 was doing repairs to the outlets. We had a toll. But we took, Union was down about 6,000, 7,000 last year. And then went on route, I suppose, or as a whole. So this year we kind of surfed around. Union's only down about 2,000 acre feet, and then by the time I was down about 6,000. Okay, so we're close to that, close to average. A little bit about average releases, but pretty close to it. Okay. What I was doing through that, I remembered that there was something that we discussed in previous meetings about some kind of switch over. Yeah, yeah. Thanks. Sure. And then on page 19 here, so on the Colorado Water Basin, it's the storage level at March 1st was 82%. So South Platte River Basin reservoir storage at March 1st was 100%. So as you can see, you go to the top there, you can see this. So we basically have Boulder County, Laramie County, and Grand County there, and Jackson County to the top. So the grand Boulder County, Laramie, were dry and moderate drought. So it's, they were perhaps holding that. I looked at, this was March 8th, but I just looked at March 17th, and we're the same. So we're still, we keep getting the weather patterns that we're turning in now, but that's important this time of year, because if you don't get those weather patterns, it's, you know, rain snow here, snow mounds, then that snow pack starts to drop. So especially when you put warm weather in your eyes, so we definitely, I know we're supposed to be dry this, warm dry this weekend, but hopefully we'll start keeping those patterns. And I was going, it's like, okay, so on the Colorado River Basin, we have 23 days till the peaks for the snow pack, and then South Lab, we have 35 days. So we're just going to need those weather patterns. So basically, all I have, if there's any questions, I'm going to have to answer any questions. This is pretty similar to last year. Yes, actually, so for the most part, last year, we were better shaped this year than last year, except for this time last year, around March 18th, we had that four kids, highest snow in this region, in the farmland region. So that was the March 18th, 19th, I believe. And that's what really changed last year, because we were kind of projected, we were going higher. So we were really dry all the way up until, for example, December, then we had all that snow last part of December and January this year. And then in February, we had like 63 or 5% of precipitation. So it started going out. March, we'd be getting above average precipitation. So we're pretty close. It'd be nice to get a big snow, that's for sure. The real drill here from last year isn't so much our basin. It's the Colorado River basin was in extreme drought, red, about half of the entire western soil. Yeah. The earlier snows this mid-year Christmas snows really helped that Colorado River basin. Well, that's a good point, because the Colorado River basin is definitely better shaped right now than it is. Because that snow is what I was talking about, mainly intact. It did a little bit, it didn't amount to the main on the front range or the central mountains that it did. Any other questions? Thank you. Okay. Cache and lute. Yeah, I'll just report real quickly. The action of, of course, I think I sent out an email, the council went ahead and approved the resolution on the change of the cache and lute at 485. So that went pretty smoothly. We had a pretty good flush of cache and lute come in. In the 21 days before that council meeting, we probably brought in as much cache as we did two years prior. So which it was expected. Yeah. There's still a lot of land out there though, but yeah, you have to come in. And so we didn't, because that was just approved a couple weeks ago, we don't have any additional information for the March cache and lute setup. We have got a little bit of information on CBT. It has, it was kind of sitting steady about 60 grand a unit, but we know at least one entity trying to purchase, they just put out on the market and said, I want 200 shares of CBT and they're offering 65,000 share. You knew it. And so I think they're going to say they bumped the market up $5,000. But in terms of some of the local water rights, not a lot of change there. So one thing that I think I briefly mentioned this last month, council is in addition to looking at affordable housing, they are also looking at kind of the next category of attainable housing. And we may end up, so we're probably coming back to a lot more talk about how real attainable housing look in the water. We're all about requirement policy. It may, we may have a program similar to our foreign policy program. Actually, right now there is a task force that I'm not on, so I can't tell you what kind of where the progress is, but there's a task force that's looking at attainable housing really kind of need to come up with a definition of how we do it. So that kind of process takes a little bit of time, you know, to bring it together. So we're not ready yet to start having the conversation about how that might look. But if council directs us, we easily come up with a program similar to affordable housing. So just kind of a heads up that we'll probably be coming forward in sometime in the near future, you know, this quarter or so. And we'll keep you up to, as soon as we hear about the attainable housing kind of task force kind of, their work will bring up the speed on that. I don't know, Marcia, if you have anything more to do and kind of don't. You know, there has not been discussion and recently it seems like the discussion is among the housing staff and then it comes to council bait. So, you know, I don't get a lot of previews. But what I can say is that, you know, of course, attainable housing has bigger margins than affordable housing and more flexible financing requirements than affordable housing. So the incentives don't necessarily need to be as great as they do for affordable housing. But short of that, I have no idea. You know, the staff is younger. So maybe possibly different ideas about what's going, you know, what's going to be appropriate. So I'm hoping that there'll be something innovative that comes before council. But I have not stuck my nose into it yet. So I don't have any inside information. So it sounds like attainable housing isn't well defined yet? Well, attainable housing kind of is well defined in terms of for sale housing. It is 80% of the area median income on the bottom and either 100 or 110% of the area median income on the at the top end. But does everybody know what area median income is? I don't know what it means. I don't know what the number is. The number changes all the time and it depends on the size of your family and you know, so there's never a number. But but anyway, as long as you know that it's roughly, you know, the median is how much people make here. And it's supposed to be a major measure of livability. You know, do you earn enough to actually buy a house here? And the answer is if you're below 80, no. And right now, the market's so out of balance that the answer is no unless you're above 100, at least. So again, this is not something that HUD forces a definition on us. So as it is for affordability, right? So we will come up with our own definition of attainability in terms of what needs to be incentivized. Other agencies not in the federal stack, like economic development partnerships, you know, which we have the Long Line Economic Development Partnership, and then it is a member of associations of similar organizations. So they have data that they'll be presenting to us. And we'll be trying to come up with a good definition that allows housing to be built for what can be afforded, what people can afford. Because right now, as you probably already know, Ken, the city's having a really hard time recruiting employees. Yeah, I'm trying to formulate it. I just don't know a whole lot about the topic, right? So, but I do know, for example, like, I mean, for a long month to have an affordable housing program, that would be the incentives of that in addition to diversity, et cetera, would kind of relate to accessing perhaps like HUD programs and pools of money that perhaps otherwise be available. Is that same type of thing? Because HUD doesn't have a definition for attainable housing, is there like kind of like loan incentives and other types of kind of like community program incentives or something that are available by having an attainable housing program and striving for that? Or is it mostly just like long months interest in doing? Well, it's only the ones we make ourselves. So, for example, the Economic Development Partnership has enlisted a loan agency whose name is escaping me, but it's the one that is co-housed with the EDP. And