how important that is to the the river flows. Yeah you bet. So I came in at the the 11th hour of this process I was hired on in July but I have had some conversations with Longmont staff and I know that it was a topic of discussion at a lot of the stakeholder meetings. It is it is touched on in the report but just mentioned at a high level that we would look to sit down with Longmont staff and try to develop some you know reservoir operation scenarios if you will that might be able to to provide mutual benefit in the basin and so that it's listed in the report there aren't a lot of specifics on that and and that was intentional. Sean do you have anything else you'd elaborate on there. Yeah if if I could many on the board are either aware of this or know this but there was a time where Longmont was very active in in making releases particularly in the winter time that provided mutual benefits and that that was through Longmont's leadership in the in the state of Colorado through a variety of different policies and interpretation on on decrees and administration really challenged Longmont's ability to continue to be able to do that and it hasn't been done for some years and staff could certainly speak to the specifics around that. I think it was partly a motivating factor in Longmont's participation to really sort of shed a light that the administration of the river oftentimes presents really collaborative creative multi-benefit management of water supplies and so through now the the stream management plan having science to demonstrate what the needs of the river might be we can utilize that to have conversations with the state about how much flexibility we might have in and collective management of supplies not to just shed a light singularly on on Longmont but you can look at a variety of different ways that we manage water supplies across the basin and and at least now we have a state sanctioned report that we could talk to the state and say you know something doesn't square here. Chiverson Williams if I may you mentioned some projects that are ready to be funded would you mind elaborating on that please? Yeah so I think that there are several areas that that have been noted that are that were not restored after the 2013 flood event so there there are several key areas of stream restoration. There's a lot of aging infrastructure in this basin that you know could could use retrofit could use replacement could use upgrading altogether you know as it pertains to infrastructure those are more complex conversations because of the the various ownership structures and so we've already started to have some of those conversations and and Longmont has been a part of those as to how we best tackle these really important issues on the stream moving forward. And if if I could add to that sometimes projects is is used as a term of art with these kind of processes and so the the management conversation on on how we collectively as water users manage water supplies and as I said earlier creating those multiple benefits could couldn't have itself be a project quote unquote so that's definitely something that's described in the plan as well. And on the water quality side of things that it's fairly well established some of our our real problem areas some of our legacy mines and so those are ongoing projects that that require more funding and require further development and so if they are established at this point. I've got an additional question I know you know at the last election you guys were able to get some additional funding source through a increase in the mill levy. How does that play into kind of the future funding of you know the projects that you identify as part of the plan. And then I assume maybe that also gives you some leverage with the state on partnering or leveraging some funding to get projects done just if I don't know if you've it's been pretty recent since you got that I don't know if you've given some thought as to how that all comes together. I'm going to take that Jason. Yeah I think that Sean was going to present on that one a little bit as well so maybe this is a good turning point. Yeah and I could I could give a little bit of that answer and then and then slides will touch on the rest of it but it is early in the process it just approved in November we don't start receiving the money until January and then periodically throughout the year. So the the St. Verna left-hand water Conservancy District Board of Directors are going through prioritization exercises to identify what opportunities might be out there to to best maximize those dollars. Absolutely matching of grants is is one that's going to be a top priority of the board for every dollar that that the taxpayer has granted us if we could leverage that with a dollar from the state that's just better money spent here. So that that'll certainly be in the mix but the the stream management plan as well as the districts recently approved business plan will be the lenses at which the board of directors go through that prioritization exercise. Thanks Sean. Any other questions? I don't see any other. Sean were you you were going to give another yeah Heather if you could queue up some other slides I just take a couple more minutes if we have it just to thank all of you as Longmont residents and voters on your recent approval of what the ballot called 7a next slide. So this was put on the ballot as a result of the board of directors recently adopted business plan that is was adopted in February 2020 next slide. So what 7a asked the voters for is a 1.25 mil increase as of in 2020 our mill was 0.156 so this was a 1.25 mil increase to that dedicated to what what we told the voters is a five point plan that that is basically the business plan that the graphic showed you a little bit earlier that at the time we we believe that to generate about 3.3 million dollars per year with with this year's assessed property values going in 2021 it looks more like 3.4 million with some of the new properties coming online. We also told the voters it would have a 10-year sunset so what we're looking at in way of implementation timeline is something over the next or some things over the next 10 years next slide please. So this was really a collaborative effort in working cooperatively with a variety of different partners and stakeholders this is just all the logos of the folks that actually publicly endorsed 7a and you'll see here quite a diversity in agricultural nonprofit commercial and enterprise folks all from this area and state national organizations next slide please. There was also a great deal of folks who were aware of the five point plan and the and the business plan and the ballot question and for a variety of reasons didn't necessarily publicly endorse it but we're we're aware of what we're doing and providing feedback through the whole process next slide please. So the the voters approved it nearly 70 60 67.81 percent to be exact next slide please. So where do we go from here next slide please just go ahead and Heather if you could click through real quick and that's it there. So the five point action plan is watershed protection and water security improve our water IQ, strengthen agriculture, creek improvement facilities and improve conservation and what the business plan talks about is there's programs projects and services within each of those five categories or five points. So on the slide it's it's a little difficult to see but underneath each of those five points within the the color shaded box are programs projects and services and some maybe of