 I'd like to call the March 15th, 2021 Longmont Water Board meeting to order. Heather, could we please start with a roll call? Sure. Chair Williams? Here. Vice Chair Peterson? Here. Board Member Gould? She here. Allison, are you here? She is. I saw her. Here. Board Member Holwick? Here. Board Member Lang? Here. Ken Houston? Present. Nelson Tipton? Here. West Lowry? Here. Kevin Bowden? Here. Francie Jaffe? Here. Jason Elkins? Here. And Heather McIntyre is here. Council Member Martin? Here. And Allison, have you joined us yet? I'm not seeing where she is. She is on the call. Why don't we just, we can keep going and she can join in. Throwing, maybe I threw her off with starting two minutes early, so. Yeah, no worries. So the next item, item three is a approval of the previous month's minutes. We need a motion and a second and a vote on the February 22nd, 2021 meeting minutes. Does everybody have a chance for review? Are there any questions and comments on those minutes? I'll move to approve, Mr. Chair. Okay. We have a motion. Is there a second? Second. Okay. A motion by Scott, a second by Roger. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? Okay. Minutes are approved. And I see Allison is on the, I can see her on the video, so welcome back. The next item, item four is the water status report. Is Scott alluded to, I don't know if we really need to do that today, give him a storm, but maybe we'll, you can just, I'll make it really short. How's that? Because it's definitely going to be short. So I'll just give you, because a lot of the gauges were frozen in or snowed in. The flow of the St. Brain Creek at Lyons today is 55.4 CFS and the 24 year average is approximately 18 CFS for this date. Calling the St. Brain Creek is Highland Lake. Name is last, last month, Admin number 8917. And the priority date is May 31st, 1874. So calling the main stem that impacts district five is Riverside Reservoir. And the admin number is 26302, priority date, January 5th, 1922. So brought button rock is currently at 63.97.7, which is 15,737 acre feet. So it's 96.5% full release and approximately 50 CFS now. So the regulating date is, is repaired. And I won't go into any details on that, just in case Dave's spacing is going to give an update, but it is working. We're making releases. Union Reservoir is at approximately 19 feet down roughly, that's approximately 6,7,000 acre feet. So down approximately 6,000 acre feet and currently released in nine and a half CFS. And that's, that's all. Okay. Are there questions for Nelson on the water status report? I'm not seeing any. Nelson, I remember right, the flow on the St. Brain was about half of the historic average the last few months. And then it went up to about triple the historic flows. Is that about right? That's, yeah, because the button rocks regulating gate, like I said, is repaired. So we're a city law month's making releases. So the flow is pretty much the same as of what it's been for last three or four months now. Okay. Without the releases. I see. Okay. All right. Any other questions? If not, we'll move on to item five, the public invited to be heard in special presentations. Heather, I believe there's no public invited to be heard. Is that right? That's correct. We have no one with us today. Okay. And any special presentations? We have none. Okay. All right, we'll move on to six. Ken, is there any agenda revisions or submission of documents? I have no agenda revisions. We do have a little bit more information in the drought plan that less will present on screen, some of the snow tail graphs. Great. Well, look forward to that. Item seven, development activity. Once again, there is no development activity. Is that right? That's correct. Okay. Moving right along. Item eight, under general business is the cash and loo review. Wes? So what we've included in your board packet is the same type of information that's been in there prior quarterly reviews. There's been a small amount of Lake McIntosh and oligarchy ditch still transacting at the same cost per acre foot that it was transacting at your last meeting. Cost for new water supplies. We were hopeful that we might have some updated windy gap firming project data, but we don't have that at this time. We're hopeful that we'll have it for the next meeting. The other three items that we have on there, they remain unchanged based on the construction cost index. So what we really have that's new to this month for you guys to look at is that CBT allotment unit transfer cost. There were 60 units that were transacted in December at an average cost of $73,684 per acre foot. And then in January, 27 units at an average cost of $71,759 an acre foot. And then in February, there were 17 units at an average of $73,762 an acre foot. And so when we took the weighted average of those total cost was around just over $73,397. So it's actually went down slightly from the prior quarter. But one thing that probably might be of note, a couple of those transactions, one in January was from a church to a to a Class C contract. So that might have possibly influenced a little lower price per unit. And then in February, there was 12 units that made up the bulk