The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About750993.tiff y / rk CL /a C41 ( QL 01 LARIMER - WELD REGIO L C UNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS C PHONE (303) 667-3288 ROOM 201 201 EAST 4th STREET LOVELAND, COLORADO 80537 LARIMER-WELD COG GOVERNING BOARD AGENDA Auditorium 7:30 p.m. Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District Wednesday 1250 North Wilson Avenue February 5, 1975 (One mile west of Lake Loveland on U.S. 34; then one block south on Wilson Avenue) Loveland, Colorado 80537 Page(s) 1. ROLL CALL 1 2. MINUTES OF JANUARY 8, 1975, MEETING 1 3. LARIMER-WELD REGIONAL HUMAN RESOURCES COMMITTEE 1 4. LARIMER-WELD AREA AGENCY ON AGING COMMITTEE 2 5. HEARING ON SECTION 208 OF THE FEDERAL WATER POLLUTION CONTROL ACT 2-3 6. PHASE I--AIR QUALITY MAINTENANCE PLAN FOR THE LARIMER-WELD AIR QUALITY MAINTENANCE AREA 4 C 7. MANPOWER PROGRAM (CETA) 4-7 8. A-95 #75-01-14-01/D.A. , 8th Judicial District/Burglary Prosecution Specialist 7-8 9. A-95 #75-01-14-02/D.A. , 19th Judicial District/Law Student Intern 8-9 10. A-95 #74-12-04-01/Colorado Migrant Council/Head Start for Migrant Children 9-11 11. A-95 1175-01-21-02/Wellington Urban Renewal Authority/Community Development 11-14 12. A-95 #75-01-13-01/Weld County Department of Human Resources/Weld County Head Start 15-16 13. RURAL HIGHWAY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM 16 14. A-95 #75-01-16-01/City of Greeley/Sewage System Improvement 16-19 15. A-95 #75-01-02-06/Ranchero Development Corp./Mountview Addition, Fort Lupton 19-22 16. A-95 #75-01-02-01/Weld School District RE-4/Windsor School and Community Park 23-24 C 17. A-95 #74-12-12-45/Colorado Division of Criminal Justice/1975 Colorado Comprehensive Plan for Criminal Justice 24-30 18. OTHER BUSINESS 30 19. ADJOURNMENT 'J (�Q 30 17 5-- 0 lc3 C ALTERNATIVE MOTIONS AVAILABLE TO GOVERNING BOARD ON A-95 TYPE REVIEWS 1. The Larimer-Weld Regional Council of Governments Governing Board has no comments to make on the (project) (program) (proposed pur- chase) (loan). 2. The Larimer-Weld Regional Council of Governments Governing Board has further interest in and/or questions concerning the (project) (program) (proposed purchase) (loan) and wishes to confer with the applicant. 3. The Larimer-Weld Regional Council of Governments Governing Board has reviewed the (project) (program) (proposed purchase) (loan) and has found it to be in accordance with (local) (regional)(planning) (goals and objectives) (policies) (regulations) and recommends that the (project) (program) (proposed purchase) (loan) be (funded) (authorized). C 4. The Larimer-Weld Regional Council of Governments Governing Board has reviewed the (project) (program) (proposed purchase) (loan) and has found it to be in accordance with (local) (regional) (planning) (goals and objectives) (policies) (regulations), but with the fol- lowing changes or conditions to be accomplished before the (pro- ject) (program) (proposed purchase) (loan) (is funded) (be authorized) : A. B. C. 5. The Larimer-Weld Regional Council of Governments Governing Board has found that the (project) (program) (proposed purchase) (loan) is not in accordance with (local) (regional) (planning) (goals and ob- jectives) (policies) (regulations) and (the loan) should not be (funded) (authorized) for the following reasons: A. B. C C. LARIMER - WELD REGIONAL COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS PHONE (303) 667-3288 ROOM 201 201 EAST 4th STREET LOVELAND, COLORADO 80537 GOVERNING BOARD AGENDA Auditorium 7:30 p.m. Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District Wednesday 1250 North Wilson Avenue February 5, 1975 (One mile west of Lake Loveland on U.S. 34; then one block south on Wilson Avenue) Loveland, Colorado 80537 1. GOVERNING BOARD--ROLL CALL: Glenn K. Billings, Chairman William Lopez L. W. "Corky" Colgrove John Michie John Cooper Roy Moser Jean Gaines, Vice Chairman Fred Nuss Gid Gates Mabel Preble Victor Jacobucci Glenn Prosser Vern Leuf Warren Wolaver Number Present: Number Absent: (If a Governing Board member cannot attend, please notify alternative member.) 2. MINUTES: Minutes of the January 8, 1975, meeting are enclosed. ACTION: 3. LARIMER-WELD REGIONAL HUMAN RESOURCES COMMITTEE: As you will recall, the Board motion on the establishment of a Human Resources Committee at the January 8 meeting directed the appointment of a committee to study the need for and the structure of the proposed Human Resources Com- mittee, and, if there should be a favorable determination by that committee that a COG Human Resources Committee should be established, then the special board committee was to serve also as a nominating committee for submitting a list of candidates to be considered for appointment to the new COG Human Resources Committee. The board committee--John Michie, Chairman, Mabel Preble and Corky Colgrove--have met several times and will submit their recommendations to the Board at the February 5 meeting. ACTION ON THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A COG HUMAN RESOURCES COMMITTEE (By-laws are enclosed as Appendix A): ACTION ON NOMINATIONS TO THE COG HUMAN RESOURCES COMMITTEE (if such a com- mittee is established) : 4. LARIMER-WELD AREA AGENCY ON AGING COMMITTEE: The COG board nominating committee of Fred Nuss, Chairman, John Cooper and Warren Wolaver are prepared to submit nominations to the Board at the Febru- ary 5 meeting for consideration. ACTION ON THE BY-LAWS OF THE LARIMER-WELD AREA AGENCY ON AGING COMMITTEE (By-laws are enclosed as Appendix B) : ACTION ON RESOLUTION CONCERNING MEMBERSHIP OF LARIMER-WELD AREA AGENCY ON AGING COMMITTEE (proposed resolution is enclosed as Appendix C): ACTION ON NOMINATIONS TO THE LARIMER-WELD AREA AGENCY ON AGING COMMITTEE: 5. HEARING ON SECTION 208 OF THE FEDERAL WATER POLLUTION CONTROL ACT: It was determined at the January 8 Larimer-Weld COG Governing Board meeting that the Larimer-Weld Region would seek "208" water quality management plan- ning designation. In order that the COG Board, local government officials and the public may learn more about "208" planning, Mr. Paul Ferraro, Chief, State and Local Planning, Environmental Protection Agency, has agreed to be present at the COG Board meeting to answer any questions on this important subject. Enclosed as Appendix D is the packet that was mailed to local governments, requesting them to adopt a resolution of intent "to join with Cother affected general purpose units of local government. . .in a coordinated �✓ waste treatment management system for the area." The work phases and tentative deadlines for the Larimer-Weld COG to meet in seeking "208" designation are as follows: Phase I--Designation of the L-WCOG as a "208" Agency Application for designation is initially made to the Governor. If the Governor designates, the designation is subject to approval by the EPA at both the regional (Den- ver) and headquarters (Washington) level. The require- ments for designation can be grouped into the following categories: a. Technical requirements related to the water quality problems in the Larimer- Weld Region. b. Requirements related to the L-WCOG's ability to administer the program. c. Requirements for public meetings in the region to discuss the proposed designation. ® d. Requirements for support from regional, county, and local agencies. The ability to meet these requirements must be documented and submitted to the Governor and, if he designates, to the EPA. The suggested sequence for documenting and meeting these requirements is presented as follows: Suggested Completion Activity Date a. Letter to county and local governments explaining pur- pose of "208" planning and information regarding time and place of public meetings. 1/24/75 b. Documentation of technical requirements. 1/29/75 c. Documentation of L-WCOG's administrative capabilities and previous experience in water quality planning studies. 1/29/75 d. Public meeting and COG Board meeting to discuss "208" planning. 2/05/75 Qe. Documentation of resolu- tions from local agencies. 2/21/75 f. Submittal of application to Governor's office. 