interest to you but due to time we don't we can't go into that so we do have information online that you can read on our website or as Jason alluded to earlier we're happy to come back and do a deeper dive if the board chose but we're really excited about all of these programs projects and services and as I mentioned earlier the board is now going through a prioritization exercise to determine how to most efficiently start utilizing the 3.4 million this year the three point whatever next year and so on and so forth and collectively over that 10-year period really have what I call a net positive impact to the basin with multi-use approaches you'll see in here stream management plan implementation you'll see in stream flows you see education and so on so we're really excited about the diversity of ideas that come to the table and having a dedicated source of funding to really look at water issues on a watershed scale is really excited for the basin. Next slide please. So happy to answer any questions. Are there any questions for Sean? Sorry I'm cycling through the folks on the call here. You know one question Sean or maybe just a comment would be it sounds like you're rolling the plan out now you're trying to kind of put the dollars in place to start implementing it I feel from my perspective it'd be good to have you report back as you kind of formalize that plan and how you're going to maybe allocate resources and then you know as we talked earlier of long months operations may fit into that maybe that's a good point we're coming back to us and giving more specifics as to how the plan will roll out and then maybe also specifics as to how long months operations potentially could fit into you know meeting some of the goals I think at least from my perspective that'd be a good point maybe to report back to us I don't know if anybody else has any other kind of comments or questions on that I don't say anything. This is Sean we'd be happy to and if we want to put a placeholder in the board expects to kind of get through its ideas and thinking around it around the maybe as late as February so if there was an opportunity to be on the agenda and maybe March or April that might be a good good timing. I'd definitely be in favor of that is anybody else have a thought on that I think that'd be great just so we could track given obviously the importance of long month in the plan and also the kind of overall you know impact potentially the long month system I think that's a good check-in point so I appreciate that. Anything else Jason or Sean or any questions or comments from the board? No thank you for the opportunity to to present to you as Kevin said some of this may be new to to some of the board members and as Jason alluded to earlier if you want to take a conversation offline we're happy to talk to you and take as much time as you want to walk through any one of these elements the stream management plan or the business plan but happy to present it to you and looking forward to circling back with you in March or April and get further feedback. Great well thank you Jason and Sean thanks for the presentation today. Thank you and thank you for supporting the stream management plan those matching funds go a long ways when we're writing grants. Thank you. All right with that I'll keep moving on here in the agenda I think we're on item six which is agenda revisions and submission of documents canner west nelson anything there that we need to be aware of? I have none. I have none. All right we'll keep moving item seven is development activity and it doesn't look west there's no development activity that we need to review today is that correct? That is correct. Okay eight general business and one item we have there is for cash and lieu review. Yeah so I'm going to go through with the board just a few of the highlights so as you've all seen we are looking at three primary criteria for this review there was a few lake macintosh and oligarchy ditch shares that were transacted in this last quarter at an average cost of $15,100 per acre foot. The cost for new water supplies we looked at that more specifically we looked at the Bureau of Reclamation's construction cost index to make an adjustment for that we noticed that it was less than 1.7% actually was the was the difference between quarters that was the only real information that we had that was a significant contribution towards this particular criteria so what you're seeing there is the same or essentially unchanged from the last quarter. On the CBT allocation there was a total of 54 units that were transacted at an average cost of $73,209 per acre foot. That's a little lower than we saw in the the last quarter where it was just about just a little over 78,000 an acre foot so it's down about 5,000 acre foot from the last quarter we had a couple initial transactions are not completed but in December there was about 60 units that transacted at around 74,000 so this this number that we have here 73,209 is seems to be a pretty good finger on the pulse of where that's at. I'll remind Water Board that cash and lieu is currently at $17,683 so pretty close to where we're seeing that cost of new water supply and then lastly I'm going to go ahead and make note that of the 54 units that were transacted in this quarter 25 I'm sorry 21 of those the buyers were irrigation with an average cost of just over 77,000 so what we're seeing here is you know it used to be there was quite a difference between the buyers being developers or irrigators and now at least in this quarter not so much and so really I guess the the overall theme of this is that there wasn't a whole lot of change from the last quarter so if there's other questions I'd be happy to try to answer those for you. Thanks Wes any questions for Wes on this okay I'm not seeing any so Wes if I understand right we've been setting it to date based on when you get firming project costs which is $17,683 per acre foot and you're saying that's the same as what it was the prior quarter when we said is that correct? That's correct okay and then if we were to stay at that same price do you need a motion to do so or what do you need from us in terms of setting or keeping that same price? I don't need a motion if we can just reflect the minutes that that's the board's determination to leave it where it's at now until the next quarterly review. Okay any I guess I just open that up for the the water board any questions or comments on that that's the way we've set it obviously and I think we're going to get into this a little bit later in the windy gap firming project update there's been some pretty major news in terms of ability to move that project forward and that's the project we've been pegging the cost of that project is what we've been pegging our cash and loot to for a number of years now so I don't know if anybody has any other thoughts or would like to discuss a different cash and loot price otherwise we'll we'll just leave it where it's at feel free to chime in if you have any comments or questions on that okay I don't see anybody objecting to that so Wes why don't we go ahead and keep it at the the current rate and then we can monitor that and see if we need to adjust it in future quarters going forward so very good great thank you so with that we're on to item nine and nine a is a monthly water supply update date um west yeah so we wanted to just continue to follow up um normally we would start giving water board uh kind of monthly updates this is at the front end of the uh kind of the snowpack season but as you recall back in october