the way it works is that employers, primary employers who can afford to do this, will agree with the loan agency to kind of provide some security for these loans and then their employees get first pick and better deal in interest rates and way fees and all like that. That makes it easier for them to get housings. And that's all great, except that they have to have something to buy. And right now there's not enough stock, you know, because the housing stock that's on the market at Longmont right now is like everything's above $500,000 and everything that you'd actually want is above $700,000. And, you know, so we've got to build other types of housing because the cost of land is so high. That's really helpful actually. So that's where kind of the innovation part perhaps is coming in. Yes. Thinking about like, okay, what could we do internally regardless of whether or not there's these external programs that perhaps like there are for affordable housing. Right, yeah. So you don't get to use things like low income tax credits for this. Yeah. But so just this is a teeny meanie example, but Longmont really recently passed an ordinance that says if you've got a single family home on a lot now and you would like to make that single family home into a duplex, you can let it be a duplex and, you know, you have to meet other requirements like it has two kitchens, right, stuff like that. But you don't have to double the number of water meters and electric meters and stuff so you can have the landlord split up the consumption however they decide to do it. And so you get rid of the expense of having all those new connect fees for the duplex. And that is considerable, you know, depending on the house of the size and everything's like $25,000 to $50,000 in fees. So it's a it's a that's a big incentive even though it seems little what you described it. And so things like that, we hope we can come up with a lot more to encourage density, which will then lower the cost of the housing. All right. And again, I appreciate the marketer work on getting this cash and new thing moving forward. So I appreciate it. All right. How about the Windy Gap Fermi project? Okay, just real quick update on the Windy Gap Fermi project. It's luckily going very well. So a couple, couple pictures here I wanted to show. The first one is one of the to get to the site. They needed a need a road and now now the main access for the construction is a different road. But this shows where there's a bridge that's being built over the Pennstock, the CVD Pennstock, that bridge will actually be the after the reservoir is built, we got 300 foot down up on the side of the hill, there's a bridge that comes out a road that will come around serve not only the reservoir, it's a road to the backside of the reservoir is a containment dyke on the backside of the reservoir that needs to be maintained. But it will also serve as the access for Blurimer County open space property, which is immediately adjacent and will have a tie in with the project itself. One of the, one of the things that is constructed and done, this is a cofferdam, it's actually a 50 foot tall dam, so it's one of the highest dams around here, you know, Bud Rock's taller than most of this reservoirs around here, much less than 50 foot. That's just the cofferdam, that's just to protect the main dam during the construction of the reservoir, but as you can see, that's a pretty substantial. And it's done? It's done. Yeah, it's a big, big deal. That's getting, you know, used to the pace of municipal action, I mean. I'll throw a banner out there. A government project moving forward, yeah, I get it. So yeah, that is good news. So this is a better view, this is today. And you can see up here is that bridge coming over the penstock and the road up around the reservoir. This is the main footprint of the dam, if you can imagine it doing this this is the centerline of the dam, this, they completely excavated down to the bottom of the dam side, which is the most critical point in any dam construction. You know, you open, you know, that's a, you know, 30, 40 places almost 50 foot cut from the story, you know, you got down, you opened it up and you didn't, we didn't find any big major surprises. You know, there's always small things you find, but we didn't find a fault line that wasn't known. We didn't, we didn't find a weak section in there. So we've kind of taken one step past the scariest, most dangerous part of any dam construction. And they're actually now starting to, I'll say, come up. This is called a plinth. It's basically a concrete foundation that you pour on top of the underlying bedrock, drill down, you know, rebar down it, it's concrete, rebar, pretty substantial. That will go clear across the bottom and then you build the dam on top of it, but you have a good connection, you know, this plinth is just a concrete connection between the bedrock underlying bedrock and the dam that will go on top. As you remember, this is a hydraulic asphalt dam. So the actual asphalt, hydraulic asphalt core, which is, you know, pretty narrow, like six foot at the bottom and eight, four foot at the bottom, will be right on top of that plinth and go clear to the top of the dam. So that is under construction and you can see that going. And then the cofferdam was over here, just upstream of it. And the quarry is already completely cleaned off and they're actually starting, they're blasting and producing rock for the construction of the dam because that rock placement's the big deal for this. I mean, seven days a week, two and a half years of blowing up rock and placing it in the dam. So that is the construction of where we are and doing really good. I mean, we're real happy with that. One, I find it a little interesting that you can see the road over here from the bridge and then the road that will go around. Right up in this area, the Lerner County will have a recreation area and a parking lot and a boat ramp and a lap for future recreational access. That's being constructed as part of this project, paid for by Lerner County because it's a parking lot for their use. But it's being built right now because the project will then be able to use that parking lot to stage construction out, especially as the dam gets higher. And you bury all this stuff down there. But it'll actually serve a dual use. So the project's going very well. There's nothing, you know, they're probably, if you look at how much money you want to spend, which is a lot, a million dollars a month, that's a little more than that. You were about like 96, 98, 87% of where we would like to be at this point for you to project. So it got thrown down a little bit by that snow in Christmas stones and a few others in the farms. But not much. So it's going quite well. The other part of the whole project is the connectivity channel on the west slope, which is to bring the Colorado River around the Windy Gepreze award, the violet brandy. That is still moving forward. They're actually doing some preliminary work. We've got a lot of clearing and grubbing and all that for that. The, still don't have a permit yet. We're crossing our fingers that the public input process ended, I think, large tans or something like that. So hopefully, I mean, we're expecting all the comments. I don't know who would say, don't build a connectivity channel, but you never know. But that commentary is, and so now that that should be completed. We hope that permitting process gets completed pretty quickly. And everybody's still on board. That seems to be going quite well. And then finally, I wanted to bring up Northern Water, because this is a construction site, you can't go in and poke around, but Northern, the municipal sub-district project is holding tours, limited tours for board members. So I would open it up to see if the board is interested in setting up a tour. We're getting a little bit better weather here. And I think a tour in April or May or June or July, whatever. But if you're interested, the board is interested. We'd be happy to set up a tour to get up there. You know, we're not going to go out actually in the middle of the site, but we can get us off to where you can see everything. One side is right. This picture, of course, is taken from the east side of the reservoir, basically right up above Carter Lake, looking down in the valley. There's a place there. We can go up from this side and then also take you out. You can't take you into the on the right side of the picture. You can see the shins and there's four big construction locations there, and then by the bridge. But I don't know. I don't know if we'll be able to, at some point, we'll be able to start right in that room, too. I see a lot