 Thank you, Mr. Chair. OK, let's go on to approval of previous months' minutes. Questions or comments about the minutes for the meeting in June? Show me what you've got. Having a look at the second minutes from June? I'm sorry? I'm sorry. OK. All in favor of approval? Yeah. Aye. Aye. No. Yeah, would you give it to the Waters Times, you'd want to? Sure. The flow of the St. Rain this morning, the end of June was 71 CFS. The historical average is 113 CFS. The column of St. Rain Creek is the Paulington Ditch and has an 1865 water rate. And the column's not the other way. It is starting number one, which is 1885. And Ralph Braves' Reservoir is full on spilling. And we're approximately 210 school under those spilling. And the Reservoir is an elevation of 26 feet. I think they've got it down a little bit, doesn't it? Yeah, 26 feet. I have 27 there. And which is 12,020 and 38 feet. I don't know, it's 11,000. 324 feet. And they're releasing those 16s here. That's any questions? I don't know. Is that a report for this one? All right. Will, yeah. Before I, oh, yes. Sorry. Before we jump in. Before you jump in, Mr. Chair, if you will. I'm sorry. I'm a council of record for the person who's petitioning for the water race. So I'd like to refuse myself. So I'm not just stating a discretionary thing, or in particular not to have. Okay. So is there a best place for me to go ahead? You can be nice to your, whatever. I'll be, I'll be locatable. You can go sit in my office if you want. There's a phone booth thing right around this corner. Thanks. I just didn't want to get in the way. Okay. Thank you. Yeah. Before I start the presentation, I'd like to introduce Mark McClain. He's representing the applicant. In case there's any questions on the police. We have a very standard water supply agreement. Police in front of you. We actually have an assistant from the year police with LWM washout in the year 2008 and in the year 2020. There's five years left on that agreement. The state of Colorado, when you have an augmentation, the water supply agreement is for an augmentation. They plan on augmenting some wells, or they are augmenting some wells. They pull off the South Platte River. The aquifer just needs to really a little bit. They operate an overwash facility out there and it's on a little bit for the facilities. Basically, it has to be augmenting. So, in case there's an augmentation of the wells, we augment it to the same South Platte River. The state of Colorado requires you to have water supply in and out for the full-term or the lag completion of your augmentation plan. So, in case you've got about a five-year lag return, you have a high impact on the Platte River. So, even though we still have five years left on the original agreement, you're not starting the next water year as a problem with that. It won't be able to hold their wells because then it would be five years after that. It would be outside the scope of our current lease. That's what they're asking for. It basically is a five-year extension of the lease they have. We typically only do a 10-year water board to correct its doubt a number of years ago. That's what we're trying to go to. Not entering the water supply years in 10 years for concern of how far out can we see. Ten years is a long, long ways to look out. We were doing 20 years lease in fact. So, we have pretty much told everybody that we're going to limit leases to 10 years. Essentially what this would do would be we'll terminate the existing 20-year lease remaining five years while entering new 10-year lease. The effect is really just five more years past what we already had. It's a pretty small amount of water. We certainly have that right now. Water delivered would be either effluent first, would be first effluent. And the wastewater treatment plant would have secondly water focused on the water stored in the union. So, it will impact more of our ability to water water citizens. So, anyway, staff is recommending the improvement. Mark's here to answer any questions. If there are any questions on the agreement, I would if Water Board so chose to make a recommendation to council to approve the agreement, I would ask that it be done in some, motion be insubstantially performed before Water Board because we still in quite a overview of how city attorney's office may make a few small changes. I don't expect any because this is the part of their template. I use it in their template, but they might have a small non-substantial change. That's right, all I have, just recommending that Water Board make recommendations to the council to approve. If it's so done, we'll go. Since it's a multi-year, it requires a plan by council. So, we'll go for the council. Any questions? I have no issues with this. The question I have is, the original cost breaker was 258. What is it currently? 641. 641 today? How often do you anticipate doing this cost analysis to an over a 10-year period? I suspect that it's going to move every 10 years. It doesn't happen every 3-5 years. It happens about every other rate setting. The city does a full loan rate setting for all of our water rates. The water rate consultant is then asked as part of your study, do a rate setting. There's a rate setting coming up. I think we've only got through 2024. Is that current? Water rates set by council. And then we'll do a rate study to set the 25, 26, 27. Probably that will be looked at then. I'm pretty sure. So, this rate will stay. This is the current rate they're paying for the last time. The rate will set. The justices will stay here for 5 years and then it will be whatever in 2-3 years. Or longer. What are the things? Maybe to the purposes of education around any kind of problem with the agreement. Can you describe just a little bit some of the assumptions that the state or whoever makes with