Loading...
08-17-2006 r CIAC Minutes for the Meeting on Thursday, August 17, 2006 9:30am Utilities Center Conference Room 213 Committee Members Present: Other Attendees: Kirk Clifton, Chairman Cyndi Rhodes, Board of Realtor Molly Kraft Judd Singer Glenn Landers City Staff Present: Robert Garza, Assistant City Manager Councilor Steve Trowbridge Dr. Jorge Garcia, Utilities Director Dr. Mark Sutter, Financial Services Director David Weir, Community Development Director Lori Grumet, Acting Public Services Director Angelica J. Hernandez, Administrative Specialist II Chairman Clifton called the meeting to order at 9:45 am. Chairman Clifton: Okay has the Committee had a chance to review the minutes from July 20? Landers: Yes Kraft: Yes and then we accept the minutes Landers: I second Clifton: Okay there has been a motion second all in favor Landers: Aye Kraft: Aye Clifton: Okay let us just go ahead and dive in to item number two (2), 1 think what for those of you that may not have known. Members of the Committee I think primarily the three (3) of us we're all pretty new to this Committee so we want to get a better grasp of how we're dealing with the Municipal Code, how it's written and what our duties are as Committee members are and we just want to assure we want assurance that we are following proper procedures and prodigal in relating to the Municipal Code and unfortunately legal staff wasn't going to be able to make it today they had hearings both Marcy Driggers and Pete Conley. Mr. Garza is here the Asst. City Manager and with that said I guess we can just if CIAC Meeting, 8/17/06 1 you guys want to just go thru it page by page that probably the simplest thing to do at this point. Do you all have your copies? I guess further more just to start of with where there specific concerns either one of you might have had? Landers: Not that I can think of as I can recall, I think it is a good idea though for us to go thru it. Kraft: I do have questions all six (6) duties that are required to fulfill and whether we've done that in the past and how we've done that. Particular referencing I guess it's Article Four (4) Parts in Commission, Subdivision all that (inaudible), Fifteen (15) XE which is our section the Ordinance which I can't find. Let's see here, I can't find it. Clifton: Under the original ordinance there is Ordinance # 1335 there are duties of the Committee A thru D, I don't know if they give you little tabs but there should be Ordinance in your packet. Kraft: Yeah Clifton: And from my understanding we've already the Committee the previous Committee already adopted the land use assumption but the way I understand it is their coming back with some revisions to those assumptions on the population side. Garza: Yeah I understand Clifton: Okay Kraft: Do we file annual reports with respect to the progress of the CIP and report to the City thru the City Manager any inequities implementing the CIP or imposing impact fee? That's D here but there's actually six (6) of them. Has that been done in the past? Garza: I do not believe so. I have no knowledge of any such reports being done I know Mark might understand that a little bit better than I do. It is a moving target and our CIP is probably the closest thing to report but there's never been closure which is something we came to realize recently in the last year or so and are planning to do that in the future. But no it hasn't been done. Clifton: Now with that as my understanding the Committee would work on this annual report produce it to City Staff and City Staff will put it in form of Council Action from and move forward? Garza: I think that's the way that we thought that the process would be working. We've never received any such report from the Committee I think that there would some level of staff participation of putting that together because of all the documentation and all of the Capital Improvements and that kind of back ground information is something that the staff would need to be providing to this Committee today would be to put together a report. Sutter: Mr. Chairman and I do believe that last years started including putting in the financial report a summary report of revenues and expenditures as a needs of meeting a CIAC Meeting, 8/17/06 2 requirement of being an annual report as far as annual report it describes the actions of the Committee and things like that (inaudible) to my knowledge. Clifton: Okay I think that one item we probably need to as a Committee to start making sure that we do that. Is there a one time is better than the other, I mean would you prefer the report be pleaded and we make the recommendation on it prior to the start of the fiscal year. Garza: Well I think the content of your report would logically align with the fiscal year so, I mean what was accomplish this fiscal year unless the Ordinance says other wise I don't have a copy of it. Is it in annual bases, calendar bases, does say? Kraft: No doesn't say. Annual report Grumet: Says Annual report Clifton: Just an Annual report Garza: So on my preference I think to align with the rest of what we are doing with the City would be on a fiscal year bases and of course wrapping up and closing out of our books relative to accomplishments in any given year is not we continue to do expenditures thru the end of June. When do we have all of our receipts in? When is a reasonable period of time after the close of the fiscal year that you would be able to draw a line? Sutter: Mr. Chairman on financial transaction stand point we still do approvals thru August I would say by the end of September most of the financial activity is slow down and numbers that we have at that point are generally pretty solid as far as what we're gonna put for annual audit figures so end of September. Garza: End of September, so maybe third quarter (3/4) time line would be appropriate for this report. Kraft: So there's, excuse me Mr. Chairman may I ask a question. Is there not been a separate report for the collection and spending of impact fees or is that what you where referring to? Sutter: That's what I was referring to. What I'm saying is that all it is, is a financial it has nothing