of what transacted in February. And that went from an irrigator out of an inactive account, also at 54,000 an acre foot. So so basically not a whole lot of change. Cash and Lou or the I'm sorry, the CBT selling price went down slightly. It's it's got some preliminary March sales that are suggesting it's probably coming back up just slightly. But again, we don't have any any new information on the cost of new water supplies. So that's really all I have to report to the board for this quarter. Okay. Thanks, Wes. Any questions for us on the cash and Lou? Do you know what it sounds like in the next month or two, you're going to get a additional cost estimate for kind of ongoing windy gap activities? Well, this litigation is pending? Is that right? And then I guess the follow up question, are there other projects that you see on the development side that are going to be coming in in the near term? So one of the big things with windy gap is they're still trying to re renegotiate their contract for some of that work. And that's I don't know how long that's going to take. Hopefully that renegotiated since we had to make a longer timeframe, not 100% sure. Again, I'm hopeful that I'll have updated numbers in the next quarter, but no guarantees. As far as water rights coming in, there might be some cash and Lou, and then there might be some non-historic coming in. A lot of these projects have been sitting out there for quite a while, and they haven't yet decided to move yet on them. I'm not certain whether or not those will come through in the next month or so. Oftentimes when they waited this late, they wait until early summer. So if I get any of that, though, that would that would be reflective in the native water or native basin water rights transactions. So yeah, I really just don't have a real good finger on it, but there's not anything I know for certain that's coming in. Okay. All right. Any other questions on that? If not, I guess we will leave unless somebody has a comment. We currently have the price set at the windy gap. Affirming project cost of $17,683. Is that right, Wes? That's correct. Okay. So if I think we can leave it at that without any action unless there's any questions, comments by the water board on that. Is everybody okay with leaving it at the current rate? I think it should be left at the current rate. It wouldn't make sense to change it at this point. Agreed. Okay. It sounds good. And then we'll revisit it. We should hopefully have those additional, the revised costs when we revisit that at the next kind of regular session for the cash in lieu update. Okay. That sounds good. Thank you. Let me move on here. So the next item is 8B, water supply agreement with same brain and left hand water conservancy districts. Ken? Yes. Thank you, Chairman. Mr. Chair. Sorry, Ken, if I may, I needed to disclose publicly that I am general counsel for the Conservancy District and participated in the drafting of this proposed agreement. So I'm going to sign off and you can let me know when I should come back in, Mr. Chair, or Heather if she can. Okay. Thank you, Scott. Heather, can you give a way to get a hold of Scott before he leaves to get him back on the call once we're past this item? Yes, I can email him. Okay. Thanks. Thanks, Scott. Super. Thank you, Chairman. So the item we have before you today is a water supply agreement between the city of Longmont and the same brain and left hand water conservancy district. This is actually a renewable of the lease we've been doing the last few years with the district. The district operates an augmentation plan in the basin augmenting out of priority depletions. Generally, that's smaller depletors. People who have say a cabin in the mountains or pull water out of a well to irrigate more a little bit larger area than you're able to with a domestic water well. So it's really it's it's augmenting depletions that have been occurring for years and years. And rather than shut people off, they run a program where the river's made whole for that out of priority depletions. That actually is a benefit to the city of Longmont because the water that they put back in the creek becomes available to all water users, including the city of Longmont. So it helps keep the basin whole. The district had water storage reservoir called Lake number four located just east or west and just a little bit south of McCall Lake. During the flood of 2013, the flood went right through that lake took it out. It's an old it's a spank gravel pit. And so it took the lake out and they just did finish reconstruction of that lake this last year. In fact, they just did a liner test this winter. And so they they have that project up and running. And if we're real lucky, they'll come in priority and be able to store and they'll use actually like for to augment the stream. One of the concerns they've had is that because of the the drought, which this, you know, the snows helped quite a bit. But because of the drought, they were they were concerned that they wouldn't be able to fill this year wouldn't come in priority. And there's there's going to be a little bit of a timing issue for them, whether or not they come