respect to how somebody gets some of the credit for groundwater recharge from one instance. So what are some of the mechanisms by the state? So they do an analysis from the well to the what is impacted in their cases the South Platte River. And then they, you know, you pump in this month so much water its depletion rains out. And I don't know the first depletion is probably quite a while. Yeah, this one's fairly long. But the most important thing is the distance from the well to the river because the relationship is a square of the distance so you double the distance. You can just talk about 4 for example. So this one's ways from the river far enough that it creates a 5 year depletion meaning that if you pump it in one month the river won't feel that total pumping effect until 5 years is done by it. And so the state wanting to make sure that the place of the water is available when the well gets shut off and it doesn't carry out the injure somebody by creating shortage it requires that water be provided for those 5 years. And does that analysis get updated periodically or is it not? That one's set by decree by the court in the augmentation plan actually that Mr. Holberg and myself Do we have any other use for our well and other entities? We do. We have a number of other leases similar to this lease. Our first use is for our own water rights cases we have return flow populations. We use water for the change to water rights we have to replicate the historical return flow to the stream and so that becomes when we use the water that becomes a death wheel to river and that's made up of a couple different forms like ditch loss return flow from the sun surface and water loss. All that makes up an augmentation that we'll not have when we use our water rights. So the first thing we do is meet all of our return flow populations. Then we have a major exchange agreement with public service company Colorado where we deliver them fully consumable afternoon that they can use in an augmentation plan and in exchange we get water out the wastewater cream of black water in from Colorado. So that's our secondary use of it. And then if there's anything surplus from that then we can lease that service water. It's really primarily it helps raise the revenue to stabilize water rates literally $100,000 but it's only excess water to what we have downstream. One of the ways we do it is the US is ordering different water to the plant. We order CBT water it's not fully consumable so we have to let it out of wastewater plants it's hard. We need a little bit more of the outflow to be fully consumable and we can convert it into a windy gap or we can use water storage for these movement sources so we always balance how much of the water out of the wastewater plant is fully consumable reusable and how much is not as well as water storage and union reservoir. Could you say that again one more time for me to hear it? So CBT is not fully consumable? It is not. It's a single use water and that's because the original water right is owned by the US government they then contracted with Northern Water to distribute the water so Northern Water distributes the water and their distribution of the water and the allotment contracts that everybody signs will be able to get on the allotment of water CBT water. The federal government allowed Northern Water to have the reuse rights because it's trans-based so it's fully consumable the reuse portion of that was kept by Northern Water and then that was down to all water users in the South Platte Basin that are in Northern District. Back in 1937 when they went to a vote to convince everybody up and down the river some people were well some people didn't have an automation they didn't have an automation people are involved they didn't need the water others weren't under additional controls to get and of course everybody is taxed has been taxed since 1937 so as part of that taxing they were promised there will be greater water supply for everybody in the South Platte Basin so the use of this water once it's used will prove back to the stream and anybody who's in the district will have use it so even though it's import water it's not fully consumable not to the Latte but it is to Northern and Northern shares it amongst all of its tax-based that's exactly and really what it does it goes down to the next the diverge water in your beach land that's in the district they then can divert that so it benefits everybody all the way to Cholster yeah that's that's a little bit harder it is I guess it's not a direct benefit to the lower part of the river but literally they can act with Congress too yeah it was because that's set by Congress and in effect as some restriction the Longmont can use something like Denver Water to reuse water it restricts Longmont using that as a solution potentially in the future correct Denver Water can vary and water reuse but that would only be an option for us on the river and I don't know how the accounting would be even more than that well we can show you that we've done that so it can be done it can be done well we'll do that someday but you know how much we put out the wastewater water was pretty consistent all this year around has been for 30 years it's just a straight line but we balance how much of that we need over time we need more and more for the consumers of the Longmont so we've increased the percentage of windy gap and transfer of water okay Tom I'm sorry did you make an option I don't remember I don't know let me say this is there an option to approve this agreement if I remember the word incorrectly I so move substantially at the same time second yeah all in favor stay on it okay yes I was a few minutes late I'm sorry that's because I'm a little easily guys be honest especially I couldn't get your filter so right in