to do with the activities of the Committee budget its only a report of the revenues of the (inaudible) and so it's a very summarized very much oriented towards just dollar numbers it doesn't really talk about the (inaudible) on a project. Garza: Projects it's a cash flow picture and I think what is contemplated by the Ordinance is somewhere in which projects where done. Some of it the money the impact fees monies being spent is debts service on bond issuances that are it's just a debt payment that's not a project in specific and that's what Dr. Sutter's reports will (inaudible) to catch flow overall but not on projects specific bases. Clifton: Not really progress oriented its just (inaudible) Garza: Right CIAC Meeting, 8/17/06 3 Clifton: I guess what I would like to see minimum I don't know if you guys agree maybe every quarter do a review sit down and do a review with staff and go thru the CIP and see where we're at what type of progress we're making and if there are any inequities and implementation of the plan an impose on the park fee impact fees. I mean I don't know maybe if just twice a year or monthly, I think monthly is a bit excessive. Kraft: Would that be possible? I mean could the information be collected in quarterly or semi-annually bases. Garza: I would say semi-annually would probably be more realistic, I mean there's lots of moving parts and it depends on where do you take that snap shot a picture in time. Clifton: Really, the way I would envision is just a check list, we have our CIP and it's as simple as going thru as a check list okay has this been done line item by line item. Garza: And maybe Dr. Garcia would want to way in on that but a lot of those CIP projects expand over months and months and months sometimes years. Clifton: Yeah Garza: And so to look at it frequently where are we, your not gonna get a real good moving picture did you want to add? Garcia: Yeah certainly a by annually report presentation on status of approvals we design like the treatment of the treatment plant for example the construction will take about twelve (12) months (inaudible) ?: If you could brief us to what the status of the projects on a by-annual bases Clifton: Let's just plan on doing that and maybe having set months like take (inaudible) months in one year get us an evaluation. Kraft: Correspond to your fiscal year and wouldn't that make sense in or step away? What do you think? Garza: Cause I think the report being scheduled for every September makes sense so that as Dr. Sutter said our books will be closed out and won't be able to draw the line and say as of June 30, previous or this year here's the report but as far as these other progress reports they could be done July 1, and April 1, or something like that. Clifton: Due to the past, I guess this is more for Dr. Garcia, has the Capital Improvements Advisory Committee actually monitored and evaluated the implementation of the CIP. I mean before they make their recommendations. Dr. Garcia: What we've done is usually in the Spring before we take the CIP improvements (inaudible), have not been approved by City Council. What we do is present to the Committee the up coming projects and then those projects that are listed we present them to the City Council as far as the CIP work sessions, present to the public CIAC Meeting, 8/17/06 4 and then preparing for the budget so the Spring is an active move at least for the ball projects (inaudible) CIAC. Now right now we are updating our master plans (inaudible) so that as soon as we have initial drafts I need to bring those to the Committee so then you all can see what are the plans that are coming that are on this revised plan. If we really go ten (10) years did we move up to the first five (5) years if it's a ten (10) year plan how we're doing another actually it's a twenty (20) year master plan is a ten (10) five (5) year increments and you will adopt five (5), ten (10) fifteen (15). So you will have to be involved from the very beginning as soon as we see the draft we see drafts of the projects you have to be involved and say okay yeah that makes sense we see where it's going. So your involvement as part of that processing you see all these projects because these projects will turn into the next five (5) year Capital Improvement Program, in the next five(5) year Capital Improvement Program turns into a the next in balance and that's where your involvement is so you have to be involved. Knowing that project eluviations as recommended by staff and consultant have been the actual fee calculation is based on those projects and that I expect to have probably meetings early the end of this calendar year early 07' to have some drafts as to what the next CIP is gonna look like and you know you will have to ask questions to the consultants saying why is that 24" pipe line up there what does it do. Okay let me explain to you what it does because that translates into a dollar amount that needs to be collected for future development. Clifton: And I'm glad you mentioned that cause I think it goes back to our wrestling with the park fee issue is because we didn't really have a CIP to work off of and base our recommendations on and that's why I think we struggle with the park fee and finally I said we know that staffs needs to move on so let's just do this. Dr. Garcia: But no, you have very well defined projects by either water wells, transmission pipe line storage (inaudible) water, interceptors sewer lines and treatment plant to pass thru for waste water. Part of the plant is being expanded right now under the (inaudible) CIP its an expansion of from 8.9 to about 13 Y2 million gallons (inaudible) keep us going for a while. But there will be proposals on the new Master Plan to look at the new (inaudible) area in the East Mesa in potentially doing a small-localized plant. The industry is going to small-localized treasury treatment plants rather than big treatment plants because of the we already have it. It would probably not makes sense to expand this plant further or build a larger one down south then put smaller plant that can collect the sewer faster treated and reuse that water in that