2/28/75 Phase II--Documentation of Work Program, Costs, and Application for Grant Assistance The application for grant assistance must be based on (1) a well-defined work program which fully meets the requirements and intentions of "208" planning; and (2) a detailed estimate of the cost of completing the work program. The suggested sequence is presented below: Suggested Completion Activity Date a. Development of work program and schedule. 2/28/75 b. Development of cost esti- mates. 3/07/75 c. Submittal of program to EPA. 3/14/75 The deadline for the Larimer-Weld COG to receive a grant offer from EPA is June 30, 1975. ACTION, IF NECESSARY, ON AGENDA ITEM 5: -3- 6. PHASE I--AIR QUALITY MAINTENANCE PLAN FOR THE LARIMER-WELD AIR QUALITY MAINTENANCE AREA The Larimer-Weld Regional Council of Governments Governing Board determined at its November 22, 1974, retreat meeting that the COG and the county health departments would participate with the State Air Pollution Control Division in the preparation of an Air Quality Maintenance Plan for the Larimer-Weld Region. A copy of Phase I--Air Quality Maintenance Plan for the Region is enclosed as Appendix E. Also enclosed, as Appendix F, are the following: (1) letter dated November 8, 1974, from the Colorado Department of Health, (2) letter dated November 26, 1974, from the Colorado Department of Health, (3) letter dated December 11, 1974, from Larimer-Weld COG to Colorado Depart- ment of Health, (4) letter dated December 16, 1974, from Weld County Health Department to COG, and (5) letter dated January 15, 1975, from Larimer County Health Department to COG. The following individuals will answer any questions that the Board might have on this subject: Douglas A. Wigle, Acting Director, Larimer County Health Department; a representative of the Weld County Health Department; Tom Koglin, COG Transportation Planning Coordinator; and a representative from the State Air Pollution Control Division. ACTION ON AGENDA ITEM 6: 7. MANPOWER PROGRAM (CETA) : In a letter dated November 13, 1974, Wayne Thompson, Director of the State Division of Manpower, notified the Larimer-Weld COG that several other Councils of Governments had become contractors for Manpower services and invited us to consider this possibility. At the December Board meeting the Larimer-Weld COG referred this matter to the Human Resources Committee for study and recommendation. A letter dated December 31, 1974, was subsequently prepared requesting further information on Region Two's Manpower delivery system. This letter is reproduced below: December 31, 1974 Mr. Wayne J. Thompson, Jr. Special Assistant to the Governor Director, Division of Manpower 770 Grant Street, Room 208 Denver, Colorado 80203 Dear Mr. Thompson: In our recent research and discussions about a possible role the Larimer-Weld Regional Council of Governments might play in the distribution of Manpower funds, it was discovered that Region Two was originally allocated $533.750. The latest figures, however, released December 12, 1974, at the Balance of State Manpower Planning Coun- cil meeting, reflect that the Larimer-Weld Region is to -4- receive $415,427, distributed $209,270 to Larimer County and $206.157 to Weld County. This seems to reflect a dis- crepancy of $118,323. We would appreciate an explanation for this reduced level of funding. It is our understanding that two contractors exist within Region Two, one being Colorado Jobs for Progress, Inc./SER and the other Northern Colorado Consortium. We would appre- ciate having the following information on each of those con- tractors or program agents: 1. Total monies allocated for each. 2. Administrative costs for each program. 3. Program service costs and a definition of what those services consist of. 4. The number and type of enrollees to be served in each program. 5. The total monies to be paid to parti- cipants in the form of wages and/or benefits. The Larimer-Weld Regional Council of Governments wishes to insure that Manpower planning is in harmony with community planning. We shall look forward to meeting with your Area Coordinator in the near future to discuss mutually benefi- cial relationships. Sincerely, /s/Glenn K. Billings Chairman Mr. Thompson's reply of January 9, 1975, is as follows: January 9, 1975 Mr. Glenn K. Billings, Chairman Larimer-Weld Regional Council of Governments 201 East Fourth Street, Room 201 Loveland, Colorado 80537 Dear Mr. Billings: This letter responds to your letter of December 31, 1974. I appreciate the opportunity of providing you with complete © information regarding CETA funds and services planned and being delivered in Governor's Planning Region II. There are two program agents delivering CETA manpower services -5- in Region II; they are the Northern Colorado Consortium, Inc. , based in Greeley, and the Colorado Division of Employ- ment with offices in Greeley, Fort Collins and Loveland. The Northern Colorado Consortium, Inc. , is operating a work experience program for youth ages 14 through 21. There have been 81 in-school youth slots and 14 out-of-school youth slots allocated to Weld County. This represents a fund allocation of $105,329, of which $78,233 is being paid as wages to participants. $15,807 is the administrative cost of this program, and $11,339 is being spent giving services to participants. In Larimer County there are 79 in-school slots and 13 out- of-school slots representing total funds of $102,369, of which $75,998 is being paid as wages to participants, $15,356 for administrative costs, and $11,015 in providing services to participants. The Colorado Division of Employment is delivering a full manpower program to Region II which includes intake, orien- tation, counseling, employability, plan development, on the job training, Public Service Employment, classroom training and follow-up. There has been $206,157 allocated to Weld County, of which $16,492 represents administrative cost and $32,986 for pro- viding services to clients other than allowances paid for institutional training and wages paid to participants in on-the-job training and Public Service Employment. In Larimer County $209,270 has been allocated, of which $16,742 represents administrative costs and $33,483 is for providing services to participants. As of Monday, January 6, 1975, the total amount of CETA funds allocated to Region II is $623,175, of which $311,639 is being expended in Larimer County and $311,536 in Weld County. In addition, approximately $197,000 was spent in this area on a Summer Youth Program under CETA. The Colorado Jobs for Progress, Inc. , is not funded for direct manpower delivery in Planning Region II. There are three SER staff members co-located in Greeley, Loveland and Fort Collins Employment Service offices and one in the Greeley Area office. There has been no local targeting of participants served or the types of enrollees to be served by county in the Division of Employment contract because this will totally depend upon the type of manpower component that is utilized in the Region II area and the actual clients needing man- ' power assistance. -6- A copy of a Comprehensive Manpower Program News Release dated December 10, 1974, is forwarded giving you addi- tional information on our total effort throughout the Balance of State. We hope that this answers the points that you outline in your letter. If there are any other questions, please feel free to contact me. I am also available to discuss this in more detail upon your request. Finally, I look forward to working with you in providing the best possible services to clients in Governor's Planning Region II. Sincerely, /s/Wayne J. Thompson, Jr. Special Assistant to the Governor Director, Division of Manpower Coincidental with COG's investigation of the overall manpower program, the Weld and Larimer County Commissioners were notified of new Title VI (public ser- vice slots) monies available immediately to each county. Since a meeting between Mr. Thompson and the Commissioners was set for January 13, 1975, the COG Board at its January 8 meeting requested the Commissioners to also dis- cuss the overall manpower program at that time. At the January 13 meeting between the Commissioners and Mr. Thompson, however, most of the discussion time available was devoted to the public service employment issue. Each county decided to have the Title VI slots administered by the Division of Manpower's existing program agent (the State Division of Employment) with specifications for job placement designated by