of nodding in, so. Okay, I think there's some interest in doing that, so. Okay, I'll be happy to set that up. Go ahead. Also, are you interested in the connectivity channel? Absolutely. By the way, can we do something over there? But that's a thank you for mentioning that, because we will. That's a really good idea, because we can look at a lot of stuff there. I don't know if you've ever been in the poking plan over there. How did it? We can. Are they doing that too much this year? Maybe not yet. They're talking about it. They haven't announced it yet, but yeah, we can certainly work that out, too. Do you, does the board have a feeling? I mean, would you like to do something sooner, like April, or wait a little later in May, when the better weather? Wait until June, when it's nice and hot? That's it. We can try to set something up, whatever works best in everybody's schedule. My only thought, people might be a little, if you're weather-wise, I don't know. You can set the date up, and then it's no 12 inches that day, and so I can get it past April. Okay, well, let me talk further about doing something maybe in May. Beautiful, I'll do it in May. Yeah, do something set up, and what would you prefer, like an afternoon tour this time of the day? Would you prefer an evening, a cultured evening? I don't know if they'll do something on the weekend, but I can ask that, too. I don't know if there's any preference. I think after doing Ken, like we would have a meeting here, makes the most sense. I just look at, as you towards the end of the school year, it's pretty busy to try to fit something else in. It does, when a lunch, a lunch tour on the day of Waterboard, and then we come back to Waterboard. It makes it the 18th of, no, that's the 18th of April, I don't remember what the May date is. I could look at maybe a Waterboard, and so you, yeah, only at the press one afternoon. I couldn't do the 16th, but I thought it was cool. Is that the May? That's not the May one. If you wait until June also. What'd you say? As we wait until June also. Sure. I want to know what you mean from your question. We're going to have tons later, so. And then later, if you wait until June, you'll see that I'm starting to go up. But it should be, well, I don't know, that's going to take a while to get for that. That's right. You know, the June one, one date. Is that right, Marcia? Did you all vote for that? Um, June 10th? Yeah. Yeah, the 20th would be the 27th. Oh, yes. But the 20th is, I'm glad you, I'm glad you know what you're on. You can't just do the city holiday. I had to talk about that, June 10th. That was June 10th. The Monday after June 19th. That was a city holiday. Yeah. So we scheduled our board meeting on 27th. Yeah. Yeah. Gonna shoot for that date. Do you know what it's on? Yeah. Okay. Okay. Well, let me, let me check into that. Let's see where that goes. Okay, thank you. Cool, thank you very much. Um, okay, Jason, you're up? Um, to add to the community gap, I don't know if you guys are into Facebook or not, but they've got a Facebook page called, uh, uh, Chimney Hollow. And I don't know how often they're adding pictures, but they're taking some really gorgeous pictures. I don't know if they paid a photographer or if somebody just really knows how to use an iPhone. But anyway, I've been following that. I think if you just like it, then you'll start to get pictures in your new speed on Facebook. So I'd encourage you to check it out because I've got some pretty cool pictures that you don't get to see from the public's perspective. All right. So, um, typically I give you guys a verbal update, which, um, you've been a very patient with me. Um, so I thought I'd give you some illustrations so you could actually, uh, maybe understand what it is, um, saying here. So the first one is the, uh, South St. Brain Pipeline Pump Station. And so here, this is just basically a site plan. So the top blue line, um, is the North St. Brain, uh, Pipeline. And the blue line on the bottom is the South St. Brain Pipeline. And you can see the South St. Brain Pipeline goes into a wet well. That's the, the, the box structure there that's then, um, funnels water into the pump station, which then gets pushed into the North St. Brain Pipeline. And so this here, um, uh, we've, we've currently, um, issued those to proceed. Lasher construction is out there right now. They've actually cleared this lot. They're doing an outstanding job. We've removed trees. We've been working with neighbors. Um, so, so far everything's going great. We're on schedule. Um, that's probably about the change. We're starting to get, um, delays and stuff coming from materials for supply chain issues and stuff. So back when we issued the, uh, re-advertise the, uh, RFP, you know, contractors went out. They got bids. They got quotes from, from vendors and everything that it was subject to change. Well, that change is now happening. So things that were available in December are no longer available now. So we're starting to see some long lead times, but we're getting pretty creative, looking for solutions and stuff. I think at the end of the day, I think realistically we're probably, this project will probably push back two months. So we're looking at maybe instead of a July timeframe, maybe we're looking at August or September when this comes online. The great thing about this project is, is we're not up against a hard date. It really is kind of at our leisure. So, um, I haven't said that. We do want to get railroad avenue back into service for the town of Lions. We do want to get this up and running as soon as possible, but we've got a little bit of float in our schedule. Um, there is FEMA dollars tied to this, but that's not until the end of the year. So the fact that we had so much float in our schedule, we've got six months worth. Um, if we had to delay the project a month or two, just so that we could meet the correct parts, um, that's fine. So, um, that's kind of all I have for the South St. Green pipeline. So the next sheet is one I don't think I've mentioned to the board before, because this is a new one for us. It's a small project, um, a relatively quick project as well. So this one is one that I inherited from Larry Wayno, uh, he was the engineering administrator of Red Engineering Services who retired. And so as part of our, um, 2013 flood recovery, we removed the North St. Green pipeline from the creek. It crossed this section of the creek like five times. And so now we've put it, we've, the road, uh, this section of the North St. Green pipeline is actually in Apple Valley Road. But in order to close out our 1041 from the Board of County from that project, um, we had agreed to remove two sections of pipe and you can see where I annotated removed section of pipe. And I've called that out. And so the orange line is our North St. Green pipeline. And the, um, green line is a, uh, the lions, the ton of lions waterline. And so as a courtesy to them, uh, we're going to go ahead and remove their waterline as well. They're paying for it, you know, financially, but we're taking the lead on it, getting the floodplain development permits. We're getting, um, you know, the, uh, stormwater construction activity permits from Boulder County, which we, which we have, um, before, uh, we, uh, started construction, we did do a site inspection with Boulder County. They gave us great reviews. Everything's going great. So right now, uh, we're over here on 558 Apple Valley Road. That's over on the left. We've already removed both sections of pipe from the creek. We've capped them off. We're now mobilizing, uh, over to the 416 Apple Valley Road site. That's over on the right. Um, the lions waterline is actually pressurized up to a valve right up to the area where we're going to cut it. So we're actually going to take that line out of service for one day so that we can cut into the pipeline. It's 250 psi of water. I mean, so that's, it's, yeah, we, we don't want to do anything with that kind of pressure on the other side of the valve. So we're going to take that out of service, uh, from one day, we'll cut into it, um, we'll physically disconnect it. We'll pour a kicker, which is just the fancy word for big power concrete. So that way when we turn, when we turn the, uh, water back on and that water pressure hits that valve, it won't try to push the pipe away and become disjointed. And so we're going to put some, some reinforcements in there to make sure that that doesn't happen. And so anyway, um, it's, it's, it's a relatively small minor project. But, uh, you know, we are against the clock on this. We had this done, you know, by the beginning of April and we're on schedule to do that as well. And so anyway, this one's