facility for irrigation. That is the industry thru out the country that is what is happening the consultants will be showing you some of that information soon. We may end up with another small package or treatment plant or treasure treatment plant in the Sierra Border maybe, maybe not but that is the thinking of putting one right now by the end of Lohman Ave. that's our first treasury treatment plant. Those things you have to buy into because those will turn into future fees. We will build the projects like Dr. Sutter explained we will build the projects with revenue bonds. So we never anticipate huge projects like this one being done in the cash bases with fees cause the fess would be huge and (inaudible) you don't want to do that. I think because that's the Parks problem right now if you look at Parks you're looking at actual cash flow as far as what's public not what we've been told we couldn't. The fees would be (inaudible) and then we would have to have zero fees for a while and then it's (inaudible) fees so we need issue bonds and then have a set fee to pay the debt I mean that's how the utility handles it. CIAC Meeting, 8/17/06 5 Clifton: Where we're at Judd is we're kind of Singer: I apologize for being late Clifton: We're going thru the duties of the Committee based on the approved Ordinance. We're just kind of touching on areas. Singer: Okay, we're not talking about any specific Capital Improvements or anything like that. Clifton: No Landers: Mr. Chairman, I'm wondering if we should ask the City to review the Ordinance and provide us with a list of specific duties and time triggers and things like that, that we have to meet as a Committee. That way it would be a little clearer to us exactly what's coming down the pike and what kind of deadlines we're gonna have to meet. For instance, the discussion we just had about you know weather to do quarterly meetings or by-annual meetings to hear about (inaudible) projects. We need to make sure that's conforms with whatever the Ordinance requires. Clfion: I think that's a good idea, I'm just saying incorporate what we just talked about as far as the reports we're gonna try and work on these reports on by-annual basis. Singer: Okay, now these are reports that we are going to file ourselves as a group or is this a report coming from the City? Clifton: It would probably be input from us and staff assimilating the information. Singer: Okay Kraft: I have a question and believe me this might have been answered in a prior meeting that I have only been to a couple so. One of the duties says Advise the City of the need to update or revise land usage assumption CIP and Impact Fees. When did the CIAC last formally approve land use assumptions? Singer: A few months back ago probably four (4) months ago possibly five (5) months ago we approved the land use plan. Kraft: Thank you Singer: And you should, we all should have a copy of that land use plan it's a plan of the Parks Master Plan. Kraft: I wasn't clear on the weather that was approved at what time. Singer: I'd like to ask if I could, what are the upcoming Capital Improvements that we will be reviewing. Is there anything in the plans that (inaudible) from the City. Clifton: It's probably what Jorge previously discussed. CIAC Meeting, 8/17/06 6 Garcia: Yeah basically we are at the tale end of the (inaudible) building a additional capacity of the East Mesa. Singer: This is for water? Garcia: Yeah and then for waste water mainly the Treatment Plant expansion those are the two (2) big items that are happening right now. The prior master plan while we update the Master plan we are finishing those projects and they will all have to (inaudible) you all will be reviewing the draft Master Plan. Agreeing to certain projects of water usage I think that they should go further then next Spring we will take that to Council as a CIP and you all will have to also approve the revised view structure (inaudible). Landersr: Okay Garcia: And but you will find out the Utility Projects (inaudible) its much more structured then the Parks because you have very clear development projects and then the other difference is that you will look at long term debt and then the fee will be based on the dead surface (inaudible) cash flow, cash cost by project. Singer: Okay Garcia: And I anticipate bringing certainly the an update of the Master Plan as I mentioned towards the end of the calendar year or earlier if there is something I should have something to show you on the future Master Plan both water and waste water we're doing a computer (inaudible) right now the land use assumptions are used as the base and then used as zoning and land use assumptions to get loads of the system grow the system in the computer for us and then we tell them the projects (inaudible) so we're in the computer portion of it. Singer: So it's a model? Garcia: It's a model, it's (inaudible) sewer collections Clifton: Judd since you've been here a while is there any issues or concerns you've had? Singer: Well you know we spent so much time on the Parks Plan that it seems like that's the only thing we really worked on for quite some time and now that we've reached sort of a climax with that it's really looking for the next project for us to work on. I am assuming that we are gonna see a proposal from the Parks and Recreation Dept. That's gonna come back that will become the CIP and then we will try to match the appropriate fee at that time based on what we what we had voted on. Clifton: And if you recall as part of that motion I mean that the way that motion was designed at least the recommendation to Council was that the Park fee couldn't be implemented until the Council approved the CIP that it reflected with the projects. CIAC Meeting, 8/17/06 7 Singer: Cause Council might want to add an additional improvements to the CIP or extract or alter it and then we should be able to then review it and come up with an appropriate fee. But we gave them a target. Clifton: Yeah and it follows in line with the Ordinance as well as you have to have a CIP in place before you start assessing a fee so. Singer: Which seems to be easier from the Utilities Dept. because