in priority, just because of how much storage still needs to be filled, including Union Reservoir as low as Union Reservoir is. And so we have worked out this agreement. Really, it's it's a kind of a win win for both of us. It gets the district water they need for their odd plan. It also gives long mod direct water out of out of Carter Lake CBD water, which we can use in our water treatment plant. So we we benefit by having that additional water supply. We deliver the water, the water will be delivered out of Union Reservoir. And so that's water this downstream that we currently can't get into our treatment plant other than by exchange, which is not real easy and probably would be fairly difficult this year. So staff is recommending approval of this agreement. Not a lot of not a lot of acre feet and even maybe less than in is in the agreement. If the district can come in and get water stored under Lake Four, but there's no guarantee. So this this helps make sure that they can keep their augmentation program running strong. So you have to answer any questions if there are any. Thanks, Ken. Any questions on the agreement? Roger? Yeah, can just out of curiosity, when did this agreement first go into effect? How long have we had it? So in its current form, we've done it for two years. This will be the third year. Um, originally, after 2013, the district was able to do a temporary substitute supply plan. And and or but you can only do that for five years. And so they basically used up their five years. Now that plan also involved Longmont releasing some water out of our system as well. So really, it's it we've been working with the district to try to help make sure their aug plan maintains viable ever since the flood of 2013. And this is hopefully the last year that they'll have to have to do this now that their facility is up and running. Thanks. Other questions or comments? Allison? Yeah, this isn't specifically related to the contract, but I was wondering if we had any follow up from the Conservancy District in regard to their budgeting on the the plan that we heard more about. When was it? January, December? Um, yes, actually, we have, and I'll talk about it under future agenda, the future agenda. We currently have the same random left hand water Conservancy District scheduled to present to Water Board at the April Water Board meeting. Their stream management plan is done now. Their their tax is approved and they are their board is looking pretty hard at about how how they bring all that together. And they're they're ready to give us an update and talk about that plan. And they'll do that at the April meeting. Thank you. Okay, anything else? All right. If not, we need a motion to recommend the water supply agreement with Saint Brain Left Hand Water Conservancy District for approval by the City Council. Okay, Kathy is making the motion. Roger, are you the second? Yes. Okay, we have a motion a second. Any further discussion? Seeing none. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? Okay. Thank you, Ken. Thank you. Now we're on to 9A, which is a monthly water supply update and I guess we're going to hopefully have more good news, Wes, so you're up. Yeah, so as everyone knows, we've we got some snow finally, and that really did help us out. It's it didn't. I was kind of hoping for even more out of it, but in terms of water, it was really good. But I just want to hit a few of the highlights of where we're at. And then I'm going to ask Heather to pull up after I do that. I've got some graphs of some different snow tail sites that I wanted to just highlight. So as we talked about Nelson kind of mentioned, we're starting to release some water out of you or out of Button Rock. Some of that water that's being released out of storage is due back to the Highland Lake. They were in priority, but we were at the same time delivering some water to our water treatment plants. And but we didn't have an ability to get that out of storage. So we worked with the state and been tracking that. And so that's kind of why we're you're seeing a 50 CFS release out of Button Rock. It's water that would have otherwise stored in Highland Lake already. But we're going to have that water to them here by the end of the week and they'll be made whole. Then what we're going to make a decision on is whether or not we're going to continue to take some water out of Button Rock and put some of that previously stored fully consumable water into Union Reservoir. Nelson mentioned how far down it was about 6,000 acre feet being an off-channel reservoir. It takes a while to fill that. It's probably it'd probably be a couple months to fill that. And so what we may do is actually move some of our decrees that are allowed to be stored in Union. And this month or early next month move some of those that were or are currently stored in Button Rock and put those into Union. That'll help us leverage that time we kind of need. Then with Button Rock being on channel, we have nearly all of our changed water rights are able to store in there. And those can be stored at a much higher rate than you could in Union. And so we're doing some things administratively. That'll