Laserfiche WebLink
<br />000652 <br /> <br />2001-General Manager's Report <br />October 18 through November 15, 2001-Update <br /> <br />..........--..-------.-.------------------------------.-.----------------------------------- <br /> <br />Water Activitv Enterprise Re~ <br /> <br />Preferred Storage Options Plan <br /> <br />Implementation Committee Progress Report- As noted in the District <br />section of this report, the City of Aurora has signed an agreement with Otero <br />County and approved the District/Aurora IGA at their October 29 City Council <br />meeting, With that matter under control, I have turned my attention to addressing <br />the issues raised by the City of Pueblo (the City). The City wants all users of re- <br />operations and enlarged storage at Pueblo Reservoir to limit their associated <br />exchange operations at times when flows drop below 95 cfs as measured at the <br />Moffat Street gage, They also want support for their proposed recreation in- <br />channel diversion (350 to 1000 cfs) to accommodate recreation (see attached <br />news article). <br /> <br />I have met with the City's City Manager, Lee Evett, to begin discussions on the <br />matter. I have also set up a meeting between the City and the participants in the <br />PSOP (November 13) to work on the City's issues. I'm working on a concept <br />paper for a "Pueblo Flow Management Program" as a starting point for our <br />discussions with the City (see attached). I have discussed the concept paper with <br />several of our PSOP participants (see draft concept paper). Update: Due to a <br />scheduling conflict with the funeral for Ray Nixon, we rescheduled the meeting <br />with the City of Pueblo to November 28, 2001, 10:00 a.m. It is now apparent that <br />we need more time to deal with City of Pueblo issues. I recommend that the <br />Board grant District staff the authority to execute an additional stipulation with the <br />City of Pueblo in order to allow for more time to resolve their issues. The <br />stipulation with the City would not extend past January 21, 2002 unless the Board <br />takes such action. <br /> <br />Attached for your review is a draft of a scope of work for the Fry-Ark Project <br />Recreation and Land Use Study to be conducted by the Enterprise and Lake <br />County. I've also included an outline of a proposed IGA between Lake County <br />and the Enterprise to facilitate the study. I have shared these materials with the <br />Lake County Commissioners; we will discuss them in person sometime over the <br />next three weeks. I hope to have a draft IGA completed by our December Board <br />meeting. <br /> <br />1 <br />