you seem to have the much more quantifiable approach? Garcia: Yeah, its much more quantifiable and much more structure I mean its and the other thing that is different with Utilities is CIP and I'm glad that Council did that a while back in 1995 is, we have a fee to the whole system we don't have a fee for the zone because the water molecules travel through out the City, we may pump eventually in the West Mesa if you drink that water on the East Mesa. In some Cities, they have impact fees that are (?) localized then you have distribute supply like we do that's very hard to quantify. Wells could be district down here and in Councilors Trowbridge's district but they will still feed water through out the City so, should that cause only be of this district no, it's a City wide system. That has helped in the Utilities CIP that is all global it's one system. Because the water the sewer comes from way up there to be treated down here and it water could be pumped anywhere then we could move water all over the systems so we didn't see the need to have district type impact fees it makes much more sense the way it set up like that. Clifton: Okay great thank you. Singer: Where do we go from here? Clifton: Does the Committee have any other flaring issues with what we're doing or what we're charged with, what we need from staff I mean is there something we would like to see from staff that maybe we that. Landers: Well at the thing I just talked about having them prepare some analysis of the Ordinance so it lets us know what our specific duties are so that if ever needed we can go through it and say you know whats the status of this, whats coming up and that will help drive the agenda I think. I wonder who we need to make that request to and if we need a motion to ask. Clifton: We probably need some type of motion but, is there any suggestions from staff I mean who the Committee should coordinate with. Garza: I think our City Attorney's office can draft something along those lines for your use for you next meeting. Draft an outline for you and you can talk about it whenever you set you next meeting. Singer: That would be great. Landers: Okay, I would make a motion that we ask the City Legal Dept. to analyze the Ordinance determine what our specific duties are and provide us with any time line or CIAC Meeting, 8/17/06 8 reports information on any time line or reports that we need to generate so that we can make sure those get done on time and incompliance with the Ordinance. Singer: Okay Kraft: Second it Clifton: Okay we have a motion to second all in favor Landers: Aye Kraft: Aye Landers: And who should make that request? Garza: I'll take care of it. Clifton: Dr. Garcia, just a quick question as part of the Master Plan you guys will be working on is it going to define I know this is gonna be difficult with recent actions, but is it gonna define the Cities proceed service area like the previous Master Plan did. Garcia: I was afraid you were going to ask that. Clifton: Expansion of areas. Garcia: It will define areas that we feel our staff we consultant and are logical service area for the City. It doesn't mean that some of those areas may not be contested by other water providers but, I don't think the City should give up in areas that are within City limits so it will define the areas that logically the City systems has structured and with its growth can serve. So the answer is yes it will show areas that may appear to be controversial but think we need to do that as a first step I know eventually I think as we see a little more clear our legal situation in terms of water service areas. The Committee needs to agree to (inaudible) by our new attorneys on what the future is in terms of water prevision (inaudible) but we will not allow just claims from other water providers to restrict the areas that we present to you. I think we're together on that. We shouldn't include areas within City limits with the exception of areas that are today on the Federal of settlement with Dona Ana Realtor which not much of our CIP is (inaudible) anyway so the restriction of that area cause that's a settlement in Federal Court that has been accepted by and filed in Federal Court so that one is (inaudible). But as far as other areas like East of town for example I mean anybody can claim sewer in that area but if the City is gonna grow to the East which is what the land us assumptions show then we will be showing that as our service area. Clifton: Okay anybody else? Singer: I'm gonna be interested to be educated on some of this water, water issues that we're dealing with that the City right now and the claims that are made by these other water providers and I'd also like to understand a little bit better how the water use issues connects with the sewer issue and I know that Dona Ana Mutual is planning or has their CIAC Meeting, 8/17/06 9 proposal for sewer treatment and you know (inaudible) discharge and how that's gonna work with the City and what the Policy's will be going forward with that. Garcia: We can certainly provide a briefing of you with the consulting attorney's of the City (inaudible) can provide a briefing as to what different issues of are (inaudible) of the law are and we can go from there and the issue of Dona Ana Mutual to again, that's a settlement so yes there's a designated area that Dona Ana will serve (inaudible) and we're serving the sewer (inaudible). Singer: I'm specifically concerned I guess with the with what I understand the Moongate Settlement I guess on the East side of town. Well their providing water, we're providing sewer you know we have no way to cut off sewer to a customer who doesn't pay their bills so to speak and it just seems to Garcia: True and that has been an issue that is an issue and has been an issue for a long time because the City added some new areas that where already served by prior water systems and we extended sewer to those areas that we Singer: When we annex when the City annexes those lands do the utilities that are in the ground become City property and that's what the real argument is all about now. Garcia: No, because private water companies can exist