Laserfiche WebLink
Howard: <br /> <br />Dreher: <br /> <br />was built in the 50's. It's now <br />approaching 40 years old and we have <br />begun to rebuild portions of the <br />project. We've been rebuilding the <br />canals and have completed rewinding <br />all of the pump motors at Granby. <br />The insulation in the windings had <br />begun to break down and there were <br />boltage leaks to the casing on the <br />pumps which became unacceptable. We <br />did rewind those motors at a cost of <br />$1.5 million apiece. There were <br />three of them. We're continuing <br />with efforts to modernize the <br />project and rebuild it, so it will <br />continue to function for another 40 <br />years. It's those purposes that the <br />mill levy is primarily directed <br />towards and is probably a factor <br />that the Board would have to <br />consider before they chose to drop <br />the mill levy. <br /> <br />It appears that people who are not <br />in the original six cities are <br />interested in this water. I assume <br />that the cost of that water is going <br />to be more expensive for the <br />newcomers than it was for the <br />original six cities. If that's the <br />case, wouldn't that tend over time <br />to equalize those payments? <br /> <br />The Conservancy District nor its <br />municipal subdistrict have any <br />control over what the water is <br />bought and sold for. It's on a free <br />market. We don't participate in the <br />sale of the water. <br /> <br />Howard: <br /> <br />Dreher: <br /> <br />With new cities getting involved in <br />this, are we shifting away from the <br />old uses, which were less expensive <br />to newer, high, more expensive uses? <br /> <br />Cities own 40% of the CBT water <br />shares and agricultural entities own <br />about 60%. But, agriculture <br />continues to use 70% of the CBT <br />water and cities use about 30%. The <br />difference is that a number of <br />cities have bought the CBT water at <br /> <br /> <br />