each county. Insufficient time was available to discuss the overall manpower delivery program. The State Division of Manpower, however, encouraged that modifica- tions or suggestions for change be made for inclusion in its current planning cycle. Staff is continuing to research the manpower issue. NO ACTION IS NECESSARY ON AGENDA ITEM 7: 8. A-95 #75-01-14-01 Applicant: District Attorney, Eighth Judicial District (Larimer County) (Contact: Stuart A. VanMeveren) Project: Burglary Prosecution Specialist Federal Program and Agency Under Which Assistance/Loan Is Being Sought: Program: 4-A Human Resource Development Agency: Law Enforcement Assistance Administration Project Location: Eighth Judicial District (Larimer County) ® Project Description--Nature and Purpose: Project Objectives: (1) to increase the number of guilty pleas entered in cases filed by the District Attorney's office to at least 65%; (2) provide -7- training seminars and classes for law enforcement officers; and (3) increase interaction and cooperation between the District Attorney's officers and law. How Will Implementation be Measured (Evaluation) : A comprehensive examina- tion and review of cases filed during the year to establish percentages of guilty pleas and convictions. A listing and outline of training seminars held during the year will be prepared along with critiques by officers attending the seminars. (Source: Project Summary Sheet prepared by N.E. Criminal Justice staff) Project Funding: Federal Grant $17,285 Local Matching Funds 11,523 TOTAL $28,808 Budget Summary: Grantee Total Federal Share-- Cost Share Cash Personnel $27,300 $16,380 $10,920 Travel 1,308 785 523 Operating Expenses 200 120 80 Total $28,808 $17,285 $11,523 Comment from Northeast Colorado Criminal Justice Planning Council Staff: "This is 2nd year funding. The planning staff recommends funding as requested. This is a high priority program. The project has expedited the handling of burglary cases and a high percentage of cases have been made on evidence since the grant began. Local law enforcement personnel have received excel- lent training by the burglary prosecution specialist." Comment from Northeast Colorado Criminal Justice Planning Council, Region Two: "Region Two Council action taken December 18, 1974. Council recommended funding by a 10 to 1 vote with 1 abstention." ACTION ON AGENDA ITEM 8 (use alternative motions included with this agenda as a separate sheet) : 9. A-95 #75-01-14-02 Applicant: District Attorney, 19th Judicial District (Weld County) (Contact: Robert N. Miller) Project: Law Student Intern Federal Program and Agency Under Which Assistance/Loan Is Being Sought: Program: 4-A Human Resource Development Agency: Law Enforcement Assistance Administration Project Location: Performed in 19th Judicial District (Weld County) . -8- Project Description--Nature and Purpose: Project Objective: To acquaint law students with the prosecutorial side of the criminal law and to take advantage of the law students' research and paralegal abilities as an aid to the office of the District Attorney. How Will Implementation be Measured (Evaluation) : The interns are required to submit reports on their activities and these reports and the District Attorney's evaluation will be provided to the Division of Criminal Justice on the quarterly reports. The standards and criteria used by the District Attorney for evaluation will be the interns' progress on the objectives stated. (Source: Project Summary Sheet prepared by N.E. Criminal Justice Planning Council staff) Project Funding: Federal Grant $2,484 Local Matching Funds 5,796 TOTAL $8,280* *Budget summary report prepared by N.E. Criminal Justice Planning Council staff reveals that all expenditures are personnel ($8,280) Comment from Northeast Colorado Criminal Justice Planning Council Staff: "Planning staff recommends funding as requested. This is a third year program. The program has been very successful in acquainting law students to all sides of law practices. Their aid has been invaluable to the ever-increasing workload of the District Attorney's office. The program has also enabled the District Attorney to hire competent and experienced deputy district attorneys." Comment from Northeast Colorado Criminal Justice Planning Council, Region Two: "Region Two Council action taken December 18, 1974. Council recommended funding by a unanimous vote with one abstention." ACTION ON AGENDA ITEM 9 (use alternative motions included with this agenda as a separate sheet): 10. A-95 #74-12-04-01 Applicant: Colorado Migrant Council (Contact: Ms Dorothy Passig or Henry Esquibel) Project: Head Start for Migrant Children Federal Program and Agency Under Which Assistance/Loan Is Being Sought: Program: Seasonal Head Start for Children ® Agency: U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, Child Development--Head Start • • CProject Location: See map below. __ • • i_ `Zp U - LJ • - t�O C N CI f J Z a - = ism — . .\--- 7. •":"4 : t:. _ # r . N f) o j , O r- • a 1 ii r y ' 1 ii t: 1 .'.2 V �:iL . p n � J � ,t �, 1 c• w as, '� 4 .a ._- a , ;.:_.!'8---� 411. O • o � N 'c d Y• yea'+:.. �i �. f a - c i<a m omc't+ t °.�,Z [4"' -i r w oa 4. ft i r, C r-t9 / q1 S- D:?-22-2 t XS...1 : .-. i i P -.C"- 1 Q f. t- r. .1 \j 11 a}.r`.f +1' N _ at r/` tii S�.-q O c c.- �13 , /L { 'O• 9 N :4 y c T U ` U' 'I a �V lam'' :l a �1i ( Sp's,/_ J n' • '1/4V-. � H ta • co el y .w LJrr- - v - I U N • l•c f \ •Ez I I t, S t f i51 ' i ,di 1,1 ni IS bl I _� ,- I C C a- O 57 •:f f a N r --1 :O u n • I t) GJ Ia U"-- ' O..-• P { / 5_1:j ri ci n.! , ©✓ Project Description--Nature and Purpose: Summer migrant, seasonal Head Start for children between the ages of 0-5 years. Health, nutrition, educational process for 8 hours for 5 days a week for 700 migrant, seasonal children. (Source: A-95 Notice of Intent submitted by Colorado Migrant Council) Project Funding: Federal Grant $252,588 TOTAL $252,588 Comment from Weld County Health Department Staff: "The Weld County Health Department has reviewed the program and has found it to be in accordance with local planning and recommends that the program be funded. "We have reviewed the information available and recommend the program be funded with the assurance that the Migrant Head Start coordinate with our program. "I also request a copy of the entire proposal submitted to facilitate this coordination with the Weld County Health Department." /s/Franklin D. Yoder, M.D. , Director Comment from Larimer-Weld Regional Council of Governments Staff: No one from the Colorado Migrant Council appeared at the January 8, 1975, meeting of the COG Governing Board, and, therefore, the COG Governing Board tabled any action on this A-95. Representatives from the Council have been contacted by both letter and telephone, requesting a representative to appear before the Board. ACTION ON AGENDA ITEM 10 (use alternative motions included with this agenda as a separate sheet): 11. A-95 #75-01-21-02 Applicant: Wellington Urban Renewal Authority (Contact: Wilson Leeper, Executive Director) Project: Community Development Federal Program and Agency Under Which Assistance/Loan Is Being Sought: Program: Community Development Program, 1974 Housing and Community Development Act Agency: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Project Location: The project includes the entire town of Wellington, which includes about 300 acres, 450 buildings and a population of approximately 1,200. -11- Project Description--Nature and Purpose: The project includes completion of street paving commenced in previous years, improvements to the Town's water system and structural rehabilitation. Community Development Plan Summary: Statement of Needs a. Inadequate Housing: The Town must continue to respond to the problem of inadequate housing. Despite the construction of more than 120 FHA moderate income units, 26 public housing units and numerous housing rehabilitations over the past four years, there are still an estimated 40 families needing housing assistance and an anticipated need for 40 new housing units annually of which approximately 15 will be needed for low and moderate income families. b. Slum and Blight Conditions: Although the Town has had a successful re- habilitation program over the past few years. there remain 24 housing structures in need