when we talked to the board we were uh facing some fires and pretty dry conditions so we decided that for this month and months upcoming we would just continue to provide you um some information on our overall water supply and so I've got a short powerpoint presentation basically it'll go along with the textual information we included in your packet where I wanted to just highlight a few key parts and then towards the end of the presentation Ken will speak a little bit uh on the fire impacts and then there again as always if you have some questions or anything we can address those at that at that time so um like to start with the uh the next slide so as the board may recall um we continue to operate under the water supply and drought management plan which uh is for us to be in a sustainable conservation level that was uh directed by city council back in july so that's where we're at today next slide stream flows uh from for almost all of 2020 water year we're below average and this kind of indicates that the solid blue line is what we actually saw the gray line above it was the the average um there were certain periods of time where stream flow was a third or even a fourth the normal I think currently we're about half of what we normally would see that would be kind of that nine cfs of the 17 cfs average so continuing to stay a little below uh below normal next slide another slide is kind of hard to see but what we wanted to speak to on this local storage is slightly below average so in other words the five-year average if we took um about a dozen and a half reservoirs in our basin normally at the start of december we would have those at about 66 full we actually seen them to be about 62 full and so slightly below average but not anything overwhelmingly to concern ourselves one point is uh note as nelson mentioned uh button rock is full which we normally would have seen that being down however union is more down than it normally is so there's kind of a balancing of of the reservoirs but as a whole we're slightly below average next slide please so again ralp price reservoir being uh being full and spilling nelson mentioned about 10 cfs we're hopeful that we can have our repairs done by the end of february early march um and i i'm not going to steal jason's thunder when he talks about that more specifically on under our item 90 next slide union reservoir again as i mentioned um as nelson did we were down about 4500 acre feet um one thing that i'd like to uh speak to is to fill union reservoir it it takes a little bit longer union reservoir is an off channel reservoir that fills off the oligarchy ditch and with just the operational history of that um it normally would take a month or two to fill union regardless of how much flow is in the st brian creek just from the standpoint of what the oligarchy can handle and so it's likely that early earlier this year it could be as early as january it might be in march or april but sometime earlier it's likely that we may be releasing um some water out of button rock um the value of that is that um button rock being an on channel reservoir has the ability to to store quicker physically store quicker we also have more decrees available to store in button rock that we do just in union alone and so we're going to try to continue to do our best management practice and do some operational things that will hopefully at the end of uh the runoff season that we can realize union and button rock being full uh next slide please so the longmont water uh treatment plants are on pace to uh produce about 104 percent of what we've seen in 2002 and we kind of use that as a monitor or as a benchmark that's when we started doing our water supply and drop management plans um so interestingly over that 19 year period we're just slightly over it even though our population is increased and that's a a testament to some of the water conservation as um things that uh the city has done um in comparison if you kind of hard to see i understand but in 2019 we did about 16 000 acre feet so we were we're going to do about 2 000 acre feet more than last year but if you looked at the whole 19 year period the average was about 17 000 so we're nothing real surprising um i think we're right on track to what we were expecting next slide please so um the snowpack for the south flat basin as nelson mentioned we were at uh 76 percent of normal and on the upper colorado at about 73 percent of normal um kind of bear in mind that the snowpack this early part of the season is probably barely a quarter percent of the snow that we would normally experience and so with each passing uh water board review period you know it'll become more and more important i think one thing to note is you can see on that green line how a single event can really make a difference and so we're hoping that we'll have a couple significant snow packs and early on would be nice but as always it's those spring storms that will really make or break um our water supply but as of right now we're we're below average but nothing to overly concern ourselves with at this point uh next slide please so um pleasant valley reservoir if you were to look specifically at our local storage you'll note that pleasant valley reservoir is down it's about 25 percent of full and um it is the call on the river as nelson mentioned um we are putting water in there likely it will have realized its full decree by the end of this month and um in so doing uh will probably be somewhere around a third full and then we'll have to wait until either uh the call on the river changes so that it can fill under one of its enlargement decrees or we can put other water rights that are decreed to go in there you'll notice back in 2018 when we were doing some work there we were actually uh less full than we are now and in that given year um we ended up filling it to about 80 percent so we're thinking even though it's down uh quite a bit that there's everything indicates that we should be able to get it within three fours or even full before the end of the runoff we'll see how the snowpack does uh next slide please um so that's kind of on the water supply piece the uh the the other piece that we wanted to speak to was kind of some of the fire impacts and we wanted to speak to that this month now going forward there really won't be a whole lot more to say but we wanted to highlight five of the major fires that were in along the front range all of which have now been uh contained um so when you uh look at them you can see there's there's a fairly significant amount of of um acreage that was burned there was uh just under 450,000 acres represented by these five fires so if you were to kind of rough that out you're talking an area from Longmont up to Fort Collins and over to Greeley so pretty big total area um fortunately most of these were outside of the uh the direct watershed but I think uh at this point Ken I'm going to let Ken go ahead and uh speak to the kind of the remaining slides and the few that actually may have some contribution in terms of water quality for the same terrain thank you Wes um did want to kind of bring the board up to speed on where we are with the fires you know most people read the hundred percent containment and the fact that most of the fires are out and be and and kind of it is really easy to kind of forget about it um unfortunately um all three of the fires uh did and are going to impact us um but that impact will be felt really in the future um I'll really start with the smallest fire I'll call it small it's the largest fire ever in Boulder County