put us in a good position to put not only Button Rock filling, but also hopefully get Union much fuller than it might otherwise if we're only relating or waiting for it to fill under its own decree or during runoff. So those are some things that we're thinking about and we'll report what we're doing a little more next month. I'll let Jason, when it's his turn to talk about the outlet repairs, we're really thankful to have that up and going. That's such a critical component for what we've what we do in the winter. So looking at the Colorado snow tail sites, the South Platte River Basin, when I put this packet together, at the time we were at 83% of normal. I'm sorry, I think that was for the Colorado, was it 83% and South Platte was at 86%. After the snow, it looks like the South Platte is at 97%. And the Colorado is at 88%. So we've seen a bigger bump this side of the continental divide, which we all kind of expected. Didn't put as clear over 100%. However, we still have some time on our side. A lot of these snow tail sites don't actually realize their peak until some time into April, even towards the end of April. So another snowstorm or two will help kind of continue to push us over. So the other part that we talk about each month is our CVT quota. The Northern will have their spring water users meeting on the 6th of April. So you can mark your calendars for that. They'll be taking input from municipalities and irrigation companies. They've been hearing from some as you might expect. Some of the municipalities are championing a quota maybe in the 70 to 80% where a lot of the irrigation companies are in the 80 to 100%. And so it's likely there'll be a supplemental quota set by the board on the 8th. We'll see what it's going to be. It could be anywhere from 70 to 100% after the supplemental is added. We'll just have to wait and see. But regardless, I think we're in pretty good shape there. Local storage is at 62%. We've, again, this snowpack is going to help us quite a bit. It's a wet snow. It's not like when you get in November. It's going to help have a higher peak runoff, these types of snows do. And that should all get caught into storage, which is going to be really good. Heather, if you wouldn't mind, go ahead and start taking the screen over. And if you could pull up some of those graphs, the first one that we have up, and let me make sure, yeah, perfect. So the first one we have is Willow Park. So we're kind of going to, I'm going to kind of hit these real fast and understand that they're kind of from north to south. And when you look at them, the lines that you're kind of paying attention to, the black line is where we're at now, the green line is kind of the normal or the mean. And so on the Willow Peak snow site, it kind of, it's done pretty good. After this snow, it's 110% of median. So, and it reaches its peak, not until about the 26th of April. So still a lot more time left for it to kind of peak out. If we go to the Bear Lake graph, very similar there on the Bear Lake, the single storm really pushed us over that 100%, actually at 112% of median. And I think it's true, its peak date for snowpack is the 30th of April. So again, a long time there. So hopefully we can keep getting a little bit more in these next six weeks for that one. Willow, Wild Basin. So that one kind of hits closer to home. We're all familiar with that, feeds the North State Bering, sitting at 93% of median. So certainly better than we were before the storm. But again, I still need, we're looking like, we're probably somewhere around 12, 13 inches of snow water equivalent. And we'd like to see that get up to 15 or 16. So definitely looking for some more snow up there. Sawtooth, it too had a nice jump, but it's at 85% of median. The next one at University Camp, it got closer to normal at 97%. It actually is a site that doesn't peak out until the second of May. So quite a bit of time on that one, but you can see where the normal is. We've got a lot more snow to get up there to finish off at normal. So Lake Irene, that one there is at 84% of average. A good jump, but hopefully we can get some more. Phantom Valley, that one moving south, that one's at 92%. That's kind of actually on the upper, feed some of the upper Colorado. But it's one we like to watch. And it's probably the earliest one to hit its peak, which is usually around April 1st. And then the Berthold Summit, one again hits at 94% of the median with a peak date on the 29th of April. And so you can see that the snowpack that we just got definitely did help us quite a bit. I think everybody's probably got sore shoulders and wouldn't necessarily like to have another dump like this. However, we definitely appreciate having this moisture that it did provide. So we really live on these spring storms. But the spring is not over, at least for the runoff. And so we'll see what happens in the next month. And hopefully by the time we talk again, we'll be real close to having all those close to that 100% of average. So that's really all I had to report at this point in time, unless there's some questions. Any questions for Wes on the water status report? Hey, Wes. So my 4288 Brandon