front of us stop it yep it's got this agreement was passed so I'll keep going this time I'm 233 I'm 10 10 just a quick update on the windy gap for me project we had a very successful tour we enjoyed it yeah it was good we have time I don't know we're supposed to give us about 20 minutes dissertation wow we talked about this stand by no it's quite impressive I'm sure you're going to explain any of that yes I'd be happy to do that so this is a recent just last Monday so this is a recent picture of the we had a good tour basically this was taken from the overlap where you looked out on the project and the tours not everybody can make today's tour I have a number of tours you can sign up directly with Northern Outer so if anybody is interested in doing stuff just real real briefly you can see this is the footprint for the dam it's actually you can see the dam starting to come up there's actually an embankment there now last time we were out there I don't know the dam was like 40 foot tall and it wasn't even at the ground level yet so it did there's nothing that looked like a dam but now it's there so this is the main rock fill it's a rock fill dam with hydraulic gas valve cord what was really neat today is you can really that hydraulic gas valve cord starting to get wide enough long enough that you can it's not wide at all it's only three and a half to the wide it's long enough that you can really see you go oh there's that hydraulic gas valve cord ironically the machine was right where it is on this picture when we were out there we were going along quite well and and they don't have anything to this is the rock crushing operation here I'm sorting the quarry is over here and the pipe might deliver water to the reservoir it comes right down here and then around so anyway that's what it looks like right now looking pretty good but wanted to kind of show you progress why you can remember the last picture that's where the dam and embankment construction is right now so that's a little further in terms of the full width of the dam we're up about a hundred and thirty forty feet right now if you cut across section here it looks like it's well on its way because of how much has been placed although this is original ground level right here so you can see a lot of the construction was the foundation rolling now going up we've hit this part right here so it's all of a sudden the hydraulic gas all core placement is taking a lot longer it's kind of slowing them down because they're now literally trying to get this part done the first part of that hydraulic gas core has to be hand applying the machine can't lay it down so the hand applied in the first layer all the way down here that kind of put them back a little and just take them a little bit once once they get over here and they just they just kind of hit the spot and the dam is that's that's just kind of shows where the construction is right now one of the things I didn't want to talk about real quick so is schedule and performance on the contract right now we're about two years into the four year construction period about halfway quite half almost halfway through and generally our own target but to stay on timing they had to go to 20 hour a day some of the operation is 24 hours a day most of it is 20 hours a day 6 days a week I think 6 but they're having to increase production a little bit to stay on time so all in all they're going quite well in terms of the project the original contract in about was $500 $12 million in change orders so the revised contract was $529 now this does not include this figure here does not include the cost for the federal lineage so that was pretty significant and as in terms of the overall cost of the project should be counted as part of the overall cost this is just the amount that's going to come a contractor there was a change order with a contractor for that federal litigation delay cost because of the federal lineage that's not included in the actual and the reason I wanted to highlight this this month is we're finally kind of getting the final numbers and we'll be setting our cash in lieu in September we're going to be coming back in September with a lot more detail on the cost looking hard not on the cost of the project but what we expect it to be because we believe we want to percent the water for the full picture this is the project that we're using as part of our cash in lieu calculation cash in lieu will be up for review in September so we'll be looking much harder for all these numbers next month making some decisions on how does that impact our cash in lieu calculation I have 529 or 530 that doesn't include litigation it does not include litigation we'll bring all that back next year so would you anticipate a quarter on cash in lieu looking at these numbers on the quarterly or is that too often it won't we probably should look at it each quarterly one but it won't change the number I think it will in September or December one of those two reviews I think they'll probably want to look at pretty hard to decide what that impact might be or how you might include that and we'll bring you that data as part of but we don't change it until there's actually this change ordered 21.8 you've already calculated in your cash in lieu there was a contingency amount I can't remember the exact number but round number is about 50 million dollars for the project and that was included in the original calculation so every quarter even though every quarter we'll bring that information in until it changes until we expand all the contingency funds we won't need it won't affect cash in lieu once we exceed contingency which would then mean we'd have to develop more money it will other than that federal litigation we now kind of know all the costs of that and we may want to look at that and decide