but that's the Calwood fire at 10,000 acres um it's still a sizable fire next slide please so Calwood fire um this slide is uh basically what we call an erosion rotability uh map this shows where um the the little bit larger concern of the rotability is there's really two factors the two primary factors in the rotability are um how hot the fire burned and then how steep the terrain is where the fire burned so um this map shows if if you if you kind of envision the larger area it's about the eastern three fourths of it you'll see you'll see a green area right and kind of just west of the middle that whole area is the gear canyon area from that yeah from that marker there going east that's gear canyon so the bulk of the fire actually burnt in the left hand basin although that left hand creek does come to Longmont and so it that will impact us um eventually as as the ash laden and silt come down from that area most of that area is uh Boulder County open space and uh US Forest Service property so um the one thing I do have to do a little bit of a shout out to the to the Boulder County open space they have done a really good job at working looking at doing rehab and uh they've already turned in a project to the natural resources conservation service through their emergency watershed protection program and they will be doing a lot of work up there um on um putting down aerial mulch and seating and and really doing a lot of the fire recover efforts in that area the area on the west side of the map basically from that green spot over that whole area is is called the central gulch area the fire started um really on the far west side of this burn area in the Calwood education center that's where they got the name Calwood fire um and then burnt burnt to the east so that whole area on the west side is central gulch that's all central gulch eventually drains down into the south sink rain creek and then uh would um that drainage would go on down south st rain through the town of lions over over our diversion structures on the south st rain on into the main stem of the st rain creek uh where the north and south come together in lions and then will come on east um so looking at this erodibility map you can see and primarily because of the steepness of the terrain um some of the most erodible areas are on central gulch we were initially um and and just for information sake this is all these erodibility maps tend to be a little um on the high side uh um just just the way it works out uh we we are certainly hoping that um especially the the north part of central gulch uh burnt very um the burn was much cooler um that'd be mostly because it was coming down the canyon coming down the walls of the south st rain canyon as the fire goes down it doesn't tend to flare up as much and so um it didn't burn quite as bad um in fact go ahead and go to the next slide this is the bottom end of central gulch this is about three quarters of a mile upstream of the intersection of uh st rain creek south st rain creek um the fire didn't quite make it down to this point and and the point of this picture was just to kind of show you you can kind of see the the damage from the 2013 flood the the bottom of this valley is fairly open and and um large large rock and cobble um from the flood and uh but but there's good uh there's good timber on the sides there's there is good downfall logs um you go about another quarter of a mile and you hit the fire and luckily at this part of the fire you actually if you could have a prescribed burn and have a perfect fire that's what we had there it actually burnt the understory it didn't even get up into the crown of the trees so you go about another half a mile before you really get into to where the the trees were burnt um up in the crown so the good news for us we were originally very concerned about what was going to happen with central gulch still concerned we're still going to watch it we're still going to work with the county and the U.S. Forest Service to try to get some um work done on the upper parts of it but um it appears that at least from a woody debris and hopefully from a sediment load um this the effect of the 2013 flood um will help keep some of that woody debris or most of it up there and hopefully a good portion of the granular debris so really we will have ash um because it will be suspended in the water and it'll be coming down so we'll have some pretty good ash flows come out of here but we'll put in we'll be working with the county and the U.S. Forest Service to get in some rain gauges to get us some advanced warning and we can shut off water intakes during the worst of the of the rainstorm events that would bring that down so that's pretty much kind of right now where we are with the calwood fire that that since that burnt into our basin that that will have the greatest impact um luckily it won't have an impact all winter because there there won't be major runoff events it'll really be next uh late may june july early august when the big range thunderstorm type events come and and really flush that canyon out so then go ahead and go to the next slide this is the east troublesome fire um it's um probably the most problematic fire we have it burnt um really a good portion of the uh CBT collection system and so that's going to be one of the things that we'll have to be watching very very closely the good thing is we've already had one good meeting with northern staff on post fire recovery efforts and and i again i'll hand it to northern they are taking this seriously they've set up an entire interdisciplinary team that's working on fire recovery they've set up some operational planning that that will help the good thing about this fire is that it has it hasn't impacted any water quality yet and all winter long we'll be bringing over the CBT water so we'll have the west east slope carter and horse tooth completely full of clean water before any of the thunders summer thunderstorms yet um of the uh of the of the fire itself um the big part of the fire um really was in um the willow creek uh the worst part of the fire was in the willow creek basin but the willow creek basin only makes up 13 percent of the CBT uh system so that's um probably an area where we'll be able to do some shedding of some of the water um to keep it out of the system uh 25 percent of the watershed is the colorado river area and that's really west and north of grand lake and then east going up into the rocky matt national park uh the the the fire that went up straight north of grand lake up into the kawaneichi valley part of the park didn't burn too hot uh that's mostly open meadow and and i i really am uh cautiously optimistic a lot of that will green up before that some of the big thunderstorms uh the more problematic part is north inlet creek which is kind of west or northeast and east of grand lake and then tumblesome creek which is the north part of that burn in rocky matt national park uh those were pretty big fires pretty hot fires and and those unfortunately drain directly into grand lake so their impacts will will be felt right into grand lake and there's not much we can do about that um can't can't really change that and so uh the good part of the tro part about the troublesome uh drainage is that about half of that burnt in the around 2012 and that last drought so the upper part of that had already burned and so it would it would not have burnt very hot in this fire and should green up um and and really not create too big of a problem uh and another good part of it's an area called big meadow which again