of major rehabilitation or demolition. These struc- tures are scattered generally throughout the northern 3/4 of the com- munity and generally house low and moderate income families and/or elderly citizens who need assistance. Q c. Inadequate Streets: Approximately 20 percent of the Town's streets are unpaved. There is historical evidence supporting the contribution of unpaved streets toward deterioration of adjoining property. Additionally, the FHA rehab loan program is the most useful means of achieving rehabili- tation in the town and current FHA regulations preclude the issuance of loans for properties abutting unpaved streets. d. Inadequate Water: The Town's water supply is currently supplied by 3 wells. Current studies have found that the Town faces problems of water quality, storage and future supply. Analyses conducted by the Colorado Health Department indicate that the water supply currently contains above recommended levels of dissolved solids, hardness and sulphates, and exceeds the maximum allowable level of Selenium. Other studies indicate that current delivery and storage of water will be inadequate within a few years to supply a required peak demand of 750 GPM. e. Inadequate Wastewater Treatment: At the present time, the Town's waste- water treatment facility will not comply with 1978 State Effluent Stan- dards. Deficiencies have been noted in the system's aeration basin, lift station and existing trunk lines. f. Inadequate Park, Landscaping and Community Facilities: THe Town pre- sently does not have a fully developed local park, some of the Town's areas are relatively devoid of vegetation, and there is no community cen- ter available to its citizens. Long-Term Objectives a. To remove and deter slum and blighting conditions. -12- b. To develop adequate water and sewage treatment facilities capable of accommodating the existing and anticipated increased population of the Town. This goal is directed at discouraging the development of special utility districts, encouraging peripheral areas to annex to the Town, promoting an orderly future growth, and improving the Town's tax base. c. To provide competent and sound management of the community's public affairs consistent with population size and services required. d. To develop a park, recreation and open space program including a community center and encompassing Box Elder Creek. e. To establish and maintain a street tree planting program. This goal is designed to provide vegetation in new areas and replace existing dead and/or diseased trees. f. To encourage the development of the Town's core area with commercial and other facilities needed by the Town and surrounding areas. Short-Term Objectives a. Adequate Housing: Over the next 3 years it is the Town's objective to provide adequate housing for the current inventory of 40 families needing assistance, and to secure construction or rehabilitation of an additional ® 120 units of housing of which approximately 50 units will be for low and moderate income families--all under the HUD Section 8 program or FHA programs. b. Slum and Blight Removal: The 3-year objective is to remove the 24 hous- ing structures from the substandard category through rehabilitation or demolition, to continue monitoring the Town's housing stock for evidence of deterioration, and to employ remedial actions where appropriate. c. Street Paving: During the next 3 years the Town's objective is to com- plete a paving program for all streets to encourage property rehabilitation and conservation and to reduce dust pollution. d. Water System Improvements: Over the next 3 years it is the Town's objec- tive to improve the quality and quantity of water by improving treatment facilities and storage capacities needed to protect the community's health and safety and to augment the psychological incentive to maintain property values and housing conservation activities. e. Wastewater Treatment Improvements: The Town's 3-year objective is to make necessary improvements to the system to comply with 1978 State Effluent Standards. Activities will include rehabilitation of trunk lines and improvements to the treatment facility including modification of the effluent line, effluent structure and aeration system, and im- provements to the chlorination system and power supply. f. Park, Landscape and Community Facilities: As an objective for the 3- year period the Town hopes to initiate activities leading to the im- -13- provements of park and recreation space and street landscaping, and the development of a community facility. Initial activities include the pur- chase of a park and community facility site in connection with a site for water treatment facility improvements, and a needs and cost analysis to achieve the remainder of the objectives. (Provided by Wilson Leeper, Executive Director, Wellington Urban Renewal Authority) Project Funding: Federal Grant $201,000 Total $201,000 Community Development Budget: Program Activity Amount Acquisition of Real Property $ 30,000 Public Works, Facilities, Site Improvements 97,440 Clearance, Demolition, Rehabilitation 1,500 Planning and Management Development 20,100 Administrative 36,000 SUBTOTAL $185,040 Contingencies and/or Unspecified Local Option Activities 15,960 TOTAL PROGRAM ACTIVITY COSTS $201,000 Comment from Larimer County Planning Commission Staff: "The Larimer County Planning Department has reviewed the program and has found it to be in accordance with local and regional planning and goals and objectives and recommends that the program be funded and authorized. "The Larimer County Planning Staff has reviewed the proposed Community Development program for the Town of Wellington and recommends that the program be approved and funded. "The Town of Wellington, in the past, was a typical rural Colorado Community which had a desire to survive but needed direct financial assistance. Because of the support of the townspeople in general and the specific endeavor of certain individuals in particular, the Town of Wellington was authorized an Urban Renewal and Housing Authority. Since the establish- ment of an Urban Renewal and Housing Authority, the Town of Wellington has maintained an excellent record of housing rehabilitation, improving muni- cipal services, improving the economic status, and greatly increasing the community spirit. The proposed program should further assist in Wellington' s progress and is in compliance with local and regional planning goals and objectives." /s/Richard L. Marcus, Community Development Planner © ACTION ON AGENDA ITEM 11 (use alternative motions included with this agenda as a separate sheet) : -14- 12. A-95 #75-01-13-01 Applicant: Weld County Department of Human Resources (Contact: Thomas Chagolla) Project: Weld County Head Start Federal Program and Agency Under Which Assistance/Loan Is Being Sought: Program: 13.600 Child Development Head Start Program Agency: U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, Office of Child Development Project Location: Weld County (location of centers--Ault (Home Start), Dacono, Greeley, Kersey, Platteville and Windsor) Project Description--Nature and Purpose: Weld County Head Start entails the following: a. Total enrollment 210 (1) 189 low income 21 over income (2) Ethnic breakdown: 155 Chicano 54 Anglo 1 Vietnamese (3) There are 66 families in Head Start receiving ADC. (4) There are 46 working mothers in the program. b. Results from the DDST have determined that 25% of our children are special needs. The special needs identified have been emotional, hearing and speech, culturally unexposed, educationally retarded, psychological problems because of the home background, and various learning disabilities. These special needs problems have not yet been professionally diagnosed, but they will be during the course of the year by a professional staff at UNC, the health clinics and private physicians. c. Head Start in Weld County operates a full working day, and 32 weeks with the children. d. Employed are 14 teachers and 14 paid teacher aides. e. We have in Weld County a modified Home Start program with 17 children enrolled. Particular attention in the application is given to the Ault Modified Home Start Program, educational objectives, mental health objectives, medical and dental objectives, social service program objectives