going good, working with, you know, in partnership with Boulder County, um, with the residents here. And, uh, yeah, so everything's been, everything's been going good on that one. And this one here, I know I've never talked dollars on this one. This one I'm, I'm estimating it's going to be about $200,000 to, to renew these two, uh, sections of pipe. So then the last handout I have is for the upper North St. Brain Pipeline, uh, Alignment Study. So we've talked about this before how, you know, the upper sections of, of the North St. Brain Pipeline are very hard to get to. Some of it's on a cliff, some of that pipe is suspended. And so we're looking at, all right, you know, it's coming to the end of its service life. It could be taken out in the next, you know, next flood event or, or, or a rock could fall on it. You know, what, what do we want to do, uh, in the long term? And so we've identified several different ways that we can divert, um, some of our water to Nelson Flanders that doesn't involve using the upper North St. Brain Pipeline. So the upper section that I'm referring to is the yellow dashed area. So this is the one that has two tunnels. This is the one that has timber cribbing, rock cribbing. This is the one that, um, uh, I would like to invite you guys to go on a hike and explore this and see it for yourself. You kind of have a greater appreciation which you've actually kind of gone up there and hiked it. And it's a, it's a relatively easy hike. It's two hours, but it's maybe it's something that we can do here in the spring. And so anyway, um, looking at, you know, long-term plans for this, you know, one of the ideas is, uh, who we can replace it in kind, which, you know, has some advantages to it, but would be very challenging because we don't really have a means of getting, you know, uh, an ATV back there, let alone an excavator or a crane or anything like that. So that would, you know, those are some considerations. So the thought was, well, let's leave our diver, our point of diversion at Longmont Reservoir in place, but let's just realign the pipe. And so one of the thoughts is the red line here, you can see, let's just put it along Longmont Dam Road. Um, and so we, Longmont Dam Road, um, this would require a tunnel section and would also require a siphon to come back up to the hill. But the great thing about this is, um, you have easy access to it. And it gets 100% of our diverged water to the hydro plant. So we'll actually, where you see the yellow and the red line come together, that's the top of the pinstock. So we'll actually be able to keep the hydro plant in service. So moving to the right, you can see the green line over here. The green line is, uh, the existing line's diversion structure. So the channel lines used to, you know, provide their own drinking water until the flood of 2013. Well, their diversion structure is still in the creek and we could potentially use that. So one of the ideas is, well, we retrofit it to accept 28 CFS, which is our carrying capacity. Right now it's designed for, I believe it's six CFS. So it's not very much. And so anyway, we'd have to highly modify that. And then what we'd also have to do is we'd have to pipe it down Apple Valley road to our north pond. So benefit of that, um, it's much shorter, much easier access. Downside of that, we completely bypass the hydro plant altogether. And so then another option is looking at just doing, uh, adding a pump station. We could potentially have a pump station right there below the north pond. We could potentially pump water from the creek into the north pond and from the north pond to the north and we're St. Rain pipeline. We could also just tie directly to one more St. Rain pipeline, have another interconnect or could do both. Again, some benefits to that. One of the downside, a couple of downsides is, you know, you're putting the infrastructure within the flood plain. So that's not very good. You're reliant on power. So now as opposed to generating power, you're consuming power. So that's not very good. And then again, you're bypassing the hydro plant. And so then we're looking at, well, maybe we could do combinations of all of these, you know, maybe, maybe one of the long, you know, long term, the end game is to realign or replace the upper north line, um, in its entirety where it's at. But at the same time, why can't we go ahead and invest in the lion's diversion structure so that if a boulder should fall in the upper north pipeline, we're not completely taken out of the game. Like, hey, we can still divert some of our capacity to Nelson Flanders. It's not optimum for long term. But at the same time, it does add redundancy to our infrastructure. It is susceptible to contamination events through, you know, vehicles, you know, crashing into the creek off of Highway 36, which happens about once or twice a year. So, but anyway, you know, these are things that we're looking at. And so I just want to let you know that we're still working on this study. We've done the SES, which is the Sustainability Evaluation System, which is a process of looking at this, not just from an engineering standpoint, but also from an environmental standpoint. So we've completed that. Dewberry is our consultant who's going to take all this plus a dozen, two dozen other design criteria. We're going to put this into a report. And then we'll start doing a workshop. And so one of the workshops we have to do is with the board and kind of present our findings. And, you know, the workshop is a chance to present findings, gifts, and provide you with an opportunity to give us feedback and with what your thoughts are before we conclude that report. So anyway, that's where we're at right now. A lot of decision making. Yeah. I mean, and, you know, the cost to do this, you know, we thought we had a pretty good handle on what the cost of some of these projects are. But now what's going on? So what, as far as timing on, is this something you want to have done by any particular date or what are your thoughts? So for the study, we'd like to get this done before our next CIP budget cycle, just so that if you want to start planning for the long term, at the same time, if it goes beyond that. This isn't something that we're not, it's not like we're going to start budgeting $39 so that we can start construction in five years on any of this. So, you know, we could potentially do an easier project like the lines of version structure. Maybe that's something we do in the next 10 years. Maybe we make, if we decide to replace the upper north pipeline in its exact location, maybe over the next 10 years, we're looking at doing site improvements and stuff like that, access improvements, so that when it comes time to replace the pipeline, we can actually physically do it. Or, you know, if we decide to realign the pipe along one Latin road, you know, there's going to be heavy permitting involved in that. It's going to take several, several years. So, I guess looking at this, you know, where this is, we're playing a long game on this one. This is nothing that I don't think anything's really going to materialize in the next five years, other than the study and planning efforts, permitting efforts, stuff like that. I see there's an entry flow on North St. Green Creek here. And I was wondering if there's ever been any studies there as far as deficits to the entry flow and so far as using the natural streams instead of the pipeline? You know, that encourage streams of losses, but, you know, what was it? Well, that can answer that one. That might be out of my wheelhouse there. Yeah. Actually, there's a whole bunch of history on in-stream flow in the North St. Green Creek. There is an in-stream flow of 87, 88 vintage. It unfortunately doesn't do a lot below long-time reservoir, because, in fact, basically a little winter off our degree of 28.5 C at best, but that sweeps the river. We have, I spent probably 20 years doing an in-stream flow program on the North St. Green and the North St. Green that pre-woke up, blown up by the state. And that's why it didn't help it. We do want to re-establish that some time in the future. I don't know when or how that can happen. We had quite a very effective program in conjunction with the St. Green, with a lot of concerns in the district and the state. A lot. Most of the irrigation ditches along St. Green. So, yeah, that is certainly an advantage we were able to, in addition to keeping the hydro, but it's one of those things, you know, what is better for the environment? Having a hydro plant, you know, good clean green energy or have an in-stream flow? I mean, you know, those are two competing interests. That is still something, so we're all going