that will that burnt but that will green up quickly too still a lot of area up there but it's the north inlet creek that'll probably be the biggest impact so that will really impact us a year from now as as that impacts that west slope water and uh a year from now when we bring in over that water um we might we might have some concerns it did it did jump the continental divide and burn down into the marine park area but in talking with northern water staff they're fairly confident that uh that won't impact the cbt system too bad um part of that had already burnt uh in the cub creek fire marine park fire about eight or nine years ago uh and part of it didn't burn too hot because it was fairly high elevation uh the higher your elevation the the less heat you get on your fire generally so um while that did burn a good area northern feels less concerned about that you know go ahead in the next slide um this is just a blow up of that marine park area in the troublesome Gulch area so that's really the kind of the the biggest part um a lot of people working on that at northern water and a lot of people working on it with the bureau reclamation grand county it's amazing the people have come together to start helping out already on the west slope so we'll we'll keep you updated on that and uh that's more of a long-term issue for us next slide please and I think that was it so we are um keeping an eye on these fires we'll keep an item it's uh it was a little scary when you think the the Calwood fire burnt to within a mile and a half of the north saint rain basin on the south side had it gone less less than one quarter mile more it would have hit the side of the south saint rain canyon going up north and it would have climbed right up that canyon and been in the north pretty quick so that's how close it was to our north drainage on the south the east troublesome fire once it burned over in the marine park area it actually burnt to within three miles of estus cone and the estus cone is kind of the north side drains into the big tops and the south side drains in to the um north saint rain so we were within a mile and a half of the Calwood fire three miles of the east troublesome fire and then the Calwood fire when it made us run down south into the big Thompson was only 10 miles away from us so we really had all three of those big fires literally within miles of the north saint rain basin so we're very fortunate it did not burn into this north saint rain at all and so for long month the best best news is we should have good clean water supply from the north basin even if some of these other basins are impacted a little bit so that's really all i have right now in the fires but wanted to give you a quick update on them and i'll let you know we will continue to track them and continue to give you input on that thanks ken does the board have any questions or comments for west or can on the reports i'm roger i see your hand up yeah can i don't want to belabor too long but two things on my mind i didn't hear the causes of the starts of these fires were they natural or were they man made or do you know off the top of your head um they if they know they haven't said yet um they have not on any all three of the fires they haven't posted a reason i if it's possible that they're investigate ima or it's possible they got so big they couldn't figure it out but it hasn't been a cause that i'm aware of yet on any of them one one other question then uh how much of the the burn was uh helped i guess by uh the amount of dry timber up there like pine beetle kill was that a big factor no i don't grant lake there seem to be a lot of that available to burn but i i don't know you know i um the the dry timber made it easy for it to burn but quite honestly the um drought this summer how dry it was the low extremely low soil moisture extremely low humidity uh creating extremely dry timber even even the live timber uh extremely dry and then unfortunately pretty thick timber everywhere and the winds it was really the wind um some really terrible wind uh conditions every time they came close to getting it corralled the wind took it off and and made it run and so you know we had similar big fires in 2012 the last drought bigger drought um as well as 2002 if you go back to you know the it's usually during these drought periods that we have the big fires okay thanks can any other uh ellison you have a question or comment yes thank you um i had two questions one um is involving snowpack and soil moisture um is the snowpack to some degree going to replenish the soil moisture such that we're going to realize even less down here um yeah in fact i would i would say you know with us soil moisture conditions we're looking at right now um they're they're extremely we're extremely dry before it started to snow um it would even if we had a hundred percent snowpack we'd be lucky to have a 75% runoff all that west elaborate but it will impact it yeah i think and and that's where sometimes these um early snows help a little bit in that they come out uh slower if we have just those late spring snows they're just it's melting so fast that the ground can only absorb so much and so it's going to be a combination of things we can't hit it on the head it's it's going to take an above average snowpack to be able to realize an average runoff i think thank you and second question was kind of circling back to your presentation west um i was wondering this is kind of a elementary question but what actually happens to the water post-treatment plant say that again i'm sorry what happens to the effluence once it's um fully treated so um what we do is there's really two types of water that the water treatment takes either fully consumable or single use for the um single use water that goes into the plants that is just returned down to same rain creek at the wastewater treatment plant and it'd be available for the next users in priority for the fully consumable effluent that goes through the water treatment plant we um lease that either through long term or short term leases and so there's approximately a dozen entities that we have lease arrangements with and so um we use nearly 100 percent of the wastewater treatment effluent and we find that in most cases that's insufficient to satisfy the full lease requirements thus why we've been making releases out of union reservoir to make up the difference so in the winter time we usually have closer to 90 to 100 percent of the effluent that's available to us is fully consumable and that's because we're taking water out of storage out of button rock that would have already been fully consumable water that was stored um and so we're able to make uh more complete use of the water in the winter time but nonetheless that total amount that's being released from the wastewater treatment plant effluent is normally again not um sufficient to meet our full lease obligations and so there's always some that we're either releasing as in-stream credits through same rain creek or out of union to fully satisfy those obligations thank you and one follow-up question what kind of percentages does it shake out in terms of fully consumable versus single use in the irrigation season so um it varies by month but if we were to look at the irrigation season I would say during the irrigation season we're probably a third or a half that would be available as reusable effluent it really again it really depends on the call on the river and what water rights we have available to us it also depends upon um what the water treatment plant is using we we um CVT being