The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About03/24/2022 - Meeting Materials SLC PUBLIC UTILITIES ADVISORY COMMITTEE L_ Public Utilities Watershed Management Plan Update Protecting Our Drinking Water Supply Keep It Pure DON'T POLLUTE THE WATERSHED Plan Need & Context Protection of drinking water source Is The Purpose Of The Watershed Management Plan Keep It Pure DON'T POLLUTE THE WATERSHED Why Update The Plan Changes in the existing condition as compared to 1999 Change in environmental stressors Identification of trends Adaptive and proactive management Necessary to meet legal requirements of UDEQ DDW Drinking Water Source Protection rules High quality water + ongoing stewardship = Pure water for the future Plan Need & Context 00/ 0 <9> GOAL NEED VISION Protect the high-quality , Salt Lake City Department of , Develop sound policy that source of drinking water Public Utilities is required by the can be executed methodically supply that originates from Safe Drinking Water Act to by Salt Lake City Department our watershed areas. create and implement a plan of Public Utilities through that documents how our collaborative management source waters are protected. with trusted partners. The conditions in our watershed areas have changed and they are under pressure on multiple fronts.It's time to update the plan. "The eyes of the future are looking back at us, and they are praying for us to see beyond our time" -Local author and naturalist Terry Tempest Williams Project Team • SLCDPU - Laura Briefer, Marian Rice, Patrick Nelson, Holly Mullen, Sharon Turner • JW Associates - Jessica Wald, Brad Piehl • Wilkinson Ferrari & Co. - Brian Wilkinson, Cindy Gubler, Hilary Robertson • The Langdon Group - Siobhan Locke, Dianne Olson Anticipated Timeline February May Analyze Existing Conditions March May Public Input/Meetings Public comment is welcomed at any point Mid-March June in the process eve oping ecommen a ions April July Complete draft WMP Update WMP July September 0 August Public Engagement October N \j wam7w ra ii a ina Early October Public EngagemenNovember December ma Engagement Framework & Process Review management Review existing strategies & previous plan Identify changing stresses watershed conditions recommendations on the watershed Public Analysis integrating above inputs Input Public Input Develop draft recommendations - AMMII Finalize recommendations & release draft WMP 1 Pevise • • -te • . - - . - . Public Input (45-day adoption public review period) Engagement Structure & Meetings ¢_ F Plan Advisory Committee Meetings (3 total) Meeting 1 -Process Framework March 14, 3:00-5:00 pm PLAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE Stakeholder Committee Meetings (8 total) • Meeting 1 -Need, Characteristics & Framework March 24, 1:00-3:00 pm STAKEHOLDER • Meeting 2-Climate Change COMMITTEE PRESENTATIONS April 1 ], 1:00-3:00 pm • Meeting 3-Wildfire April 21, 10:00- 12:30 AD HOC PUBLIC • Meeting 4-Human Impacts WORK GROUPS OPEN HOUSES May 6, 10:00- 10:30 Public Open Houses (4 total) • Meeting 1 -Need, Characteristics, Framework,Areas Of Focus TBD Plan Area of Focus: SLC Drinking Water Supply Sources: cok I Red Butte Creek \ a a ?e a c \,It Lake Cuy (:e a a� Q' Watershed Mill Creek d1 Management Plan study area Area of Existing Water Sources Areas where Water Rights are held for Big CottortWooq Q Irrigation Use or Creek Future Drinking \/ Water / ❑City Creek f.nay Little ❑Parleys w""•r^ Cottonwood Creek ■Big Cottonwood ❑Little Cottonwood M sr. ❑Outside Wasatch Canyons-Deer Creek Reservoir&groundwater Unique Attributes of Salt Lake City and the Wasatch Front Proximity to