to have to rush it. We were able to do both. It's going to be a big lift and it takes a long time. But that is, you know, one of the things the sustainability evaluation system looked at, was there's definitely an advantage. Again, you have to look at what, you know, fortunately, environment is a single thing, you know, you can run water down the stream more, but then it's over quality by the time you pull it out. That's one of the things we looked at. We really, really wanted to have lawnmower. Is that we enjoy some of the highest quality water source because we've heard about lawnmower reservoir. But once you go below lawnmower reservoir, there's a considerable amount of stream side septic systems, and then there's a considerable amount of impact from roads, quite frankly, parks. You probably remember a couple years ago, we had a tanker truck crashed and we had a lot of them, about 5,000 gallons of fuel. We do currently have the ability, and we do occasionally run water down to the Highland Ditch. We have another carriage here in the Highland Ditch. We carry down to their Diverton Highland Ditch, but it's lucky. And that is, actually, we didn't have that when we did the prior mainstream football program because that plant wasn't built yet. And now we have that ability and couldn't do that. So there are a lot of options. We've got a little different region. And I hope after spending as long as I did, and my career getting out of the program going, I hope to get it going something I love to see something else coming. I mean that's part of what that SES of I have been doing so far. In fact, it's a lot of quality, but also the benefits of the environment. A lot of given take on that kind of thing. So the, I mean, what you're showing here are kind of three different alternatives. Are there other alternatives in the mix, such as keeping the water and river, or are these three alternatives the ones that are really kind of... So yeah, so this one's more focused just on the upper north pipeline and the alternatives for that, not alternatives for water delivery as a whole for the city. So it's really focusing on this yellow dashed line. We know it's going to become a huge problem for the city, and it's going to cost millions of dollars to fix it, tens of millions of dollars to fix it. You know, we need to start long term planning for it now. So that's kind of what this study's been focused on. And on Jason's picture there, you see the little orange pump station, that's illustrative of what you could do there with that pump station. We actually looked at a number of different locations. One of them is at the Palmington Rupp and Ready Headgate, just east of Lyons. You could run it down to there. We have most of our change cases have that as an alternative point of quite a diversion. It really helps us because you've got to be careful not to take too much of the water. You get slammed at everything that takes up the water. So even though that orange line is at that location, we certainly, as these things move forward, you can look at something like that and say, well, the benefit of moving that. One benefit we have of the Highland Ditch and the Palmington Rupp and Ready is we're a little confluence of the South. So now we have all of our decrees on the South and all of our decrees on the North available at those two locations. There's so much to look at that Jason's really busy looking at all those things. So I guess inherent in that orange line is essentially keeping water in the river, delivering it to that point of diversion. Correct. And yeah, exactly as Ken mentioned that that pump station, the idea of that is, I mean, we've actually, yeah, identified like five other locations, but just for simplicity, but not one day to issue water. That's what the study is looking at is, okay, the pump station, that's an idea of where would it be best suited and so now we're going out and doing some individual studies as well. And so, you know, kind of like the line's diversion structure, do we want it to carry the full capacity? Do we want it to carry just what it can already take? A combination? So it's, these are the big ideas for each one, each idea, we're diving into the details and then the combination of each idea and the different options we have that way. And I guess the way that we're, we like the hybrid options because it gives us the most flexibility in how we use our portfolio. I totally understand this, just kind of what the optician or something between water for hydropower uses and water for kind of stream uses. As we mentioned, I think I remember from our tour up there though, it was the, and don't get me wrong, the hydropower plant is amazing and it's got this wonderful sort of kind of aspect to it that is very special, I think, in the long lot area. In terms of the amount of power it generates, it's relatively I mean, what was it, 0.1% or something like that? If you look at our total energy supply, it's very small in turn. We actually have a requirement of 10% of renewable energy generated locally. And if we're looking at that, that actually is I think 2% of that 10%. So it does, and even though overall, you're right, it's like 0.2%. Of our overall supply, but it does actually help us meet that local generation. So this is really specific kind of niche, I guess. Yeah, it's awesome. And we also, in the SES evaluation work, just in terms of the hydropower plant, not just thinking about the renewable energy, but also the cultural and historic significance of the plant, so a couple different factors that we want to The other thing to consider is, if we were to take the hydropower plant offline, that doesn't mean the hydropower plant would go away. It's a historic structure. It would still be there. So it would almost be a shame for it to be said there and not to be used. So it's not like, hey, we'll return it back to Mother Earth and we'll tear it down. And now, you know, wildlife will flourish. I mean, it would still be there. So we would still have to maintain it. Didn't we just carry out the example of the flood, do some upgrading in that hydropower plant based on what damage you heard there? There wasn't too much damage. There really wasn't any damage to the hydropower plant, because the North pipeline was fairly quickly basically plugged off along the reservoir, so we didn't get any debris or anything down to the hydropower plant. But at about that time, ironically, about a million before that, they had completely automated our last site operator retired. And it's now operating automatically. Anything else, Jason? I'm sorry. I love the idea of a workshop. And the feed actually, so Dewberry, when they participated in the SES, they were one of the participants. They were, they actually sent us an email afterwards saying like, it's so great that we had the SES tool and we used it. He's like, you know, we work with a lot of municipalities on projects like this. And a lot of times it's just a one person show without taking me into any consideration of sustainability, planning, anything like that. And so anyway, so Kudo's the long one for being a forward thinker and pioneers and that because they were, I mean, they said that like, we've never seen a municipality really care and have workshops like that and get so many different participants in there. Just for one second, I mean, without in mind, can you tell us just a tiny bit more about the SES? How about Francie? Because I think this is her baby now. Yeah. So I want to start with, I'm referring to the internal sustainability evaluation system. There is an external one that's slightly different that's used for certain development projects. So our internal sustainability evaluation system. It's essentially a tool for applying the triple bottom line or sustainability lens whichever way you want to refer to it to a large scale project. So we have, I would say, two different modules. The first one's like really early on, maybe if you're developing a city wide plan and wanting to think through, okay, do we need a factor in transportation staff and water staff and kind of just factoring in. We did the module two that really looks at different options and factors in there are have actually pulled up. There's 11 different topic areas from best practices to economic vitality, to natural environment, to energy, transportation, water. And within each of those larger categories, it's really broken down into subtopic. So water could have water conservation as well as water supply. And we actually added a couple for water rights. And there was one other that, also in the realm of water rights, natural environment. That's where we have things around watershed, but also natural environment can