single use but windy windy gap being uh fully consumable and so we're we usually try to manage those um trans basin supplies that we take into the water treatment plant the CVT and the windy gap we like to run windy gap when we have a higher uh return flow credit factor so oftentimes we'll run that windy gap earlier in the season to get more full and complete use um we do have the ability though if there ever becomes a time when the wastewater treatment plant effluent is above and beyond what our needs are we can put that excess into union reservoir we can pump that into union and sometimes we have done that thank you are there any other questions or comments for canter west I do have one um can you had mentioned that under the cowwood fire you guys are looking at putting maybe rain monitors up um to look and see if there's ash flows coming down I assume then you'd you know turn off the diversion from the south st rain um but I know for Collins has done something similar where they look at turbidity or that in the pooter river um I guess um is is the intent that you'd have more are you going to be monitoring the rain gauges and then looking in the river or is there a ability to put some sort of gauge you know in the river to kind of monitor turbidity and then turn off your diversions based upon you know if it gets too high may cause more of an issue to the treatment plant just kind of curious how you're going to handle that going into this year um yes that's that's correct Todd we we really want the rain gauges to give us the maximum forewarning but really all that does is say hey it rained up here and then we would have to use both visual and turbidity monitoring to determine when we would shut off you know if it gets to be a very significant rainstorm event it will just automatically shut it off because we know what it's going to do but um if it's a a quarter inch or a half inch um then then we'd probably do it with turbidity monitoring but our our plants will they do real-time turbidity monitoring of all their sources okay thanks Ken any other questions comments Scott thank you just a quick one and I don't know if anybody has a definitive answer but I think at a recent meeting where Brad wind was speaking he mentioned that the northern board may not um issue their quota for the 2021 season at its April meeting which is when we've historically seen that information that might be postponed into later into the summer maybe may or June and I didn't know if that affects our ability to project our water supply on water demand um considerations or if that's going to inconvenience us a fair amount yeah I haven't I haven't heard definitively that they were going to postpone it I did hear they were considering or they just didn't mention they said we're not sure when we'll we'll do that I'd be surprised if they went clear into June because that really has more of an impact that has a big impact on the irrigation companies they need to know how much water they're going to have um but yeah for us it would it would be less than convenient if it were too late but and I might add that or will you really use that information is when we put together our you know the next year's water supply and drought management plan what it would probably require us is to then make some assumptions instead of the facts um one of the tools that one of the primary reasons they've always tried to get it out um when they normally do is so that people can make some decisions in regards to um taking any of the carry over water um I think Longmont as we we as water resources staff is have have already kind of come to a conclusion that we're going to take our full entitlement of our carry over so with that in mind it's not going to be probably as much so that we have to wait for the final determination and our decision to take that carry over you know there's a lot of factors that's going to go into that some of that being the uncertainty of the water quality that uh we may or may not experience here in the native basin water rights and two some of when I talked about some of the storage that we have where we've always tried to have a um uh play it on the safe side if you will and to um be be as much certain as possible that we have enough water and so I think with those things in mind it would be a it would be more helpful if they could get it out but if they were to wait a month or so I think Longmont would still be able to come up with a a reasonable assumption and a and still be able to put its water supply and drought management plan together um at about the same time that we normally would have otherwise I guess one comment there has not been any definitive um discussion or direction on that other than brad's saying it may need to be considered from the board level just so everybody's aware of that so I think that'll be a discussion as we get further into the spring um just uh so there hasn't been anything definitively decided there any other questions comments from the board I don't see any okay with that um we'll go on to item 9b which is a windy gap firming project update Ken thank you chairman um just a real quick update today on windy gap hopefully everybody um received their email the the good news that the federal lawsuit was um finally uh got it got a an order out and and was great news we we won every single point in the in the case and the and the judge upheld the issuance of the permit by the federal agencies um that really really helps the project start to feel like it can move forward um obviously there's a potential for an appeal that that is not all that uncommon in a federal lawsuit like this um the plaintiffs have I believe 60 days from the time that the order was out so that that time will won't run out till um February about February 10th but um so we'll we little bit of a waiting pattern here still yet that being said um it did one of the things the project needs to move forward with is relocation of the WAPA power lines by the western area power administration and they can actually they are actually going to start working on that they were waiting for a ruling and um they don't appear to be you know needing to wait to see if it's appealed or not they're they're going to start working on that project um hopefully right away uh of course it is a middle winner so we'll see we'll see how that works but um that does allow that to start moving forward um so uh as a result the project is actually calling for a special um participants meeting this Wednesday to talk with all of the uh participants and and let everyone weigh in on their their opinion of if anything was forward or if um if we wait until the end of the appeal period um and really where we go with uh the project right now um still um I mean we're not the project isn't ready to kick off anyway because still need to get all the funding in place before it can kick off but uh the timing of that funding the timing of the sales of bonds and things like that will really really try to work that out in the next month or two as far as the project itself um the uh Colorado River connectivity channel design is now at a 40 design state so that's good um getting that project moving forward uh the firming project itself um they've done an inspection on the bald mountain tunnel and the inter potential interconnect to the reservoir from the CBT system and that all looked good so that that news is good um Pudder Valley REA will start putting in project power lines um I think they actually should have started by now um and then uh the draft air air quality permit from the state