in this state based on the Public Utility Law Singer: They can Garcia: You can set up a regulated utility and go serve within the (inaudible). Now if we are within the boundaries of Municipality we are Franchise. Which is part of the other argument Moongate is (inaudible) doesn't have a Franchise and they claim they don't need one. So that's not what the state law says and that's part of the issue (inaudible) so Marcy can explain that (inaudible). The new (inaudible) but yes they can increase because the Public Utility Act says that they can exist. In some states there's much more there are much more stringily parts that existing as a Water Utility. Such as Fire Protection from Commercial Bonds. This state it doesn't anybody can set up a water utility and you are (inaudible) by the state and the requirements its not very hard to do. Singer: Now the State Engineer would have control over the amount of water rights available to that Utility would they not and are these utilities claiming right that are real or are they claiming rights that are over and above the capacity what their real capacity is. Garcia: That's exactly the issues that we are bringing up you see the Public Utility Act that is enforced by the PRC prevents these Utilities that they have no jurisdiction over the Water Rights the State Engineer the governs the Water Rights. This body of law that the State doesn't care about these other ones I can't not tell the State Law it's not one body that says yeah I'll let you service this area but show me your Water Rights. There two (2) (inaudible) things you could have a public utility that is permitted to serve in a certain area and they have no water rights and that's a problem it's a good question you have because that is an issue that Marcy can explain (inaudible). That's part of our argument we can't do that as a Municipality as a Municipality we need to assure it if we're gonna Annex we need CIAC Meeting, 8/17/06 10 to have the Water Rights and the to cover that area. But that's part of our planning we look forty (40) years down the road. Those utilities don't have to look two (2) years down the road. Singer: But my issue my concern is that I guess I've always been told that these water utilities company's buy the utility companies themselves that they have the water rights they claim ex amount of acre feet of water right. And of course I know when I'm property owner how water rights work and seems to be different than the water rights they claim and they use the term Mendidall Water Rights which when you got to the State Engineers office he tells you that released valuable water rights and so I'm just really curious of how ultimately this has to play out. Garcia: That's right. Yeah and we can certainly prepare a presentation that assure you those issues and (inaudible) in different issues including water rights. That's a very broad area of water we'd be glad to even bring our water rights attorney from Sante Fe to give you a briefing as to how we go about that. Some of them do have some water rights left and some of them have some that are permitting that are small amount and a bunch that are limited and are basically paper binds (inaudible) official use and there is water available with out impairment. Which is the issue Singer: Which is another part of it if they are not if they hold water rights that are greater than what they are putting beneficial use why do they get to hold those water rights when a farmer for example who's not blowing the field doesn't get to hold those Garcia: Well they sometimes they claim to hold those water rights but that doesn't mean that they have the water rights that's some subrogation that we have in the East Mesa because East Mesa is basically a close base and there's no more permits being approved (inaudible). So if someone claimed to me I'm gonna get another 2,000 acre feet of the East Mesa (inaudible) that's bogus instead of it happening there's already internal existing use of including us. Singer: So basically, the allocation of water already has been allocated. That's it there's no more allocation there's no more water to allocate. Garcia: That's why the whole issue of our growth is based on the City and I can brief you the Committee since all of you are all of you are new basically on the conversion to surface water as we Annex or develop plans that are in the revision district we have a conversion mechanism of surface water so that we're not creating we're converting use from (inaudible) for areas the develop (inaudible). The other one (inaudible) early 80's to apply for permits that are approved in the East Mesa 10,000 acre feet which we haven't touched yet. So the City again thinks four (4) year increments some of the private companies are mutual domestic don't necessarily do that that's a fact. Singer: Does the City have any long-term plan for any desalinization program or any walk river pumping or anything like that. Garcia: Well last year we developed a forty (40) an updated forty (40) year water plan. That in review by that State Engineer so it hasn't been made proper yet the Water Committee of the City consistent of three (3) Councils has seen a preview of the draft but CIAC Meeting, 8/17/06 11 AWN the State Engineer has to bless it first before it can go to either the Council for approval or the public first the public for input the State Engineer has to delegate certain parameters. There can be changes later but such as conservation guide lines things like that. The State Engineer is reviewing right now I'm hoping that they will finish their review within in the next month or two but, that plan (inaudible) needs only different options for future water supply it shows how much we have how can we support future wealth with dry water and surface water mixed. The third option is desalination because a lot of our aquifers actually are not saline aquifers they have fresh water on top one of the reason EI Paso going into desalination is because the (inaudible) has there's no more fresh water on the fresh water portion therefore there tapping brakeage water further deep. Singer: I see Garcia But we are contemplating that we're