be broader outside of that. And then you pull together staff across the organization. So it's not just Jason thinking through this, but we had staff from who run our hydro plant, who are part of that. We had staff from our water treatment plant. We had staff who are bringing different perspectives to it. And essentially, we go through and rate the tool together. And you go through and you essentially assign a rating based on an established scale. And, and then you kind of do it together. So instead of everyone doing it individually, we recommend you kind of do it individually to get an idea. And then you come together, but it's really a conversation. It probably took us five hours. Yeah. And over two days. So it's this and I was just, I am asking Jason that we could, there is a final report we put together that I believe we can send out to the board if you all want to review it with the contents that this is just part of Jason's analysis. But if you're interested in kind of looking at like the key takeaways from this, yes, I'd be happy to share that out. That would be great. That takes me back to my consulting days back when I was fresh out. Call it. I guess these are the types of things that I used to do. Yeah. Jason, anything? That's it for major projects. Just a quick reminder that the South St. Brain Pipeline rehab project's done. So I'll stop giving you updates on that one. And as soon as the pump station is online, the South St. Brain Pipeline will then be servicing the Nelson's landers through the pump station at high locations. Very happy with that. It's been a long time. Thank you. All right. Ramsey, you've got a water conservation update? I do. So a shorter update this month, I believe in May, I'll be doing the larger update where I bring, I'll have our total water consumption numbers in 2021. So I can show you all the trends that I usually do about once a year. But just wanted to let you all know that a lot of our starting dates in the summer are outdoor water conservation programs. Garden Abox launched our, so we have two different types of discounts. We have a $25 discount, which sold out in less than a week. And then we have our cares. So we have the Wachmont, oh, I do not know what that acronym is. It's a regrade program. I do not know what that acronym stands for. But we provide $100 discount through that. So that we are not having as, last year we actually sold that one pretty quickly as well. We're not having as creative an uptick this year. But I think there was also a drop in the cares participation month. So last year so it could have been a number of different factors. But we're still promoting that one and hoping we can have greater participation in the $100 discount. And then this year, Resource Central opened up their turf replacement program to more communities. Longmont's not currently participating this spring. We are in conversations to join in the fall. And there will be official announcement about that in May, so when I have the larger announcement about that in May, we can talk a little bit more about Longmont's participation in that program. And thank you because there's been a tremendous amount of interest in that program. So everybody wants to get rid of their turf. Yeah, in general, Resource Central, they told me the demand is just way higher across all every single community they serve. So I think they're already thinking about hiring more staff. So yeah, it's not just here in Longmont, but all across the front range huge demand for that program. Anything else? That's it. Okay, can I just lay the report? Yeah, not too much to report. We don't have any bills that we're actually recommended for those or anything like that. There is one bill though that I thought I would highlight just because you actually made a question about it. We've actually got a couple questions about it. It's set a bill 22-029. It's an anti-speculation bill. We've talked about anti-speculation in Colorado for a very, very long time. And there's been different ideas about there's more concern, I think more so on the west slope. So things going on over there, some water we bought up a little bit in Arkansas. But just a general kind of concern about speculation on water and the general thought that yeah, that shouldn't happen, that people should be utilizing water but shouldn't be buying it up trying to speculate on it. But that being said, so this bill basically sets up an anti-speculation law that is not real, real clearly defined in that what it would do is if somebody's purchasing water for purposes of speculation on it, make money that the state engineer's office can intervene. It has kind of a funny requirement for ditch companies that ditch companies have to declare a minimum amount of shares per user. This thing would use as a criteria to determine if somebody's speculating. And I have no idea how ditch companies are going to figure that one out. So it's been introduced. It hasn't even come out of committee. I'm not sure it'll make it this year, but I don't know. It's not going to impact a long amount because long amount doesn't, one reason we have a charter restriction that says we can't sell water. So we're never going to get a lot of what we're going to call speculating on it to try to sell for a profit. So it really doesn't impact a long amount directly. So that one reason we don't take positions on bills that go directly and put back on them. But it has scared the heck out of some of the development community. They tend to, development communities, well, buy water, especially in Thuloma because you can use it as part of your development process. So there has been some water that's been purchased. Then the development holds on to it. Annex is a personal property that needs to be watered. So we've had a number of developers call us to say, do I have to sell my water? Is this going to affect me? I say, not really. I think as long as you can show your nexus, I have this water, I have this land, I've seen it in Thuloma. But I, you know, really true, honestly, I don't see it affecting any of our developers. Who knows, you may be asked by somebody to say, hey, I'm concerned about this, or you may be asked by people saying, hey, this is a good idea because I don't want speculators from New York coming in and buying up water in our basin. So if it starts moving forward and you're anything, sure to let the board know, but I just, I find it a little interesting. It's a really good idea. You don't want speculators, but that's a really hard thing to really turn into a lot. So we'll see where that goes. I don't know where it'll go, but that big water bill, I think that's really, we'll watch and we'll also see what happens, anyway. Okay, let's go on to item 10 for you, the major project listings and items tentatively scheduled for future board meetings. Just my comment on looking at these, basically, this is the last meeting that we're talking about several items and then beyond that, there's no date schedules to be determined. I don't know if, Ken, if there are some items that we've ever set some dates on or what you've thought about that. We just, yeah, we don't need dates unless the board would like to have something coming back. The water system yield is just a study, you know, a study we do about third or fourth year. Certainly, when that becomes right to do again, we'll do that again. The stream management plan, you know, has been done by the district. They did come in, last fall and give us an update on that. They are actively, the district is looking at doing some work in that arena and rather than try to set a date, I prefer waiting for the district to give us some input on where we're going. And then again, the painful housing. We'll, not probably sooner than later, but we're trying to fit in well with where the committee group is looking at that and we'll be going. Any comments from the board on the schedule? I was just going to say, I just want to make sure we all move momentum on continuing to think about the cash and the criteria and just making sure that we continue to set up that justification or kind of burn in that justification, I guess. Okay. Cool. Yeah. And that is, we do have, that it does come every quarter. Yeah. And so in my view, we have kind of three months to think about that again, right? And when it's all set down, that's only six hours of water board time, I suppose. So, so just making sure that we continue with momentum on that. Okay. All right. We're going to annual water board report, which is pretty sizable. Yeah, it is. And basically, you know, we, it's your report to council. So if there's ever anything you want us to do differently, all we try to do is help you out by, by compiling