if we include it or not include it in the cash in lieu and if we do how we do it so all of that stuff's going to have to be looked at in the second quarter but this tells us as far as contingency not including the but if you go back to some of the questions something I learned and maybe I might share this line here is that yeah boring and they say they can put up to nine times to nine inches twice they go through this in a day so they this thing raises that bam this part and the other thing correct me if I'm wrong can or hope they make the asshole up here do they not and they chuck it on down here go across these ramps and fill this little truck that's needed it's just going to it's all all the stuff is made right there whether it's the asshole bring the rock in whatever it is kind of do it yourself right there in the back yard so and one other thing is the people making the asshole are they Swiss people well of course Portuguese leaders of the Swiss you know it's Swiss they're putting together they're running how the mixture goes I mean this is something the US doesn't know very much about Europe they know a lot about that's what I learned today my takeaway it is very interesting the slaying down machine it's kind of unique because they put the hydraulic household in there on each side so it's laying three a layer of sand filter on the sand filter three zones of the dam at one time sand filter it's kind of the walls that keep the asshole yeah it's a transition from the hydraulic household to a fine sand lens to a small rock lens to the actual rock field what I miss most finally this is just for informational purposes this is an actual hydraulic household replacement and because it did that it's hit that long straight part plus they're trying to route company trying to keep ahead of the last hydraulic household court placement there are a little behind schedule in the hydraulic household court and there's a lot of concern about we've got to get that hydraulic household court going otherwise there going to be a fine schedule that's the first thing that goes down so if that doesn't stand on schedule then the whole project can't see the whole court affected by like what do you mean can they work through winter they can they actually can do better in winter they actually had to shut down a couple weeks ago when it was hot because they put it down at like 350 360 which is 70 degrees hot already really hot asphalt for placement and it has to cool down enough to put another man on top of it so they actually if you look at those pictures that you can see every week if you look at some of the snow pictures there's no snow on that I don't think that's all cool so yeah it's really now we get one of our famous blizzards is you can't get the workers out there you can't get around out there but by and large it's really the 95 to 100 degrees plus days that slows them down more in the cold weather I learned that today and it comes down in almost a liquid form as it's not the truck was just washing around and was bringing it down so asphalt as we know is kind of a material but this is kind of a high asphalt has basically got asphalt street asphalt and then you put it 350 degrees so anyway that's the only so that's my report on so it's still going well the Colorado River connectivity channel portion of the project is going well as well they pretty much I don't know if you remember when we were talking about last spring during the runoff we had a bigger runoff on the west slope than anybody thought they would because of a higher snowpack and that actually inundated the cofferdam that was deepened with the main dam construction dry so that's about better than mine that's all cleaned up now now they've raised the dam, the new dam in the bank high enough that we won't have to talk about it what else is happening in the construction? that's what we need to work on are you going to go over the Colorado River yeah I we just put that in the packet for informational purposes for the board and that also gives me a chance to editorialize if you read those letters I really did appreciate the letter especially the Colorado letter I gave them up for Colorado River Commission letter they really were focusing on hey we need to look at how we do operating criteria federal reservoirs because it's not working the hydrology is not the same we need to groove to that we need to take that into account we need to operate the project the lower river has been over-drafting the Colorado River forever and that actually is contained in the operating the federal operating guidelines and rules they allow it to happen and in fact they almost encourage it because they have what's called an equalization protocol the need goes down the power is water released out of power to bring the need back up and so the more you overuse the more you release out of power both of them reached crisis level which we did last year and went into a tier one what was crazy to me as these letters went out if you read them really clear that hey you can't operate the car the way you've been doing it literally days after that came out because of the little bit better water supply this year federal government tier one I beat my head against the wall when I heard that I mean literally after these letters come out saying don't do that and I don't blame the federal regulators that do that because they're kind of bound by the 2008 operating criteria that technically that's what those numbers say that's what we were supposed to do but really did you have to lift them right now right after those letters went out so I think I like the fact that the state a lot of commissioners are going to say hey we've got a problem but really what we have is an overuse problem usually that will be heard as new operating criteria is drafted it's