and parental involvement program objectives; and these objectives can be cited at the COG Board meeting if desired. (Source: Application submitted by Weld County Head Start) -15- Project Funding.: Federal Grant $257,586 Local Matching Funds 64,397 $321,983 ACTION ON AGENDA ITEM 12 (use alternative motions included with this agenda as a separate sheet) : 13. RURAL HIGHWAY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM: The COG Transportation Planning Coordinator, working with the COG Human Resources Field Representative, representatives of the Weld County Department of Human Resources and representatives of Care-A-Van, has drafted a pro- posal (Appendix G). The proposal calls for the purchase of six vans for the Weld County Depart- ment of Human Resources. Five of these are standard vans, three to replace the existing low-capacity vans, one to be operated to increase service and one to be used as a stand-by. The sixth van will have the capability of carrying wheelchair-bound persons. Care-A-Van will receive three vehicles; two will be operated and the third will be a stand-by. Care-A-Van is also requesting funds to operate the vehicles during the one-year demonstration period. The draft proposal (Appendix G) is not complete,primarily because there has not been time to gather all of the information from the agencies. Also, a substantial revision will be necessitated by a recent determination that service to, from and within areas of less than 50,000 population (1970 official Census) qualifies for funding under this program. The result will be an incorporation of data relating to existing "urban" services within Greeley and Fort Collins now provided by the agencies. It also appears that the Weld County proposal will include a request for funding to upgrade the existing communication system so that contact can be maintained with vehicles providing rural area service. Representatives from the COG staff, Weld County Department of Human Resources and Care-A-Van will present further comments to the Board at the February 5 meeting. ACTION ON AGENDA ITEM 13: 14. A-95 #75-01-16-01 Applicant: City of Greeley (Contact: Peter Morrell, City Manager) Project: Sewage System Improvements Federal Program and Agency Under Which Assistance/Loan Is Being Sought: Program: 66.015 Municipal Wastewater Treatment Works Con- struction Grants Agency: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency -16- • CProject Location: See map below. _ . , I _2 , - . � ti Y5 • W F i:g Y 6 J on W ti N r - ' LL 3 , T _ a yi { 1--,_!; ` f ' ti -... .:.„,ii, r.- 7 fi S 3I -• •:.-- - E , v, 1=f v�' f ,,1 o ` ai-� �` . { . / r�l -i s.�q� dpi 1� i X14 -. \ , i-"' �' it- /,.Y _ - { mss- - f��' .17,77,7",._I-71, "` ' / ' � I` - ). 1 u ..'. 4 Is. , T -r " ter ',} g 1 \ i / �i l�n . C -51_ I I 4. 1 ' I. ' 1 1;--per ''` l' I i/1�� 1�1 / ‘ / '. -1•-. _ 1 7 1 r/ I �1 I t • / 1 I ` I 1 li ♦, • . , 4 R F \ • __ _ J_ _ _ 7 I I • 11 L \;17- -t- _- — .� •, Project Description--Nature and Purpose: The existing sewer utility system of the City of Greeley will be upgraded and expanded in order to comply with existing and future state and federal effluent discharge standards. This new Greeley metropolitan system will incorporate existing facilities of the Evans and Hill 'N Park Sanitation Dis- tricts. These two Districts are located within the study area boundaries designated by the Colorado Department of Health, Water Quality Control Divi- sion. (Source: Notice of Intent filed by City of Greeley) Project Funding: Federal Grant $4,520,0001 State Matching Funds 1,000,000 Local Matching Funds 1,380,0002 TOTAL $6,900,000 1Step 1 Grant Funds of $82,000 previously applied for are included here. 2Step 1 Local Matching Funds of $28,000 are included here. Comment from Weld County Health Department: 'The Weld County Health Department has reviewed the project and has found it to be in accordance with local regulations and recommends that the project be authorized." /s/Glen E. Paul, Director, Environmental Health Services Comment from Weld County Planning Commission: "The proposal improvements to the City of Greeley sewage system which will eventually incorporate Evans and Hill 'N Park Sanitation Districts is in keeping with the 303 Basin Plan for this area, which recommends consolidation of these districts. In that these proposed improvements will upgrade the system to comply with state and federal effluent discharge standards, and that facility costs will be minimized because of consolidation, the project is in keeping with the Weld County Comprehensive Plan, which states that the Board of County Commissioners is not only responsible to the public to see that these facilities are adequately supplied and that they meet certain standards, but also to minimize the costs of providing these facilities. "The Weld County Planning Commission staff has reviewed the project and has found it to be in accordance with local planning and recommends that the project be funded." /s/Roy Jost, Planner Comment from Evans Sanitation District: "Evans Sanitation District has reviewed the project and has found it to be in accordance with local goals and objectives, but with the following change or condition to be accomplished before the project is funded: that one of the specific plans (A through D) as discussed within the wastewater management ® facilities plan for the Greeley region be selected by representatives of all governmental agencies within the proposed service area. -18- "Pursuant with a previous letter dated May 9, 1974, from the Evans Sanitation District to Mr. Ten Eyck, Chairman, Colorado Water Quality Control Commission, the sanitation district board unanimously approved a motion supporting Greeley as the lead agency in implementing the 201 Program step 1 facilities plan. After reviewing the "Wastewater Management Facilities Plan" and the. . ."Notice of Intent to Apply for Federal Aid," the Evans Sanitation District Board unanimously agreed that the submitted "Notice of Intent to Apply for Federal Aid" should be delayed until all governmental agencies within the proposed service area select one of or a combination of the specific plans as described within the facilities plan for systematically developing an ultimate sewerage system for the proposed service area. This plan should provide the districts serving or capable of serving the areas identified as South Platte I, II, and III and the Ashcroft Draw areas the opportunity to evaluate interim phasing of their sewerage system and to determine if interim phasing of their sewerage systems would be more economical and feasible than construction of the inter- ceptor system discussed within the application. Evaluation of interim phasing would take into consideration current growth trends within the area, existing construction costs, the development of new wastewater treatment methods, and the ability of the residents/districts to be served by the proposed system to finance the modifications. This would provide for the expansion/improve- ment of the sewerage facilities as required and within the financial capa- bility of those being served. Connection to a regional facility would then occur when needed and without causing a financial burden on the residents to be served. "In summary the Evans Sanitation District requests that the. . .application be delayed because implementation of the proposed project as described within the "Notice of Intent to Apply for Federal Aid" will result in the abandon- ment of adequate sewerage facilities and may cause a severe financial burden on those residents to be served by the proposed regional system." /s/Paul Etherton, President, Evans Sanitation District; and William G. Hendrickson, District's Engineer, Hogan & Olhausen ACTION ON AGENDA ITEM 14 (use alternative motions included with this agenda as a separate sheet) : 15. A-95 #75-01-02-06 Applicant: Ranchero Development Corporation (Contact: David C. Conner) Project: Mountview Addition in Fort Lupton Federal Program and Agency Under Which Assistance/Loan Is Being Sought: Program: Section 502--Rural Housing Loans Agency: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Farmers Home Admin- istration Project Location: See maps on pages 20 and 21. C -19- • h I / d (2. ,9 I.L Cb / 5 U• D960 1 0 © c t t C 3 al trx P IN I rl1-: /^'// iii i • of • ---------\0 el o• , . r ms mss. 1 4\. i Z.............j............r...