monitoring what Alamogordo is and EI Paso district (inaudible) and eventually we may have to tap deeper but that's almost like a third or fourth option. The third one was conservation is an important component then desalination in our case in a forty (40) year horizon it's gonna be the last alternative to do this desalination We rather conserve the fresh water rather than mind the fresh water and then have to get the brakeage water out take the salt. Signer: Okay Garcia: The issue with brakeage desalination is not the technology. The memory of technology has become much cheaper to treat than water it's a disposal of the much saltier brakeage slurry that is left over after you get fresh water out. What do you do with it? If you are next to next ocean you pump that into the ocean further in but we are not we are in the desert and that's part what do you do with it. That's EI Paso is still addressing that issue I think they are thinking of pumping (inaudible) that even deeper part of the (inaudible) making it more saltier here while we're taking it from here (inaudible). The disposal is an issue so now the plan would be the (inaudible) the last alternative that we want to go thru. Reclaim water use like a (inaudible) that's another source of water treating offsetting the use of irrigation with parks, golf courses, school grounds with treated waste water and don't use fresh water for any outdoor use. That would be the idea situation. Singer: Okay Garcia: Because right now 50% of our water is treated and put back Signer: Is there any review or study going on to your knowledge of house hold usage and black water or grey water returning in residential household? Garcia: We do have information on wastewater clogs but grey water really the separation of your sink, your kitchen sink and your laundry verses your toilet water that's grey water and under State Law we can reuse that water. There's a lot of regulatory issues that (inaudible) using that water in terms of not enough to neighbors property to street that has been used very little here and we have no regulatory control (inaudible) on the grey water systems but the State allows that so that State is irregular to the agency for that. The whole plotting system has to be different so that we have segregated but, as far as waste CIAC Meeting, 8/17/06 12 water use what we're doing is really carefully treated of our whole waste water streak by the segregation we have addressed the segregation issue. Because of the regulatory burden we don't recommend that (inaudible) the we get into that regulatory business we'd rather make a mistake and (inaudible). So the homeowner wants to segregate grey what is called grey water they can do so. Signer: They can do so no Garica: It's more of a plumbing issue approval than working with the environment department on how your gonna reuse your water in your own yard basically. Trowbridge: Mr. Chairman can I just add to that. A segregation on a City wide basis let's say where the entire subdivision (inaudible) although it's contemplated probably by some numbers not going any where near that there's no plans in the book for this. Garcia: Not at this time we are first starting with (inaudible) both verses school grounds medians large public areas we could offset the fresh water use by using purple pipe. Trowbridge: That would be of the (inaudible) of the subdivision or section town. The individual homeowner building a home in your business could go probably thru the State. But we are set up a home inspection so that we could pass it now. I think that was done the last couple of years. Garcia: The way industry through out the Country, what is happening is you start trusting public hearings with (inaudible) then later as you need more treated water you can be able to council as though seen in the approvals (inaudible) we have Council says that's (inaudible) But nothing produce there's areas where you have duel pipes in the street and there's fresh service water line going into your home and there's a purple service line going through your yard. That's in many communities that's an alternative we have we're not there yet and I think it's gonna be many years before we get there because we want to concentrate on public outdoor uses first including golf course which would be a public (inaudible) but, in medians, in parks and school grounds and (inaudible) that in big areas we can do with purple pipe first that's the offset a long with the usage of fresh water. Singer: So most of the grey water would actually come from municipal water operations. Garcia: NO actually no the grey water comes from everybody. We treated and then we dispose it to put in certain areas. Cause we have to treat it anyways right now we are treating it according to the river. Different is you treating it further so that there's no exposure to any excessive nitrogen or common-flow bacteria or anything like that, I mean you treat it (inaudible) levels and then its safe to sprinkle next to a home or in a park or in a school. But no the sewer that we're treating use all the waste water for example Water (inaudible) plant on the East Mesa started to treat approximately 'h million gallons a day on the first phase and that's gonna all the sewage from all the open High Range area and everything South of Hwy 70 we're using all of that and then disposing of it. Singer: Does that cause us a future problem with not returning water to the river? CIAC Meeting, 8/17/06 13 Garcia: No because we're not treating we are will not treat a hundred (100%) your right. That basing is disconnected from the river. The permits on that basin up there only call for about 644 area feet of river inter connection over a hundred a period. So it's minimum the amount we owe to the river. It's different with that stream of water or waster water generated here in the Valley so on that one we have to have some returned so yeah there's a balance between re-using all your water is some of that return flow turns into credits or fresh water. So it's a balance (inaudible) but the Jornada (inaudible) was permitting almost like a hundred percent (100%) consumption. It's a lot stricter