urban core Short distance from source to tap Major recreational areas concentrated in small canyons Rapid population growth View of Wasatch from Sugar House Park Photo:JW,associates-Jessica Wald Driving Concept - Watershed Resiliency RESILIENCY DEFINITIONS RESILIENT WATERSHED CHARACTERISTICS General Definition Healthy riparian areas with native vegetation "The capacity of a system to absorb Intact wetlands disturbance and reorganize while undergoing Natural stream flows change so as to retain essentially the same Functional flood plains connected to streams function, structure, identity, and feedbacks." Holling, C.S. 1973. Resilience and Stability of Ecological Systems. Healthy, diverse upland vegetation Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics. Vol.4: 1-23. Wildfires that are in the natural disturbance Watershed Resiliency range (intensity & extent) The ability of a watershed to withstand or Minimal impervious or compacted cover recover quickly from a severe event such as Road density fires, floods or extreme weather. Well designed stream/road crossings Cornell Cooperative Extension Watershed Resilience - Importance for Water Supplier POST-FIRE ASPEN SPROUTING 4 - Ability to withstand disturbance = Reduction in risk to infrastructure P and service disruptions ' Rapid recovery from disturbance = is Reduction in long-term water ` treatment costs East Troublesome Fire,Grand County,CO Photo: JW Associates-Brad Piehl Higher source water quality Lower treatment costs Higher quality at the tap EXISTING WATER QUALITY A HEALTHY RIPARIAN ZONE Coming into the WTPs Water quality coming into the treatment plants has been consistently high, requiring minimal treatment prior to being delivered to the tap Leaving the WTPs Treated water leaving the WTPs exceeds all US EPA requirements (SLCDPU Water Quality Report, 2021 ) Looking to the Future There are warning signs of changes - one example is increasingly intense monsoon events e '' that result in delivery of high sediment loads to i the treatment plants, requiring closure Big'Cottonwoodl Canyon on Photo: Sharon Turner Critical concerns for watershed health •'• Climate Change ❖ Wildfire st� }aYl, •'• Human Influence Little Dell Reservoir Photo: JW Associates-Jessic Major Stressors on Watersheds • Increasing heat Dense forests Population growth • Prolonged drought High fuel loads Development • Decreasing snowpack Drying forests Recreation increases • Precipitation changes Ignition sources Forest Management How do we balance the stress of climate change and the desire for recreation and development with long -term protection of our watersheds and water supply? Lake Blanche,Big Cottonwood Canyon Photo: Sharon Turner r - �� •�$`� -_ §-. _.� - _ -- -'tip •Y' -d__.r'i .. - Thank you! Questions? Marian Rice SLCDPU Deputy Director Public 801 -483-6765 `ITS Utilities Patrick Nelson SLCDPU Watershed Program Manager Keep It Pure DON'T POLLUTE THE WATERSHED 801-483-6889 ■ ■ ■ ■ Public SLC PUBLIC UTILITIES Financial Review : Financial Dashboard(February 28, 2022) March 24, 2022 '., Public utilities Financial Dashboard As of February 28, 2022 Water Fund FY 22 Expense Detail ■ Personal Services 200,000,000 14.90% 180,000,000 ■ O&M 2.05 160,000,000 ■ Charges & Services 140,000,000 120,000,000 ' Debt Services 100,000,000 ■ Capital 80,000,000 25.00% Expenditures 60,000,000 40,000,000 20,000,000 55.67% 0 Revenues Expenses February 28, 2022 Change from FY21 Percent of Budget ■ FY 20-21 ■ FY 21-22 ■ FY 22 Bud YTD FY 22 Bud Operating Revenues $54,926,213 ($7,205,704) 60.36% Operating Expenses 46,202,964 2,444,315 57.30% Capital Expenditures 61,314,247 (5,220,204) 71.40% Amount Percent Time Total Expenses 107,517,211 (2,775,889) 64.57% Remaining Remaining Remaining February 28, 2022 Change from FY21 Percent Change 2020 Bond Funds $57,050,966 73.83% 48.40% Available Cash $71,241,740 ($34,460,313) -32.60% (Included in Cash) I jAccounts Receivable 2,816,419 399,169 16.51% '., Public utilities Financial Dashboard As of February 28, 2022 Sewer Fund FY22 Expense Detail 400,000,000 2.71% 0.53% 1.83% 3.18% 350,000,000 Personal Services O&M 300,000,000 ■ Charges & Services 250,000,000 Debt Service 200,000,000 — ■ Capital Expenditures 150,000,000 100,000,000 50,000,000 , 91.75%. 0 Revenues Expenses February 28, 2022 Change from FY21 Percent of Budget ■ FY20-21 ■ FY21-22 ■ FY22 Bud YTD ■ FY 22 Bud Operating Revenues $38,104,156 $3,990,221 65.01% Operating Expenses 13,348,528 1,399,526 53.86% Capital Expenditures 241,461,616 65,224,761 72.00% Amount Percent Time Total Expenses 254,810,144 66,624,287 70.75% Remaining Remaining Remaining February 28, 2022 Change from FY21 Percent Change 2020 Bond Funds $29,950,755 28.16% 48.40% Available Cash $39,222,238 ($47,964,103) -55.01% (Included in cash) Accounts Receivable 2,853,922 (116,095) -3.91% '., Public utilities Financial Dashboard As of February 28, 2022 Stormwater FY22 Expense Detail 30,000,000 19.25% 25,000,000 20,000,000 �— 1.00%■ Personal Services / ■ O&M 15,000,000 50.720 ■ Charges & Services Debt Services 10,000,000 L19.45%■ Capital Expenditures 5,000,000 9.58% 0 r Revenues Expenses February 28, 2022 Change from FY21 Percent of Budget Operating Revenues $8,030,490 $858,120 73.69% ■ FY20-21 ■ FY21-22 ■ FY22 Bud YTD FY 22 Bud Operating Expenses 4,295,078 314,138 46.98% Capital Expenditures 5,487,031 119,502 41.44% Amount Percent Time Total Expenses 9,782,109 433,640 43.70% Remaining Remaining Remaining February 28, 2022 Change from FY21 Percent Change 2020 Bond Funds $10,031,914 68.94% 48.40% Available Cash $22,728,817 $3,394,645 17.56% (Included in cash) Accounts Receivable 638,671 (250,617) -28.18% Public �= -X Utilities Financial Dashboard t ;T As of February 28, 2022 Street Lighting FY21 Expense Detail 7,000,000 15.18% 5.660 0 0.03% m Personal Services 6,000,000 ■ O&M 4.28% 441 ■ Charges & Services 5,000,000 Debt Services 4,000,000 ■ Capital Expenditures 3,000,000 2,000,000 74.85% 1,000,000 0 February 28, 2022 Change from FY21 Percent of Budget Revenues Expenses Operating Revenues $2,904,761 $220,772 69.78% ■ FY20-21 ■ FY21-22 ■ FY22 Bud YTD FY 22 Bud Operating Expenses 2,425,313 335,570 74.10% Capital Expenditures 457,156 6,287 20.41% Total Expenses 2,882,469 341,857 52.28% February 28, 2022 Change from FY21 Percent Change Available Cash $5,292,707 ($651,223) -10.96% Accounts Receivable 177,928 (36,647) -17.08% '., Public utilities Financial Dashboard As of February 28, 2022 Total Public Utilities February 28, 2022 Change from FY21 Percent of Budget Operating Revenues $103,965,620 ($2,136,591) 63.13% Operating Expenses $66,271,883 $4,493,549 56.24% Capital Expenditures $308,720,050 $60,130,346 70.69% Total Expenses $374,991,933 $64,623,895 67.62% February 28, 2022 Change from FY21 Percent Change Available Cash $138,485,502 ($79,680,994) -36.52% Accounts Receivable $6,486,940 ($4,190) -0.06% Delinquent Billings 1.35% Amount Percent Remaining Time Remaining 2020 Bond Funds $97,033,634 48.96% 48.40% (Included in Cash) '., Public Utilities Updates Series 2022 bond issue Includes sewer and water bonds Closing planned for June 2022 Next bond issue anticipated fall 2023 WIFIA Initial loan draw received Quarterly report due April 30 General Customer sewer rate evaluation Implementation of rate increases