„:3 : i • • loo• ____ _ �{ ___ __•4 ISM • sour I COM r/ ,r-- • II / M_ j 1 71 $ 1 1 �I r •1 .6 I a r�1 —i:,- © • - - -- . • . .• • rn---., II i —_fr` .. 1ii r• ••• •. •I •�llSsiJ ?• • .••� *.tll x.71 ••_S_4 II ,I II + a• • •u •..; •rH y • •• as .a-1 �.++re -20- MP \ .1 9J. :\ Y ), c x , `lei a �o ? t V • /•••• • \r 1 X14995 Ac I .t ,•11 .`•y•-)r^• 1 X994 Ill.. .. �:•` �•�1 •.•. • r . • 0= t , . P ��_ �``"• 8 `m .i () \ , 1 ` 11 �+ • r J I • l0 // :• a ;":50.4:..5'‘):„.3 ''a ' _ \ \ 1 �� r , I' 1 1 s r :y�st `ems 1 • \ _ I /I I _I 1 e{l 4•., /A,rP 14,1 �1\• u 1 /2 c or ..i.:906 f aryl • _ . '• . - ••••7•7" ""••••••••••"7"•••••••••••'••••••••• r •YiJ 91m`d �3__ 11 / -I ;'. e 1_ Fort Lupton i. • ( K j ` \______ (nv w .lEM 4'1141 1 ) • ` .�-r_ ` J I 1 r \ I / 1 • \ U »Jso• � BWmdmill I /__ _ _ U \ \ it JI I ;• . / , `i (1 • 1/4, --, I Ar ex. Oucric‘ _ ., ..„,. ..___ _ .. =, _ apirtzv2A, .$:_..,;==.- - ' • • • V • • • � •J li / I OS \-` \ i. / i I .9i'J 14 t 4 /I 1, - 1 - 21- Project Description--Nature and Purpose: The total project outlined in black on Map 2 represents approximately 1,000 acres. The area outlined in orange on both maps represents the acreage sub- mitted for FHA approval. The area outlined in green on Map 2 represents a projection of 265 acres--residential zoned. Incorporated within the residen- tial property will be 80 acres dedicated to the City of Fort Lupton to be used for a golf course. On the balance of the 1,000 acres, we are requesting for estate zoning, commercial zoning, office zoning, and industrial zoning. However, the program of future development on everything except the 80-acre plat submitted to FHA and shown outlined in orange is at a very preliminary stage of approval from the City. The purpose of requesting for FHA approval on the 80 acres is to receive help with the financing. Our desire is to keep the land costs and housing costs as low as possible to furnish the community with dwelling costs in the middle $20,000 range. A definite need for this priced housing has been shown by the community. With the help of FHA, a family can afford to buy a house; otherwise, the closing costs, down payment and high interest will deny that family the right to own a house. (Source: Notice of Intent filed by applicant) Loan: 9-1/2%, 33-year term and income eligibility at present $12,900, adjusted. Comment from Weld County Health Department: "The Weld County Health Department has reviewed the loan and has found it to be in accordance with local regulations and recommends that the loan be authorized." /s/Glen E. Paul, Director, Environmental Health Services Comment from Weld County Department of Engineering_: "The Weld County Department of Engineering has reviewed the project proposed and has found it to be in accordance with local planning policies and recommends that the project be authorized." /s/Richard L. Straub, County Engineer Comment from Weld County Planning Commission: A verbal report on this A-95 will be made at the February 5 meeting by representatives of the Weld County Planning Commission staff. Comment from City of Fort Lupton: Comments were solicited from the City on January 15, 1975, but none have been received to date. Perhaps the Board member from the City of Fort Lupton can provide comments on this particular loan. ACTION ON AGENDA ITEM 15 (use alternative motions included with this agenda as a separate sheet) : a -22- C 16. A-95 #75-01-02-01 Applicant: Weld School District RE-4 (Contact: Jack C. Hale) Project: Windsor School and Community Park Development Federal Program and Agency Under Which Assistance/Loan Is Being Sought: Program: Land and Water Conservation Fund Agency: U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Outdoor Recreation; and Colorado State Parks and Outdoor Recreation Project Location: See map on below. ----- ------- ' ------ -------- --- ---° ----r— I „ 9 S rn N - it 8 . L �.... 1. • Y ---- a OSt0 ^ ;Avery N co�7\ 1 \.7,9R� Rp3E M ; \,...... -1-� _ \moo \i PhL �ql 1 17 461.6 <- :4 4 id 6N ) I\. Windsor Luke ••.\\ \ p HIq in. ._s-1 >ra \ .S11r1 I I xc'I E,-11:17-77:747"v6° i� . . :� kJ I. h I i I !i ;",--i II V '\\ — I I '�i I riot 7a r 7 4/ 20 •A - " 1 c�r ; 22 YH Y N Vv . .1 , .. ,i. , i Svi,Jee0e • . IV -23- • • Project Description--Nature and Purpose: Developing the area east and north of the new high school for school and community recreational complex. This would include leveling and site grading, installation of a sprinkler system to operate from existing irrigation well, landscaping with desired grass and development of recreational fields. (Source: Notice of Intent submitted by applicant) Project Funding: Federal Grant $35,500 Local Matching Funds 35,500 TOTAL $71,000 Comment from Weld County Planning Commission Staff: Comments on this A-95 will be delivered verbally by the Weld County Planning Commission staff at the February 5 Board meeting. Comment from Town of Windsor: Comments on this project were solicited from Town of Windsor; however, no response was received. Perhaps the member of the Board from the Town of Windsor can comment on this project at the February 5 Board meeting. © ACTION ON AGENDA ITEM 16 (use alternative motions included with this agenda as a separate sheet) : 17. A-95 #74-12-12-45 Applicant: Colorado Division of Criminal Justice Project: 1975 Colorado Comprehensive Plan for Criminal Justice Federal Program and Agency Under Which Assistance/Loan Is Being Sought: Program: Law Enforcement Assistance (Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968, as amended) Agency: U.S. Department of Justice, Law Enforcement Assis- tance Administration Project Location: Entire State of Colorado. Project Description--Nature and Purpose: The plan is a 500-plus page document which contains the following: (1) an overview of the State Criminal Justice Division, Regional Planning Councils, etc. , (2) criminal justice administration in Colorado, (3) crime in Colorado; (4) crime problems in each of the State Planning and Management Regions; (5) high crime incident areas--metro areas in Colorado, (6) criminal justice system's response to crime, (7) the 1975 Action Plan describing eight func- tional categories and (8) federal guidelines compliance In regard to Regional Planning Councils and staff, the following is excerpted from the plan: -24- "The State Council on Criminal Justice receives regional input on local agency requests for LEAA funding from the regional planning councils. There is a council in each of Colorado's 13 planning regions. "After careful statistical analysis of each, Colorado coun- ties were grouped on the basis of common geographic and economic ties and a common relationship to a major city. The 13 regions thus formed offset fragmentation and dupli- cation of service by serving as unified bases for infor- mation; by permitting coordination of federally sponsored and operated programs at substate levels; and by permitting coordinated, maximum use of local resources for problem solving. "Each regional criminal justice planning council has a membership composed of a majority of locally elected policy-making officials, such as county commissioners or city council members. "Regional criminal justice planning council members are responsible for reviewing grant proposals which originate in their region, and for judging the merits of each in light of regional priorities. Council members also assist in formulating a criminal justice plan for improvement of the delivery of criminal justice services within the region. "Planners, or regional planning directors, provide pro- fessional planning support to the councils. Most serve more than one council. "Each planner is responsible for objectively monitoring action grants and reporting the results of these evalu- ations to DCJ. He ensures that the interests and needs of all parts of the region are considered by council, as well as providing needed technical assistance to sub- grantees and helping to prepare proposals for review. The relationship between the central cities and the more rural parts of the region receives special attention from the planner. Finally, the planner takes the role of an advocate for change--significant improvement--in the delivery of criminal