it for you. But yeah, we put it in your packet. And if there's any changes or any revisions you want to, we're happy to do that. If not, we just have the board accept the report that we compile and we will then send that on to the city council. I thought it made us look like we did more than I thought we did this year. I thought it was a very positive report. Maybe I just forgot some of the stuff for the year. Yeah, it's amazing when you put it all together. Are you, are you looking for us to move to Senate on a council or what are you? Yeah, if you, if you are happy with it as it's currently compiled, we'll be able to receive that and you give us direction, we'll pass it on to council. What else was your report? Any thoughts on board members? I was a really well done report and I only moved to accept it and send it on to the city council as it is. Are you excited? No, I'm excited about what I like, what's your thoughts on this? Yeah, it's a lot of agreement. Okay, I'm not all in favor. I was only around for half a year so I get to around enough to a full vote. Okay, this next item, I don't think I have a chance to read a little bit about this, this is something that is new to us and new to all the commissions. Council and Marcia, you can weigh in on this, but evidently the thought was that if you're looking at candidates for board membership, it wouldn't be a bad idea to have board members be involved a little bit in the interview process and I take it this is a pre-council interview process, but I think it's interesting for us to have a look at the candidates and maybe comment on how we feel the candidates may be appropriate for these boards and I think it's interesting that we're moving forward for something like this, Marcia, how did this ever come about, by the way? Well, there's a number of things. First of all, since you all went through the council interview process, it's ridiculous, right, that you're going to choose somebody that has as much authority and brings as much insight into this process of keeping tabs on how the city's water policy is being carried out and you get picked out of a five-minute interview from a bunch of people who get on average know about nothing about why they're picking people, right? So the idea was let's have better qualified applicants and fewer of them so that we can understand things like is this person, you know, do a manager interview, right? Is this a responsible person? Does this person have a weird agenda? Does this person have, you know, we want to just do those high-level management things and not do, does this person know anything about water and is this person qualified to actually weigh in on the subjects that the board reviews? So the idea is that the board, either with a nomination committee of two members or with a committee of the whole, would interview the big group of applicants and pick out a smaller group of applicants, which could be as few as one, right, or one proceed that the council would interview and hope that there would be a more respectful process as well as ending up with the most qualified board you could have. So that was the idea. Just out of curiosity, when your council interviews with proposed board members, you have a set of questions that you ask or I'm not trying to be nosy but I am trying to be nosy. How does that work? Well, you should be nosy. Yes, and actually that was in innovation. The first year I was on council, we didn't, you know, we just showed up and went round Robin and everybody asked a question, which isn't, it's not, if this were a for-pay job, it wouldn't even be legal to interview that way. You know, since it's a volunteer job, it's not regulated, but we should still use best practices, right? So after the first year we started having a list of questions that we would all ask and or we would ask every candidate and then I think the second year we actually had the board ask the board to recommend what questions to ask but, you know, it's still maybe it was a five-minute interview you really couldn't ask, could, you never got through the whole list and you couldn't really find anything out about the person. So we were really voting on the resumes, right? You guys all have really stellar water resumes, but for many boards that isn't true, you know, it's easy to look and say, oh, but yeah, this person is a land use attorney. I guess they do okay, right? But, you know, I can get the word guessed. So, just looking forward, if we were to be involved in the first portion of the interview process, would we be given questions or would we, how would the questions evolve? So, Don Quintana has a list of questions that was the list used last time and this is, I haven't read what you guys would give them. So, this is what I believe to be true because you guys are in charge of the process. So she has a list. You guys can look at that list and say, this is a great list. We're going to use it or you can look at the list and say, that has nothing to do with it. Let's put this question in instead. So you can develop your own list, but you should then use it for every applicant the same. Question? I never come in. Well, I was just going to say, and yeah, the process is really set up around the staff liaisons will work with the boards to set up the questions, set up the interviews, we'll do the lifting and getting the venue and getting the entities there. Basically, the board will just actually do the interview. So really the two questions today that we kind of need to answer are, does the board want to do two, three, or all five board members? And of course, talking about here, he's his turn to jump this year. So if he chooses to run again, then he wouldn't be able to be on the interview, but if he doesn't then he could. So that's really the biggest thing we need today. I mean, we'll talk about these procedures more, but it's how does the board prefer doing it, you know, just two or three or five. And why do you want to do it? Because we kind of need to know these that much so we can get things set up. The interviews will be in May, just so you know the schedule. I think it's April 22nd is when the applications have to come in. So then whoever on the board we interviewing will, you know, we could have two or we could have five. We really never have a whole lot of, we don't have tons of, tons, we don't have to interview, but however many come in is we'll set that those interviews up in May. And then we have to interview the interviews in May so that we have to give the results to the council. I think it's the first Friday in June. So we really can't wait until April because the 22nd is actually after the board meeting in April. In just a few days. So it'll be really tight to try to get something going. That way we can get the questions and we can get the procedure set up and work with the board members on your timing. Yeah, let me just pose a question to you three. They are proposing you can do one or the other depending on what your desires are. We come up with a committee of two board members or all of us being involved. And I'm curious how you all feel about what what your preference would be. Let's start with you. I would be comfortable with having this up to me. I don't think it's necessary to express the convened desire for the purpose. That's my comfort level. That's the desire we can certainly try that. I look at my May time frame and probably have time to participate but I can be in turn and won't figure out what the process is. So would we be in person? Make a little easier to record. So let me just make sure I understand what you're saying. Have just a committee of two do it rather than all of us being involved. That's my comfort level for this school. I'm a co-managing part of my law firm. Also I'm doing right now as interviews. That's what I do for a living now because as you it's hard to find people that want to work in Longmont apparently. No figure. So trying to convene a bigger group is a nightmare. That's my practical rationale. I could go to either of them. So I don't mean to be wishy-washy and not make a decision but like Scott's saying I'm comfortable with you all doing it instead of me but I would love to be involved. So I could also be part of that subcommittee or we could all do it together. I'd be inclined to a practical approach. See how many people we get and how many of us we can get scheduled. I was uncomfortable with more but to the extent we get what we want. I'm kind of inclined rather than to say okay here's the two doing it. My preference would be those that want to be involved. We all have different ideas and I think we have a little more robust process doing it that way. So maybe we can just leave it that