now. Trowbridge: Mr. Chairman if I could just yeah, that's right the return flow credits the (inaudible) can be used over here in Mr. Ben's property for a 18 hundred feet (inaudible). We have these credits and requirements almost international (inaudible) supposed to do that. It's in the Mesilla (inaudible). But the questions was kind of punched upon these purchasing you converting (inaudible) water rights in the Valley and then we are parking them a permanent to the land at farms weather its' a center to (inaudible).or farms in Hatch that flooded Hatch and then when they can be used by farmers these two (2) that are and then when the time never comes when the City would build a surface water treatment plant such as Albuquerque, EI Paso we would have the certain water rights to that running down the river. The total requirement fro that kind of fees would be a lot more and then you would have to start questioning weather it makes sense because you don't have water always coming down the river. But, that's what is another part of what I think developers anybody building a home in the Valley has to do this there's a requirement they don't dedicate to water rights. There's a payment renewal of that and that's building up like a bank of water rights but probably we only have less than ten percent (10%) of what we require for this facility to.. Garcia: Well yeah but it would never run 12 months a year I think the irrigation district would have to run water four (4) months a year. What we want to do is really phase in the technology there right now to build a plant in stages. (Inaudible) does anybody have a large area where the future plant is but then the treatment units get high (inaudible) so actually I think be ready to go to a surface water treatment plant about five (5) to seven (7) years. With the water rights, we have and we have gotten to collect. The utilities (inaudible) Weir: And the EPA scoping hearings still have a nine (9) months for over ten (10) years the initial ones Garcia: Oh yeah for the as far as the joint projects in the New Mexico Texas Water usage yeah one of the environmental work has already been done and the environmental assessments have been gone for sure for a lot of years it is Weir: Yeah just trying to convey the level of planning (inaudible) Garcia: It is complex regulatory environment to because as soon as we got to surface water that adds a completely new dimension to it the type of relation we have to comply with. Right now ground water is easy surface water is much more (inaudible). Singer: Thank you CIAC Meeting, 8/17/06 14 Garcia: But we would be glad to run back through a ratio presentation familiar probably give you a better picture as to what is happening. Singer: Yeah I think it is important for our group Garcia: I think everyone needs to be aware of that. Clifton: Yeah and on top of that rather than meeting in September I'm gonna propose the Committee that we don't meet in September that way we get staff plenty of time but, think for the Committee's educational I'll put Mr. Weir on the spot here maybe a brief presentation from CD's staff on what you guys have seen as far as experiencing growth were you anticipate growth even if that's a question better to ask me (inaudible) because I'm partly to blame for that but you know just and maybe just a brief over view for those who weren't here when the assumptions where adopted to kind of go thru the land use assumptions just briefly summarize and I don't think we need to go thru them and gut wrenching detail by no means. Maybe we can just get all this out of the way in the October meeting. Weir: I have recap of land use assumptions and then also maybe a map showing recent development or things that are on the book. Clifton: Yeah Kind Of, where we're moving. I mean I think we've always anticipated growth eastward. I mean I know from my experience in the last five (5) years they way we thought about doing businesses the city five (5) years ago is a lot different than it is know and I think a lot of what we did five (5) ten (10) years ago doesn't match what where we are going now. Just as an example, I've seen a lot of issues with the MPO plan and that (inaudible) that's just an example. That could kind of tie into Dr. Garcia's master plan as well. Weir: Be happy to do that. Clifton: I don't know about the Committee but I don't need to see specific numbers I don't need an over abundance of detail and percentages, acreages and all of that good stuff. Just general recap of where we are at. Kraft: Makes good sense Clifton: Is there while we are on that does anybody having anything else they'd like to discuss at the October meeting? Singer: We're short a member are we not to be a group? Clifton: Yes, Mr. Leverret formally resigned. Singer: So it's the City's operation to bring in a new member is that correct. Garcia: Yeah, we need to just alert the Mayor that he needs to make an approvement for the fifth member. CIAC Meeting, 8/17/06 15 Clifton: And I guess just for staff just keep me up to date if you guys are getting in a time crunch. Just let me know then we can make arrangements to push the meeting back or whatever I need to do. Singer: Do we have tentative dates in October for our next meeting? Clifton: I think it's the 19th is the third Thursday. Garcia: The third Thursday is what you all decided for regular time unless the Committee decides to change. Clifton: I would prefer to stick with that if we could at 9:30 in the morning. Landers: Mr. Chairman do we need just wondering do we need to check with the City to make that's there's nothing that needs to happen next month in order to meet the time frame for the parks fees recommendation. Clifton: Talking to Mr. Denmark sounded like everything was on line. I told him if he has any issues we can certainly convene in a short meeting in September to address whatever he might need and I guess for my benefit if we could just get an e-mail as to when Brian has taken that park fee issue to Council. So we're kind of kept up to date with that issue. Do you think that gives you enough time Dr. Garcia to put something together? Anything else? I kind of jumped