going to have to be absolutely have to be taken into account I can't imagine the state's overstate allowing operating criteria like we have 20 years ago not much that we can do I can get it that's a federal level that we all just kind of have to sit back and watch it's a question for piano and I do have a question I'm not sure it's formulated quite in my head quite yet but I mean one month I mean we've had discussions about one month's pretty blessed with water blessed perhaps is one more because we play a very active role in securing just water rights etc. and the situation that you talked about with respect to one day they say we can't do this the next day we get actually a rainstorm and it's like oh they're right we're good and we don't necessarily live and die by every rainstorm in one month or even season for long grain or not or for long drought like whether our peers I'm not asking you to talk about other water companies but essentially whether other other kind of contemporaries of ours operate in that kind of winders on when the when the rain is falling and crisis when the water is out or when the rain is not falling so you don't necessarily need to name names but is that a more pervasive attitude within the water community or do you feel like the kind of proactiveness associated with long term planning is maybe looking for greater hold? I think it's taking a much greater hold I've seen more and more other water providers really starting to take water conservation series really starting to talk about you know the power the power storage component sufficient I know a number of other water managers we really don't have much story you guys are pretty lucky I mean do you feel like the beds in that respect are behind the curve or do you feel like they are they are getting well I think they understand it they will know I believe it's going to be pretty difficult for the beds to come out with new operating criteria in the Colorado River I think I personally think it should be at least we should live within the Colorado River Compact that they weigh over they get 7.5 million a year used and 11 a year you can and I get it there's a lot of and I benefit because I eat strawberry and almonds and I like all that I get that I think there's going to be extra but I don't know it's hard for me to predict I just do know that more and more and more and it's done a really pretty good conservation in Colorado you know Colorado really has the continental divide and the rainfall that gets stopped there as it's sole water source not just the Colorado you know there's the Arkansas but that's it we don't have any other water sources California has an ocean and do you know anything about what the time lag is for investing in developing other water sources like desalination how long is it going to take them to do you know what's sort of equivalent to the energy transition that we're going through now because there are other sources of water in California they just might develop because it was cheaper to use the Colorado that's true I you know if it's a major water storage project I know it took us 22 years to get it for a mix but if I can use that for an example I hope we won't have to use that for an example there are you know there are some projects they can do out there I think they're looking a little harder even more groundwater objective use a lot of their water goes out into the ocean without being reused and doing more of that they've got some unique struggles there's a lot of pushback on utilizing water that's been used since the early 30s so they have some struggles with actually losing some of their supplies there is a lot of water up north in northern California in the central California project how efficiently they can bring it down and ultimately though you know in Colorado we're in the Palmetine Ditch right now today and half of our dishes are out of priority today there's no water going down in those dishes unless they have CDP or something like that but yeah I mean we don't think of think about they call a ditch out they shut the ditch off and that doesn't happen in lower-basic states and that's happened if you said the all American males didn't go out for a week desalination is really just an energy matter well there's a plan could be built pretty quick yeah there's some energy but there's also like there's F mode that comes out of desal that is not great I assume it would be desal yeah so the desal is not it should be the last resort as you were saying or just don't do it I mean honestly the point Ken was making is maybe turn something off you know and say maybe it's this relative priority right you know and I understand I did not know that they let clean water flow into salt water because they've been never do such a profligate thing Orange County has one of the biggest water reclamation plan I've actually had I've had an opportunity to tour about five years ago so they are starting to do that they replenish aquifers so but when you think of the effort of that one plant versus how much water millions and millions it's an awful bucket I think it's a good start and they are they are doing they're I believe they're now talking about statewide water conservation that means did it include agriculture? um I mean that's well from an agricultural perspective aren't they buying the farmers literally to not produce so maybe that's see the that is happening crazy option also where water conservation is probably the what maybe we can talk about food shortages and all this other stuff and how are paying farmers not to produce food because of the water shortages I would vote not to produce that that should go over to China but yeah I want them to produce almonds and it's probably going to be good I go to the market every day buy those things but I get it that's