Avenue, we are well above average. I'm sure everybody can agree with that. Yeah. Yeah, it's very wet. And it's, you know, it's, it's amazing, though, you know, 20 inches of snow or whatever is, you know, it also shows the impact that a good hard rain will have. But this was over a bigger area. And so glad to have it. Do we know what the liquid equivalent, it seemed like such a heavy wet snow, it's like slush falling down. Yeah, it was over, it was over two inches of snow water equivalent in this. And so it kind of varied. But usually when you get it, if you get an inch per foot, that's considered pretty wet. And we had just over that. So yeah, it was definitely very wet. Good. Any other questions for Wes? Okay. Thank you, Wes. You're welcome. All right. Next item is the monthly legislative report, Ken. Thank you, Chairman. We don't have any action items on the legislative report this month. You may recall that we had brought forward just for informational purposes the bill in legislature concerning the turnback provision for water court. That I thought we might actually be bringing that this month, but it it's, you know, slightly more controversial bill. And so the Colorado Water Congress's State Affairs Committee assembled a group of interested people on both sides of the issue. And they have been amending that bill. The bills introduced into the legislature, but it's kind of hanging up, the whole being held up. They've got it on hold until the State Affairs Committee can come out with some more language. I think I think they're really, really close if they haven't actually come out with a kind of a consensus bill on that. So that's probably one we'll want to look at. Who knows, it may it may run ahead of us and may may actually start moving before next month. But we'll certainly as soon as soon as we get a bill that's more final, we'll try to we'll forward that out email that out to water board so you can all see it. Scott, you have a question? Not a question, just a comment. And Ken, I don't even pretend to know where that bill is at, but I did get an update from State Affairs this morning. And it says that the bill will go to committee meeting on Wednesday. It's in the Ag Committee with Colorado Water Congress support. So I think they did take action at Colorado Water Congress this morning. And again, I didn't attend, but somebody in my office is our liaison. And it looks like it's at least going to go to committee hearing. So I think they have agreed on a final version. I just haven't seen it either. So I can't share any news with you there. Good. Yeah, no, that's good. Yeah, I had not heard that yet. So that's good to hear. And we'll we'll forward that as soon as I get it, we'll forward that bill on to you. Okay. Is that the only one? Okay. Great. So next item, Ken, you're up again with the Windy Gap Firming Project update. Yes, thank you, Chairman. Just wanted to update the board. We really obviously it'll be a while before the appeals action on the appeal to the federal lawsuit on the permit occurs. So still probably looking late, late winter, maybe even even early spring next year before that, hopefully sooner than later. But before that goes forward, the West did allude to it in the in the cash and Lou review. But the Northern District is currently negotiating with the Bernard construction, who is the contractor to adjust our current contract with Bernard construction as the last start date can be May, like May fifth of this year, which obviously won't be happening. And so we'll need to renegotiate this. This negotiation might be a little more difficult than the last ones, because one of the, you know, one of the real big elements of constructing a large project like this is fuel cost. You know, you're you're spent a lot of fuel to drill rock blast rock, and then haul rock and a lot of the cost of the construction is fuel just to do the construction work. Unfortunately, fuel is I'm sure you've all gassed up lately. And fuel is going up. And so for the contractor to be sitting in a in a situation where they're trying to look out a year from now to what the fuel costs might be, we I believe we're probably going to be hit a little bit with that situation. Hopefully, it won't be, you know, it won't be real real significant, but we will have to we'll see what that comes. Once we get that, then we'll know where those costs are going to go. And that will that will we don't know if those costs are going to be so high that that it will require an immediate amendment to the contract to the to the allotment contract. The current allotment contract has not a real big contingency, but it has a few tens of millions of dollars of contingency. I believe it was then when we signed it last December, the contract was signed at a $600 million project and the cost estimate I think was if I remember right was like 580,000. So there was some some contingency sitting there available. Certainly are probably burnt through that and will when we get the fuel costs back. But but we may be looking at coming coming back to look at that allotment contract once we get those dollars. One of the one of the other things that's happening