way that as we get to the situation we're going to ask who wants to be involved and I guess again what we're kind of saying is we don't want to restrict it just to two. Okay. For a committee that's what I'm hearing. So it may be just two but you're open to how to move on. Yeah. So you might want that flexibility. You're in the five minutes committee otherwise the follow-up. Yeah. And actually a lot of board can only five members. Yeah some boards are 10 or 12 million. Right. I wouldn't want to put 12 people around the table. I really don't think are here to have that many people as well in my opinion. That's one thing that they suggested in there and talking about that. If you do consider having the whole board there just be cognizant of that fact and not be overwhelming to the candidates coming in. Do we have to determine or I mean stop perhaps to determine the time like the timing of that. I mean I know that we just talked about the restriction in terms of like when this window that needs to happen. We would have to work with you all to figure out what dates and times would work so. I'm just curious as to like I mean if I wind up so this past year there were a few applicants but when I so I mean there would be if it was a 10 minute interview that's 20 minutes of a lot of work. I think you're saying it's a 30 minute. It's up to 30 minutes. It's up to 30 minutes. No longer than 30 sorry. Yeah. 30 minutes seems like a long time but. It only gets predetermined. Okay. So if it was longer than of course I wouldn't work during Well we'd have to probably look at our schedules and see how the timing of that works out. And I like the flexibility saying this is the window who's available and so. It does seem like each candidate needs to be treated the same. Yeah we have a lot. No I can interview everybody. Right right. No you don't want to. Yeah we don't want to. But it's very simple level one space available on the board and Todd's term is up. The question is of course only relatively qualified. Why? It's a low number. It may be a very small time. But Todd is I mean he is term low. So Todd when he came in for his first term was filling a vacancy. So he has only served one full term and he is eligible to serve another term. Okay. I didn't realize that. In one for two terms we're about two full terms. Okay. All right. If he wants to. Has he stated his desire in one way or the other? He's trying to think it through. He's got he's also you know on the board in northern that he's got a son that's a senior in high school you know and he's looking at possibly being out of town so he's considering a lot of your thoughts. Did you tell him when we needed a decision? You can't wait till August. He's got one month. Okay. He understands it. Yeah. He has to apply by the 22nd. Okay. All right. The other thing Ken because you mentioned a lot that the staff is handling a lot of logistics which was a really good thing to mention but the other thing is if it is a committee of two you don't have to notice the meeting and that would mean that it'd be easier for you guys to schedule if you're having a hard time scheduling if it's any more than two then you have to notice the meeting or hold it during the water board meeting which is already noticed. So I just thought I'd stick that in. No thanks. Good deal. So anyway I guess we'll see depending on Todd we might be involved we might not be. Okay. Well staff will go ahead and start giving this process together and we'll give some questions together. We'll give the process together. Actually posters for applicants? I think the process is open currently for applicants to apply or not yet. But I mean I'm going to figure out if Todd says he's staying. Ultimately he's just an applicant. And he's an applicant. Yeah. So he'll have a soul app. All right then I think it'd be easier. All right make it easier but okay. Any other comments on this interview process? I think it's a good move. Marching. Yeah probably. You know there's okay maybe a little bit of burdens. Well it does it's a little bit of a burden on council but it was just dumb you know. Well I don't know how they did it when they had all of them at the same. They used to all be in December. You know that was what happened. Yeah I don't know. I did not have to experience that. This process would happen twice this year so there's the mid-year recruitment happens in June and then there's the one that happens at the end of the year too. But if there's no seats available then it's not a costless tune. That's true. Yeah a lot of board figures will come up in June and I think so. Half the boards are June and half the boards are December. So what is the list for this June? All right very good. Item 11. Anything on that? Anything on that? No I don't think. Okay. And Cash and Lou as Ken said we bring that up quarterly. Any comments on future board agendas? Just if you want if there's something in the opportunity for the board to ask for any items you might be interested in or information. You know I had I had one question Mark. Is the city going through a revision of our comp plan or in the process of that? Yes I'm not sure how formal it is going to be. I mean it's going to get formal when it gets adopted and I assume don't quote me on this. I assume it's going to get reviewed by the boards that have anything to do with land use which would be include you guys I would hope. But the idea is that the revisions will have to do with going from a suburban land use model to an urban land use model and you know anything I said about what that means other than you can stick more people in the same space would be an odd opinion of mine. But and I have them so I'm going to take my mouth shut and say that's the essential driver of this is making the comp plan more appropriate to an urban site than a suburban site. But could have impacts on our water needs though. Oh absolutely yeah there's nothing that has anything to do with land use and in fact I think it was you Ken that I encountered you and said how are we doing in terms of looking at a higher buildout number in terms of heads because that needs to you know at some point that's going to be reconsidered and and probably in light of as well as in advance of the new comp plan yeah that's that's definitely got to happen and it well just like the existing one you know it all the pieces all all the pieces have to fit together right and especially as you increase density transit becomes a lot more important because the philosophy is is you want more of the people who work here to actually be able to live here and that reduces traffic automobile traffic at least you know nationwide the study showed it does nobody leaves that here of course but you know so all a lot of different pieces including water consumption because of course you have more showers fewer lawns so it's a big deal what's the timing on that I would not venture a guess so here no comment that's not the same thing I would not venture a guess is an absolute comment right it's you know I they know they I they know they have to do it they um I don't think they know how long it's going to take to know what everybody I talked to understands the basics of new urbanism so at least they are somewhat prepared in terms of of what the parameters they are going to be considering are but how long is going to take to get agreements and you know get all the years to mesh I would not venture a guess yeah I just wanted to add in the so I mentioned long on our comp plan and the sustainability plan are going to do a joint update this year or I think this year that I know there's been it was going to be this year and I think there's just things changing and depending on staffing so it may begin later this year but that that I just wanted to highlight that those plans are going to be updated together the goal the sustainability plan was passed after the comp plan but there the plan was for them to always be very integrated plans so trying to figure out a joint update and I know staff have started to add start those conversations and without water efficiency master plan update that's to be finished by 2024 we've also talked about how can we do some joint engagement and also analysis with that larger update but again I also fortunately don't have a date either I just wanted to let the board know that it's going it looking at kind of two of our big overarching guiding plans together at this time I didn't know that and that's a really good idea and I think that's it's a it's a good check and balance the friends in my goals and well it's starting but we have no idea when it's gonna end thank you um nothing else on the agenda any comments I think we're just adjourned thank you everybody