the easiest to produce vegetables and crops and change our eating habits well you didn't cut it out it's stupid stop we're working on an art here I'm trying to I took my note so yeah we could probably think out there to about the Colorado River and I hope California is doing better but just I was encouraged with the state's letter and I hope there's real really neat art from the federal government as they go forward they gotta do that well it's too political that's what their problem is okay I don't want to have them review the water board buy laws what are your thoughts on that you're not proposing any changes are you? we're not proposing any changes the water board just reviews it about annually or by annually or so it's been over a year now the organization will be in August it would be a good time to get a new member and look into it only if the water board does anything about this change does anybody want to go through again the point that I I'm reading through it except for the notifications whereas at one point in time we have to move the minutes or the agenda need to be out to us within four days or a section that needs to be out in five days it just makes sense that the consistency and easy for someone just make it all four days or whatever that might be new guidance but I hand-delivered yeah I think one to four days and the other to three days and then what's the the resolutions by May line by days I wouldn't suggest the change I would suggest that staff maybe look at that see if there's a change because he suggested that we could personize something on the fly we'll look at that we'll see we'll look at the comments about the water board by law alright if you have a major project listing I understand what you're saying but if you want me I hope everybody's on the chance to look at our calendar events coming up and if you really have any comments or questions about those you know Kim I have some kind of a broken record about that we'll have to we're going to think about our moving water we're going to have trouble with the water is that is that something that is kind of thinking about I don't know if that's something that's going to happen in the future we need to do it where that is actually we're going to include that part of the union reservoir update the water board oh well it's scheduled to evolve we're going to do probably at that point if we're up here talking about Colorado River today we're going to do the Colorado River presentation and then the union alright that's how that is coming sooner than anybody have any comments about our schedule items coming up very good information why doesn't the water board those are attached to the package one other thing that is coming up the water treatment plant we're going to do there are going to be modifications or upgrades or something a year or two or so is that still pending still pending did you want me to so the preliminary design was put together and then it was going to be a design build so it was put out bid for the design build it came in way higher than had originally been projected so the actual timing of that has been pushed back currently our water demand has not gone up any so it doesn't look like we're trending up absolutely enlargement right away so we believe we have a few years to plan for it that is our next big project and I believe is going to look really hard we have the next rate setting the cost of that project what that means for rates what it comes from part of it will be bonds part of expansion of capacity part of it will be existing rates because it's placement with one when it gets enlarged then the great gavis water will be commissioned so essentially it's about half of it's in new capacity when it's replacing existing capacity so we can run that status for a period of time sure we were doing okay especially this summer we had total water this summer it was all over the rain I think our peak day was around 27th 28th 28th NGD day which we should a few weeks and a third and that's it yeah we're we're definitely still looking at that actually we do know what is that peak year I think peaking is a huge piece that we don't understand really well peaking is manageable hopefully we can figure it out we'll talk about it you guys can but conservation is actually pretty well that's one of those places where conservation really could ease us away from a big project or reduce the size of a big project even post-colonial if you can post-colonial because there's going to be treatment regulations that's kind of but certainly sizing plants is great so there was a while there where we were really about a year or two or so a year or two or something like that where we were really talking quite a bit about what this next kind of reasonably foreseeable project was because we were trying to figure out exactly how to set the question and I think what was decided was that we would go backward in time rather than forward how much did the cost instead of looking forward and forward it seemed like we were talking quite a bit about like union pump the pump background and then of course we haven't heard much about that at all since probably because it's quite a way it's out there but we were talking about it just from the perspective of like should we think about that project as something to I don't know sort of cast a new quote or something I mean is that type of project is that so far out that there's really not something that we're talking about very extensively at the moment or is that something that is included in this like union reservoir discussion yeah it's part of the whole union reservoir in larger discussion in the world although it's more actively on the new supply perspective of that but yeah that's really just a matter of we might need to review the cost estimates for that