is the allotment contract anticipated funding the full $600 million this spring. Because we were that close to being able to get the contractor going and started obviously with the allotment con with the appeals for the permits that that postpones the issuance of bonds, especially the pooled financing bonds. And so we may the districts looking at whether or not there's language in the allotment contract that allows us to put to pull a partial payment on the full 600 or whether or not we have to come back in and amend that to allow us to pull that and their attorneys are looking at that right now. So should know that in the next month or so whether or not we have to amend that. The reason you know we are going to be spending some money there is are a number of the mitigation projects that became due when we got the permit. And so those have those are ongoing and those costs are ongoing. Also the Colorado River connectivity channel around the Windy Gap Reservoir that's something we've wanted for years. We got a very healthy soil conservation service grant natural resource conservation service grant for that project and that but that grant requires it to be started and completed by a date certain which if that project doesn't continue to move forward we could lose 5 to 6 million dollars in NRCS funding. We are going to ask NRCS for at least one more year but that's you know that's a little bit of tender negotiations there so I guess right now the short answer is financing is the thing we're going to be looking at and probably coming back in the next month or two with additional information on that other than that we're kind of been holding pattern waiting for the federal lawsuit to play out. So be happy to answer any questions if there are any. Any questions for Ken on the Windy Gap update? I'm not seeing any. Okay thank you. Thanks Ken. Item 9D is the Birch Lake lease Kevin. Yeah thanks Todd. Yeah what we have is a basically a housekeeping item. It's a lease city alumni has been leasing the recreation rights to Birch Lake since about 2006. The primary purpose for doing that is for water quality in our for our weight gattus water treatment plan. Basically this is an extension of that lease for another five years and this is a council communication that's going to council on the 31st or 30th. So if anybody has any questions I'd be happy to answer them. Okay any questions as I read it Kevin it's it's a lease but it really the only people that would have access are the neighbors that immediately surrounded. Yes that's correct. Yeah one of the issues with Birch Lake is there's so many of those houses around the lake and instead of trying to keep them out basically we're just letting them use that reservoir in exchange for just kind of policing it self policing that reservoir and it's worked out pretty well so far. Yeah okay any questions on the the lease and I talked to Ken before the meeting this is a renewal of an existing lease it does not take I guess council consideration or approval. Ken is that right so we don't need to make a recommendation on this it's just trying to give staff feedback if there is any. That's correct Chairman it's just we it's going to show up in a couple weeks on the council agenda and we wanted to make sure Water Board knew it would be showing up there and and knows what it's about. So does that end up on their consent agenda since it's a renewal of a previous lease or do they actually do more than that? It'll just be on their consent agenda it's fairly standard so probably wouldn't come off. Okay any questions or comments on the renewal of the lease? Okay looks good sounds good thank you Ken. Looks like we're on to item 10 which is review of major project listings and items tentatively scheduled for future board meetings. Allison brought up it sounds like St. Brain Left Hand will make a presentation next month to us on the Basin Implementation Plan. If I understand right is there anything else Ken or does that board have any other items that they are curious about on future upcoming meetings? Yes Chairman there was one quick conversation I wanted to have with the Water Board about the April board meeting just I guess maybe by chance or maybe because it took us a little while to get some items together. We're a little concerned that we're going to have a fairly busy April board meeting. We do have it appears right now we've got a development activity that will take a little bit of time a little bit more than normal. We've got we weren't able to get all the water use the per capita water use numbers together that board member Lang asked us to return but we believe we'll have all those together for the April board meeting so we'll have that water the water use per capita data tie that in with our you know water conservation water efficiency programs. We'll have the St. Brain presentation and then April is also the time when the board reviews the annual water supply and drop management plan and more than likely we'll have one or two other little things between now and then so just wanted to make sure the board was okay with that agenda for next month. I still think we can get it done in two hours