ahead here but I guess the next meeting date is October 19 at 9:30am presumably the same location and is there any public participation from the one member of the public? Rhodes: The only thing that I would say is you guys are not gonna review the Capital Improvements Plan for parks as it says as you where going over that and you where talking about reviewing the Capital Improvement Plans but now your saying you're not going to for parks? Clifton: No, we'd like to see that I mean that was part of what the motion was awarded last month is that Rhodes: So you do need to see before it goes to Council Clifton: Yes, the way the motion well I mean Council can do whatever they wish but our recommendation was that okay, here's your park fee here's your target but it can't be implemented until such time as the CIP is adopted and that's part of that process the CIP would come to us first then to Council. Rhodes: So it does have to come to you then before it goes to Council. Clifton: Yes Kraft: Shouldn't it come in October Singer: We would like the opportunity to review the CIP and make sure the appropriate matching fee is CIAC Meeting, 8/17/06 16 Rhodes: It just sounded the way you said it that Brian takes it to Council that you weren't gonna see it before it goes to Council. Clifton: My understanding is what was gonna go to Council was our recommendation on the park fee increase but, was gonna be built into that resolution would be well this was the recommendation from the CIAC as part of that recommendation we don't implement this park fee to increase till such time as the CIP is addressed. Rhodes: It just seems kind of, like it's backwards because it's not looking at the CIP, assessing the impact fee, and then going to Council. Clifton: It is and that's been the argument I think for the past year I think that the Committee just got to the point where we gave staff what they wanted so they could move on with the (covet inaudible) pay you still have to do the CIP. Landers: My understanding from what the City saying was that until they had a park fee recommendation they wouldn't know how to make the (inaudible) to the CIP. So our way of getting around that was to make a recommendation about park fees so that they could make the final adjustments and then we would look at that and actually finalize the recommendation. (Inaudible everyone talking at the same time) Clifton: Yeah other wise it would be going round and round and round. Kraft: So when will we do that? That's a good question. Rhodes: Inaudible Garza: The future Capital Improvement Plan will be brought to you all before it goes to Council but the resolution that Brian is taking forward is just to establish what the park impact will be Clifton: Will be once the CIP (inaudible) Garza: And subject to the approval to the new CIP. Clifton: Exactly (Inaudible everyone talking at the same time) Singer: Is that right is he actually establishing the park impact fee at that point or is he recommending a targeted impact fee of that number and to develop a CIP based on that number that we would be able to approve. Garza: Yes Clifton: Yes Singer: Okay CIAC Meeting, 8/17/06 17 Clifton: Yes, it does seem a little backwards but it was obvious that we weren't going anywhere that was a method to say okay here's your target but you know you can't implement that fee until we have the CIP. So once, we start the CIP process on the parks it should fall in line then the Council presumably after our recommendation adopts the CIP that has the parks and once that's adopted that triggers the park fee increase. Singer: The park fee increase. Clifton: So really, the City can't increase park fees until the CIP is approved. Garza: Just kind of direction to staff to start looking at club level of service and what kind of facilities can be funded with that level of impact fees and until they know for sure that that's the level that everybody's happy with there not gonna be able to assets what kind of projects can be done with a that kind of level. (Inaudible) Singer: That's right it seems to me that impact fee can go up or down at this point and time based on what happens to that CIP. That ultimately gets approved is that correct? Garza: It will either hatch the egg or bring the chicken into the room something will happen and then the rest of the decision making will flow evenly from there given a known starting point. Singer: Right, I think that was what our objective was, was to get some sort of target started. Clifton;.. Give us a push I mean otherwise like I said we gonna be going around and around for another year. Where I loose two(2) or three (3) more members in the process. Kraft: So when will we see that again? Is that the CIP, is this resolution going the Council in their next meeting and then Garza: I don't think it will be going into their next meeting I think the anticipation is sometime this fall to get the before our Council September or October time line more than likely. Clifton: I'd like to see a preliminary CIP addressing parks at the October meeting if at all possible. Singer: That would be helpful. Clifton: Based on (inaudible) Singer: Based on the targeted parks fee Garza: And is that something that you all discussed before with Mr. Denmark or is that something Singer: I though that was pretty much the way we had left it. CIAC Meeting, 8/17/06 18 Landers: We had discussed that there are kind of in a tight time frame so I would say we would say we would have to see were we where at Kraft: Yeah I do too. Singer: Yeah Landers: In fact, that was one of my questions about weather; we could skip this September meeting (inaudible) Garza: Okay Clifton: If Brian's ready for something in September just give me a call and we'll schedule a meeting in September just for that item. Kraft: Yeah Clifton: Anything else from the public Councilor Trowbridge Councilor Trowbridge: Thank you for all serving All members: Thank you Clifton: Okay, so we have our next meeting date I believe we've addressed everything do I have a motion to adjourn. Singer: Motion to adjourn Kraft: Second Meeting adjourned at 10:43 am. Kirk Clifton CIAC Chairman CIAC Meeting, 8/17/06 19