justice services and the prevention of crime and delinquency in his region." The key part to the plan is the 76 pages devoted to the 1975 Action Plan which breaks down into eight functional categories, e.g. , communications, records and systems, etc. (which are listed in detail in the Action Grant description below). It appears that each of these functional categories and ® sub-categories identifies a problem and how a solution will be implemented and funded. -25- Program Funding_ (a detailed breakdown is set forth below) : APPLICATION FOR ACTION GRANT--P.L. 90-351 AS AMENDED BY P.L. 91-644 ANU P.L. 93-83 U. S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE ATTACHMENT Page 1 of4 sp 4 LAW ENFORCEMENT ASSISTANCE List of Action Programs for which ADM I N I ST RAT ION Grant Support is Requested STATE: Colorado (Derived from Program Descriptions in the State Plan Annual Action Program) PART PART E State, State, Page Estimated LEAA Local LEAA Local Ref. Short Program Title Total Federal and other Federal and other in and No. if an Cost Share Share Share Share Plan lA Legislation $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 345 16 Planning, 345 Evaluation & Research Units 412,453 371 ,208 41 ,245 0 0 2A Communications 349 Records � Consolidation 510,703 459,633 51 ,070 0 0 26 Criminal Justice 354 Information Systems 1 ,291 ,756 970,580 107,843 192,000 21 ,333 3A Public 361 Awareness/ Prevention 208,115 187 ,303 20,812 0 0 4A Prevention/ 366 Reduction of Rape 60,131 54,118 6,013 ' 0 0 C _9A_ C 4PPLICATION FOR ACTION GRANT--P.L. 90-351 AS AMENDED BY P.L. 91-644 AND P.L. 93-83 F•`, ' U. S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 4 ATTACHMENT A page 2 of 4 3 F'ol LAW ENFORCEMENT ASSISTANCE '�1A1 ADMINISTRATION List of Action Programs for which �,,.° Grant Support is Requested STATE: Colorado (Derived from Program Descriptions in the State Plan Annual Action Program) - PART C PART E State, State, Page Estimated LEAA Local LEAA Local Ref. Short Program Title Total Federal and other Federal and other in and No. (if any) Cost Share Share Share Share Plan 4B ?revlteti0n/ .S $ IS $ $ 369 © Reduction Robber4 Burglary 742,804 _ 668,524 74,280 0 0 4C Prevention/ ! 372 Reduction of Aggravated Assault 30,556 27,500 3,056 0 0 40 Organized _ 374 Crime 178,950 161 ,055 17 ,895 0 0 4F Consumer 376 Fraud 104,444 94,000 _ 10,444 0 0 I 4F Narcotics ' 378 (Major) 433,333 390,000, 43,333 0 0 4G Laboratory _ 381 Analysis _ 55,556 50,000 5,556 0 0 4H Manpower 382 Consolidation 77,778 70,000 7,778 0 0 C -27- C . 8PPLICATION FOR ACTION GRANT--P.L. 90-351 AS MENDED Ef P.L. 91-644 AND P.L. 93-83 e____— II '" {c U. S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE ; `a TTACHifENT A Page 3 of 4 ( � LAW ENFORCEMENT ASSISTANCE ; List of fiction Programs for which ,t/ ADMINISTRATION �+ Grant Support is Requested „ STATE: Colorado (Derived from Program Descriptions in the State Plan :,nool Action Program) — PART E II' PART F State, State, Page Estimated LEAA Local ' LEAA ' Local Ref. Snort Program Title Total Federal and other rrFeceral rand other in and No. (if any) Cost Share Share r: Share ! Snare Plan _A.._J *trial Perso$ $ $ ;� S 386 nel Training 116,667 105,000 11 .667 0 0 56_ Peace Officer lI 388 Training 186,790 168,111 18,679 I 0 0 5C Corrections 39n Personnel Training 90,000 81 .000 4.000 0 0 6P, Pr,:secution 393 ;C . in. & Interns 67,316 60,584 6,732 j 0 0 6a Public Defende- i 395 Intern Proq. 25,000 22,500 2 ,500 0 0 7A Juvenile 400 Prevention 138.692 124 .823 13.869 0 0 76 Juvenile 403 Diversion 381 ,684 343,516 38,168 0 0 70 Juvenile Can- 405 munity based Corrections 522,249 345,024 38t336 ! 125.000 13,889 -28- • • c — . - -- a•`` .1 U. S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE !i Al - ' 'NT ,: - CONT1NUATIO PAGE � klj LAW ENFORCEMENT ASSISTANCE I ! 4 1� 4,i ADMINISTRATION ' ' `o:;'e o. of II STATE: Colorado PART C 1 _ P T E Estimated LEAA State,local FiAA 'State Page RSnort Program Title Total Federal and other !Local nf. g ,��•:cral �arid other in Ond no. (if any) , Cost Share Share �' rr 'Share Nan za r,r,f?nprnpnt , s ,$ I$ ,� ` . 409 Based Corrections _ _� _ Juvenile 222 ,222 0 0 , 200 ,-);"; 22,222 814. Diversion from _; 411 Institutional Confinement • i (Adult) 535.556 482,rff 5t 55F La 88 Confinement j 415 eased Treatment 5ehavilitation I (Adult) 104,667 94,200 110,467 1' 0 0 8C Reintegration i j_ 417 (Adult) 174,802 42,321 4 ,703 115,000 12,778_ L_ _ Corl�lett below on last continuation pale only: TOTAL 6472,22a 5,373,000 591,002 t.';', :c►] 70,222 C —29 Comment from Larimer-Weld Regional Council of Governments Staff: In view of the fact that the COG Chairman has established a special ad hoc committee to examine the relationship between the COG and the Northeast Colorado Criminal Justice Planning Council, it is suggested that the Board adopt the following motion: The Larimer-Weld Regional Council of Governments Governing Board has held a general review of the 1975 Colorado Compre- hensive Plan for Criminal Justice and establishes a special committee of the Governing Board to confer further with the Northeast Colorado Criminal Justice Planning Council staff on the plan. ACTION ON AGENDA ITEM 17 (use alternative motions included with this agenda as a separate sheet): 18. OTHER BUSINESS 19. ADJOURNMENT: ACTION: C -30- LARIMER - WELD REGIONAL COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS o ='G' PHONE (303) 667-3288 r'4P.'�'. ROOM 201 201 EAST 4th STREET LOVELAND, COLORADO 80537 MINUTES LARIMER-WELD REGIONAL COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS GOVERNING BOARD January 8, 1975 The regular monthly meeting of the Larimer-Weld Regional Council of Governments Governing Board was called to order by Chairman Glenn K. Billings at 7:30 p.m. , Wednesday, January 8, 1975, at the offices of the Northern Colorado Water Con- servancy District, 1250 North Wilson Avenue, Loveland, Colorado. 1. ROLL CALL: Governing Board members present were: Chairman Glenn K. Billings, L. W. "Corky" Colgrove, John Cooper, Jean Gaines, Gid Gates, Vern Leuf, William Lopez, John Michie, Roy Moser, Fred Nuss, Mabel Preble, Glenn Prosser and Warren Wolaver. Governing Board member Harry Ashley was absent. Staff present were: Dick MacRavey, Director, L-WCOG; Alice Mack, Human Resources Field Representative, L-WCOG; Tom Koglin, Transportation Planning Coordinator, L-WCOG; Walter Weese, Director of Planning for the Elderly, L-WCOG; Dwight Whitney, Planning Director, Larimer County Planning Commission; Jan Schroeder, Planner, Larimer County Planning Commission; Roy Jost, Planner, Weld County Planning Commission; Joe Hellewell, Legal Counsel, L-WCOG; and Cheryl Shikles, Executive Secretary, L-WCOG. 2. MINUTES: William Lopez moved, and Mabel Preble seconded, that the reading of the minutes be dispensed with and that they be approved as written. Motion carried unani- mously. 3. ELECTION OF COG GOVERNING BOARD OFFICERS AND EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEMBERS: Warren Wolaver, chairman of the nominating committee for 1975 officers, reported that his committee recommended that the 1974 officers be reelected to their respective offices (Chairman Glenn Billings, Vice Chairman Jean Gaines and Secretary-Treasurer Mabel Preble) for 1975; and, furthermore, that Gid Gates and John Michie be appointed, along with said officers, to the new Executive Committee of the Governing Board. Commissioner Wolaver moved that nominations cease and that a unanimous ballot be cast for said nominees. Commissioner William Lopez seconded the motion, and the vote was unanimous in favor of the motion. 4. A-95 #74-11-22-02 ® Applicant: Northern Colorado Construction, Inc. Project: Stagecoach Subdivision in Unincorporated Area of Larimer County Mr. Keith W. Blakeslee of Northern Colorado Construction, Inc. made a presenta- tion and answered questions on his company's Stagecoach Subdivision. • Warren Wolaver moved, and Roy Moser seconded, as follows: The Larimer-Weld Regional Council of Governments Governing Board has reviewed the proposed loan and has found it to be in accordance with regional goals and objectives and recom- mends that the loan be authorized. Motion carried unanimously. 