but it'll be a little more hefty agenda than normal. Okay any issues there for the board if we have a little longer than normal meeting in April everybody looks like they're okay with that can so I guess we'll proceed does the board have anything they want to bring up on upcoming topics? I'm not seeing any okay on to item 11 is informational items and water board correspondence anything there that anybody has a question on or anything that the board wants to bring up at this point? I'm not seeing I did have one graph that I was going to ask Heather just to pull up it's kind of a precursor to some of the information that we're going to bring to water board hopefully next month as it relates to use per capita this doesn't actually necessarily speak to use per capita but and I realize it's kind of compressed here what we're looking at is a graph of water use or water production starting back in 2002 and so you can see in 2002 the last that would really spur the first initial drought we had we had pretty good participation and cutting back the next two or three years so in 2003 four and five it was it was definitely less than 2002 then in 2006 we kind of had our peak year that's kind of in 2007 both we had in those two years if you look at the most that the treatment plant put out on a given month I think we had eight records broke in those 24 months period and and so and understand that during all this time the population the service population has increased so this kind of kind of ebbed and flowed a bit last year in 2020 our total production was about a just about 104 percent compared to 2002 so if you took a line from 2002 and moved it over for the last almost 20 years you see that we only had about four years since that time that has exceeded that total amount of water production so that probably you could argue translates into a lower per capita water use now we'll go into more the numbers of what that kind of looks like but I wanted to kind of at least give you a sense of what it looks like in terms of lawnmots water production since that 2002 drought okay Roger you had a comment or question you're meeting Roger there we go well and defining water production I mean is that the equivalent of water usage or what's the difference so the water production that's going to be the what that number actually represents is how much raw water we put into the water treatment plant so there's some water that's lost through backwash and things like that and then there's going to be additional water that's lost just through the transmission so this is the this is the amount of water that's shown at the Nelson planters water treatment plant okay thanks and then Roger I think the what they'll be bringing back will be some of the per capita day use numbers right well so then you're you're kind of normalizing it based on population and you'll you know as Wes alluded to the population's been increasing but our water demand has not so that'll show up in the per capita usage that's been going down to so anyway that ought to be you know and that's kind of what we're looking at is the yardstick of the conservation measures and how effective those are over time so yeah and and and and also bear in mind there's different classifications you know you have just beyond residential you'll have industrial and commercial and some of those which can influence a total production amount depending on what those are and so we'll see when we bring that information hopefully we can kind of break some of that out so just looking at a single per capita number sometimes can be misleading if you're not careful okay thanks okay any other questions comments on that thanks for the preview there was all right so next item we've got items tentatively scheduled for future board meetings so we'll revisit the cash from Lou and June again and hopefully be able to capture the revised windy gap cost estimates that the Ken went over and that's like all we've got for that the next board meeting is scheduled for April 19th of next month so mark the calendars for that and with that we're on to third item 13 which is to adjourn the meeting anybody else have any questions comments for the go to the order Ken um Todd one thing we did from forget to mention is that the spring water users meeting for the northern Colorado water conservancy district is going to be the first week of April and that's going to be a virtual meeting so if anybody wants to attend that you can just go to northern's website and sign up directly if you do sign up please let Heather know so because if we have more than three board members attend we'll need to three or more we'll need to notice that as a meeting but that kind of nice to you know it's nice to meet in person but it's quick and convenient if since it's going to be virtual well and is I think most of you know I'll I'll be there so I guess it'll be if two more board members want to join so anyway marcia did you have something I thought I'd say your angle okay all right with that um I'm sorry you were muted there I was waving goodbye well yeah you beat me to it um with that I'll adjourn the meeting so thank you guys bye everyone have a good day