of Colorado um should be coming to us within a few weeks so that was one of the last permits that needed um it's not that it won't happen it's just what it says um that that should be coming fairly quickly so uh just a little bit more of a wait I guess on on the appeal period but I think the project had a great milestone and and should be starting to move forward so happy to answer any questions on that if there were any thanks Ken any questions for Ken on windy gap update I'm not seeing any um with that we'll move on to item 9c the monthly legislative report um Ken it has you down again yeah and um honestly I don't have a report this month yet um obviously this um legislative session won't start till next month and I don't have the information from the interim legislative committee yet I apologize for not being able to get that to you yet today but um we'll we'll cover all that next month at the january meeting and go over that sounds good yet it's on the items for tentatively scheduled future more board meetings so we can revisit that in january um so with that we'll move on to item 9d the water resource engineering project update and looks like we have an elf here named Jason that can fill us in go ahead hey merry christmas everyone uh yeah so I'm Jason Elkins water resource engineer and project engineer for all of our capital projects I got three big projects I want to update you on but real quick I just wanted to add to kind of you had asked about the turbidity testing um we've actually started taking some turbidity some water quality samples and doing some analysis to try to figure out um what the baseline turbidity and total suspended solids is in the south st vrain um sea dot's got a project that's coming up this summer and they think that you know they might impact that and with the cowwood fire we just thought we'd take it upon ourselves let's just go ahead and just start doing some water quality analysis so our water quality lab and our uh nelson flander water treatment plant operators are doing um water quality analysis on that so we can get we can get a good baseline prior to spring runoff and and all the debris coming down our way um uh let's talk about uh button rock repairs so as you might recall we sprung a leak um over the summer up at button rock and uh we currently have the emergency gate closed and we have the regulating gate completely torn apart um we're currently um actively trying to get these repairs done so that we can put this all back together and have it up and uh operating uh come the middle of february um there's quite a quite a bit of repairs it's pretty extensive um but it's fully achievable with we're we're totally confident that we can do it um you know there's just a couple things that add some time to it um lead based paint you know so it's like we got a properly disposed of that that takes time um but uh i i think we're going to have button rock put back together and back into service um the second week of february that's what we're tentatively um scheduled scheduled for um the south st vrain pipeline pump station um so i'm actually meeting with the town of lions tonight to try to secure um our permanent easement to install the pump station just south of the lions fire protection district if you're familiar with the town of lions uh right right just south of the fire protection district is a vacant lot uh where our south st vrain pipeline runs through so working with them to get uh an easement big enough um for us to install that and uh fully anticipate that they're going to um approve it tonight um the design for that uh we're currently getting ready to advertise an rfp request for proposal for a pump station manufacturer so we're looking to we already have burns and mcdonnell on board as our uh engineer consultants but we're going to have a prefabricated manufacturer come on board um to start you know start the design and uh the design and the fabrication of that to have that delivered come june so anyway that's should be going out to bid by the end of this week and hopefully by the end of january we'll know um who's going to be making the pump station um as for the south st vrain pipeline rehab project um unfortunately that's hit a bit of a delay um i don't know if you guys recall a couple weeks ago that there was a couple up in gilpin county that had died from uh um uh carbon monoxide poisoning um it was i don't know the details but it sounds like it was some sort of accident or something so anyway one of those two people was the project manager at cnl water solutions who was in charge of our project and so she passed away um she was i mean she's one of their founding project managers so it's been pretty hard for cnl um i told them take as much time as they need i i get it you lost a family member just as much as you did uh a co-worker so um i'm anticipating that's going to put about a one month delay on that but with the pump station project starting construction in june it's really inconsequential um it would be nice to get the south state vrain pipeline up and running prior to the pump station so we can you know put it back into service and at least you know do some testing some flow testing and stuff on that um but if we don't make that it just it's just going to end up delaying it you know months a few months so it's unfortunate and it's sad um but it's you know we'll we'll work through it and we'll make up the lost time and um we'll get the south st vrain my fully plan on having that thing back up and running um 100 by the end of next year any questions any questions for jason i am not seeing any great thank you for the report jason no problem okay we're on to nine e which is a water conservation sustainability update is francy out there yes um hope everyone's doing well today i'm i have update on four different water conservation items from this past fall um the board may remember that this past summer you all provided feedback on the climate action task force water conservation recommendation uh city staff reviewed board feedback combined with a analysis process to provide a implementation timeline and modifications on all climate action task force recommendations they were passed earlier in december so the water conservation recommendation which originally had the goal of a 35 to 40 percent reduction by 2025 staff modified that goal to instead somewhat to what water board recommended um continue with current water conservation and drought management plans until the the 2024 water efficiency master plan update where a more extensive analysis of a more of the benefits of a more um more ambitious water conservation goal should be analyzed and returned to city council at that time so that effort essentially has been put on um kind of well not put on hold because we'll still continue water conservation and drought management efforts but this analysis a more ambitious water conservation goal probably won't begin until sometime in 2023 another update is that this past september staff from a number of different divisions including planning parks water resources attended the water smart growing water uh sorry growing water smart uh workshop from this um sonaran institute from that we created an action plan focused on how to better integrate water efficiency and land use planning to meet the goals of our water efficiency master plan and and envision longmont so that one year it's a one-year action plan staff is currently in the process of presenting it to different leadership among the city but the primary goal was to figure out how the uh city staff can further