project and compare that certainly be something that we look at compared to the cost that we get from union and other things but we wouldn't have it by September but we can certainly commit to bring that additional things okay yeah sorry I'm invisible back here behind the line as long as somebody can see your hand so I this is almost a cost plus kind of a discussion about where the fees and moves should be and what about a market discussion because if they didn't if they had to get the water from somewhere else they'd be paying a lot more so should be a year ago public raised that point this is you know why are we giving our water away for free you know so I'm just asking why why do we only seem to consider the costs and the economic needs as opposed to it's not like we're a cash heavy municipality is it because of the enterprise organization of the waterworks or what is it what's the reason you know I think we've simply included that information occasionally which we I agree with you Marcia that included that information when we had brought a change forward and that's what that did give the discussion going about you know why don't we reevaluate that's when we you know set the so the currency and we didn't have to split the difference on that for just another side of the call you know I feel like looking at the next project or the current project because I think the next project may be quite more out because of conservation and flat demands but looking at the current project costs I think align much better with cost of service principles recommended for rate setting and in this case system development charge setting and so you say this is what it's costing and this is what you pay and market is lovely but sometimes market can be driven by things that aren't exactly cost of service and cost of service is highly defensible and it's there's an element of fairness and I want to be clear I'm not pro developer I'm not anti developer I think developers should have a fair portion of new demands on the system and so you look at okay what's this new or current project doing in terms of new demands and that's where cost comes from when you're looking at market you can be looking at things that aren't actually reflected in the cost of utility this utility bears to that exactly is the question right is market is different than cost plus and and yet we're talking about well we can't afford to stick to the original plan on water treatment so shouldn't we be making up and I would say that that would be one thing I would love to have this group know more about is there's the system development charges and then there's a raw water requirement and those are fees that run parallel and so there should be a system development charge that is looking at costs of water treatment and getting that money and you know whatever water treatment element is expansive that should be attributed to the system development charges but the cash in lieu is really about the raw water component and so cash in lieu shouldn't be supporting no treatment by that thought because it's a raw water fee system development charges and I did kind of conflate those terms in my earlier statement about cost of water and I freely admit that I'm not that slow or that fair you know it's like our city needs this stuff let's make sure we can get it let's get it from the system development charges but not the cash in lieu I'm all for getting that money to be clear and I'm also very much in line with what I think the trust of your point is the rate payers shouldn't be paying for expansion development should be paying for expansion growth pays for growth yeah you don't think that's happening do they extend it on to okay I want to be clear I'm not throwing stones at system development charges I would just like to know more and I think it is we do trust the city's analysis of that that system development charges are capturing particularly between cash in lieu and system development charges we are capturing growth pay and growth but it's always worth checking and I believe you guys check every what five years you do a rate study and then in the next rate study we'll look at assessment development fees specifically for that although the rate payers should pay for the depreciation and replacement on the existing facilities so the developers obviously can't pay for the new plant all by themselves because they're not, they're only a little piece of the reason we're going to replace it yeah Chris you guys are coming in I was just going to say that our system development fees were really about three years ago so we disconnected rates and system development fees in that cycle so system development fees were kind of one of our two years after the rates and due to this rate study and when I say I would love to know more about system development fees I just I think this group would be well informed to understand system development charges and cash in lieu of how they work together and to know what developers are seeing both of those economically things have changed significantly over the last few years so so much so our system development fees were based upon estimates that were done five years ago well it was resolved but I think there's a lot we don't understand it would be nice to understand more thoroughly but and I have good faith in staff like did you feel like staff has a well in hand we're just there first public last question okay well that covers cash and we want an retirement over in September as well so we don't start looking at how that impacts it discuss future water board agendas just only a water board has additional items so like we've done a little bit here it didn't mull over we've got some options there what else for the cause oh I was hoping for you bring more the meeting next time okay it's really nice