integrate water efficiency into the development process so staff will be meeting monthly to kind of update and make sure that water conservation is continue to be integrated into other parts of the city more so than it has in the past i do want to highlight that we did find what going to that workshop longmont actually is a little bit ahead of other communities and kind of connecting planning and water resources primarily because our water utility and planning are within the city but we did identify areas that we can continue to improve um the another opportunity that that we actually just applied to is the water now accelerator it's a project accelerator uh we just applied earlier this month and we applied to get some best practices research support because we will a lot of our amr data will be coming in hopefully by the end of the first quarter next year because we'll have a lot of the the system set up to receive that data so we wanted to have some best practice research from experts in the water conservation field of how to best use that data so we will hopefully find out i think next month whether we received that project accelerator support so update the board if that is the case um and then lastly uh we partner with resource central every year for a number of water conservation programs and next year we will be the first community to launch a income qualified garden a box program so if you're familiar with garden a box cities usually partner to provide a $25 discount we had been hearing that for not that's not accessible for all of our residents so those who are participate in longmont cares which is a income qualified program can now also participate in a 80 discount on a garden a box and we're hoping that will help reach more members of our community with those water-wise gardens so those are four very different updates on things happening with water conservation uh but are there any questions thanks francy any questions that the board has on the updates to the conservation plans um francia i i do have one i think it'd be the growing water smart i don't know it at some point in the future if it makes sense to make another kind of specific presentation on that i'd be kind of interested in seeing how you're integrating kind of water resource water conservation with future development and part of that may be as we look to the future water demands and the build out for the city of longmont you know maybe we can get some more indication as to you know what is that appropriate or achievable level of conservation so that we can you know kind of look at water supply and demand and kind of get a better idea of you know where are we with in terms of meeting that future demand anyway i i know northern was kind of help facilitating some of those presentations i think that's a great program and glad to see that longmont participated but is that something you could report back to us on at a future meeting um yes that is something we could report back i also it also sounds um like a lot of i just want to make sure i heard your request correctly besides understanding maybe the different components of the action plan and how we're trying to better a lot of the efforts we found were on how we better educate developers but um also kind of bring back how we're meeting water demand and water supply which i assume would be more of a conversation presented by ken yeah francie i guess what i'm curious of is you know one of the the things is i understand it would be there there may be ways to you know do you know less bluegrass more xeric you know really reduce those future landscape demands in certain areas that would have a corresponding reduction in future water demands so and i don't know if you guys got into that or how that kind of the you know with the cost of water what i'm seeing is a lot of developers are trying to figure out ways they can reduce their cost to development and one way to do that is to do more um kind of low water use plants or landscaping and i don't know that's kind of what i was curious i don't know if that's being integrated into the planning documents um and then that would have a corresponding impact on you know the future water demand so it may be one that may take a little bit of time before that all kind of flushes out of how it would be integrated into the future kind of planning documents and then what those changes would mean in terms of future reductions in water demand if that makes sense that that's kind of what i'm kind of curious of going forward yes that does help clarify i in the time we had we didn't get into that level of detail i think a lot of the initial conversations were around engagement that being said i think that's where we'll start to move towards so as you mentioned it might be a little bit longer for us to return with that presentation but i think we'll start to move in that direction and i also know we don't have a set timeline yet but hopefully in the next probably starting next fall but maybe a little and then over the next two years the sustainability plan and vision longmont uh will begin their update so we'll also be looking into how we can set up this growing water smart effort to kind of maybe more strongly integrate into those plans so i think later in the year we should have some more information that we can return and present to the board on that sounds great no rush i just think it'd be something that would be important for us to pay attention to and like you say then we could maybe integrate it into the sustainability goals that the city has you know long term just make sure we're tracking with the water supply planning so thank you for that appreciate it any other questions comments for france a year scott you have one sorry uh mr chair it's not for francy i apologize for any inconvenience but i had a 430 appointment scheduled upon me so i'm going to have to excuse myself and check back with you all next month sounds good well merry christmas scott right christmas everybody happy holidays thank you and see you okay with that um we're through the items from staff we're onto the items from board um item 10a is a review of major project listings and items tentatively scheduled for future board meetings the only one i really saw on there for january is once again to discuss the water legislation in more detail is there anything else can that you see coming up that we need to to um be thinking about um nothing that we really haven't already been discussing okay all right with that we're on the informational items and water board correspondence um is there anything that the board wants to bring up um at this point for the consideration or discussion and i'm not seeing anything um so with that we're on the items tentatively scheduled for future board meetings once again the legislative update and then in march we'll revisit the cash in lieu um and i think that that is it um is there anything anybody else wants to add for the the last board meeting of the year here i don't see anything so with that i just i'll go ahead and adjourn the meeting and wish everybody a merry christmas and look forward to uh 2021 hopefully we can see everybody in person and get back to more of a normal meeting yes it'll be good to meet allison and other board meet members and in person beyond zoom so i look forward to that just one item of note our next meeting will be january the 25th so we're going to delay it one week um due to the martin leuther king jr holiday in january so we'll see you on january 25th y'all happy holidays everybody holidays everybody yeah thank you bye