5. A-95 #75-01-24-01 Applicant: Lone Pine Corp. Project: Lancaster North Addition in Fort Lupton Mr. Fred Huebner of Lone Pine Corp. made a presentation and answered questions on his company's development of the former Fort Lupton Labor Camp into a rural community. Mabel Preble moved, and Jean Gaines seconded, as follows: The Larimer-Weld Regional Council of Governments Governing Board has reviewed the proposed loan and has found it to be in accordance with regional goals and objectives and recom- mends that the loan be authorized. Motion carried unanimously. 6. A-95 #74-12-09-03 Applicant: Coal Creek Water Users Association Project: Coal Creek Water Supply Project Mr. A. J. Madonna of Coal Creek Water Users Association made a presentation and answered questions concerning the Association's plans to construct a reser- voir and treatment facility to serve the communities of Lafayette, Louisville, Superior and Erie. William Lopez moved, and Mabel Preble seconded, as follows: The Larimer-Weld Regional Council of Governments Governing Board has reviewed the project and has found it to be in accordance with regional goals and objectives and recom- mends that the project be funded. Motion carried unanimously. 7. A-95 #74-12-09-04 Applicant: City of Louisville Project: Water System Improvements Mr. Noel Hobbs of Rocky Mountain Consultants, consulting engineers for the City of Louisville, made a presentation and answered questions on the City's plans to upgrade its existing water system. Warren Wolaver moved, and William Lopez seconded, as follows: -2- • • The Larimer-Weld Regional Council of Governments Governing Board has reviewed the project and has found it to be in accordance with regional goals and objectives and recom- mends that the project be funded. Motion carried unanimously. 8. A-95 #74-12-09-05 Applicant: City of Lafayette Project: Improvements to Existing Wastewater Treatment Plant Mr. David Mauthe of D. M. Mauthe & Associates, consulting engineers to City of Lafayette, made a presentation and answered questions on the City's plans to upgrade its wastewater treatment plant. Mabel Preble moved, and Vern Leuf seconded, to adopt the following statement: The Larimer-Weld Regional Council of Governments Governing Board has reviewed the project and has found it to be in accordance with regional goals and objectives and recom- mends that the project be funded. Motion carried unanimously. Q 9. A-95 #74-12-04-01 Applicant: Colorado Migrant Council Project: Head Start for Migrant Children Since no one appeared on behalf of the Colorado Migrant Council, the matter was tabled until such time as a representative of the Council could present its proposal to the Board. 10. A-95 #74-12-19-21 Applicant: City of Greeley with the Cooperation of the State Division of Highways Project: Railroad Crossing Elimination in Greeley Dwight Bower, District Engineer, District IV, Colorado Division of Highways, made a presentation and answered questions on the City's plans to make safety improvements at the railroad crossing at Fifth Street in Greeley. Warren Wolaver moved, and Gid Gates seconded, to adopt the following statement: The Larimer-Weld Regional Council of Governments Governing Board has reviewed the project and has found it to be in accordance with regional goals and objectives and recom- mends that the project be funded. Motion carried unanimously. 11. A-95 #74-12-05-07 QApplicant: City of Fort Collins Project: M 8027(1) , Taft Hill Road Between Mulberry Street and LaPorte Street in Fort Collins Robert Brunton, City Manager, City of Fort Collins, made a presentation and answered questions on the City's plans to pave and otherwise complete con- • struction of the east one-half of Taft Hill Road between Mulberry Street and LaPorte Street. Jean Gaines moved, and Mebel Preble seconded, to adopt the following statement: The Larimer-Weld Regional Council of Governments Governing Board has reviewed the project and has found it to be in accordance with regional goals and objectives and recom- mends that the project be funded. Motion carried unanimously. 12. A-95 #74-12-05-08 Applicant: City of Fort Collins Project: M 8017(1), West Mulberry Street Between Crestmore Drive and Taft Hill Road Robert Brunton, Fort. Collins City Manager, made a presentation and answered questions on the City's proposal to pave and otherwise complete construction of the north one-half of West Mulberry Street between Crestmore Drive and Taft Hill Road. Mabel Preble moved, and Warren Wolaver seconded, to adopt the following state- ment: The Larimer-Weld Regional Council of Governments Governing Board has reviewed the project and has found it to be in accordance with regional goals and objectives and recom- mends that the project be funded. Motion carried unanimously. 13. A-95 #74-12-23-05 Applicant: City of Fort Collins Project: M 8010(1), Lemay Avenue Robert Brunton, City Manager, City of Fort Collins, made a presentation and answered questions about the City's proposal to install traffic signals at the intersections of Stuart Street and Lemay Avenue and Drake Road and Lemay Avenue. William Lopez moved, and Mabel Preble seconded, to adopt the following state- ment: The Larimer-Weld Regional Council of Governments Governing Board has reviewed the project and has found it to be in accordance with regional goals and objectives and recom- mends that the project be funded. Motion carried unanimously. -4- • 14. A-95 #74-12-19-16 Applicant: City of Greeley Project: M 8200(2), Safety Improvements at Various Street Locations in Greeley Mr. Keith Eberhardt, Director of Public Works, City of Greeley, made a presen- tation and answered questions on the City's proposal to make safety improve- ments at six different street locations in Greeley. Fred Huss moved, and Jean Gaines seconded, to adopt the following statement: The Larimer-Weld Regional Council of Governments Governing Board has reviewed the project and has found it to be in accordance with regional goals and objectives and recom- mends that the project be funded. Motion carried unanimously. 15. A-95 #74-12-23-06 Applicant: City of Loveland Project: M 8702(1) , Taft Avenue in Loveland Mr. Don Hataway, City Manager, City of Loveland, made a presentation and answered questions on the City's plans to make street improvements at four locations on Taft Avenue. Warren Wolaver moved, and Mabel Preble seconded, to adopt the following state- ment: The Larimer-Weld Regional Council of Governments Governing Board has reviewed the project and has found it to be in accordance with regional goals and objectives and recom- mends that the project be funded. Motion carried unanimously. 16. A-95 #74-12-19-14 Applicant: Colorado Division of Highways Project: ROS 000S(3) , Ramp--Mumper Hill to U.S. 85 Dwight Bower, District Engineer, Colorado Division of Highways, made a presen- tation and answered questions on the Division's plan to install a "Fitch Iner- tial Barrier System" (a crash barrier) in the gore area between U.S. 85 (south- bound) and the off ramp to the southbound U.S. 50 Bypass (Mumper Hill) north of Greeley. Gid Gates moved, and Vern Leuf seconded, to adopt the following statement: The Larimer-Weld Regional Council of Governments Governing Board has reviewed the project and has found it to be in ® accordance with regional goals and objectives and recom- mends that the project be funded. Motion carried unanimously. -5- • C 17. A-95 #74-12-10-02 Applicant: City of Fort Collins Project: Edora Park Swimming Pool Site This Notice of Intent was withdrawn by applicant. 18. A-95 #74-12-10-03 Applicant: City of Fort Collins Project: West Neighborhood Park in Fort Collins Robert Brunton, City Manager, City of Fort Collins, made a presentation and answered questions on the City's proposal to develop a ten-acre park in T7N, R69W, Section 16, Larimer County. William Lopez moved, and Mabel Preble seconded, to adopt the following state- . ment: The Larimer-Weld Regional Council of Governments Governing Board has reviewed the project and has found it to be in accordance with regional goals and objectives and recom- mends that the project be funded. Motion carried unanimously. 19. A-95 #74-12-10-04 Applicant: City of Fort Collins Project: Southwest Neighborhood Park Mr. Robert Brunton made a presentation and answered questions on the City's plans to develop a 20-acre park site in T7N, R69W, Section 27, Larimer County. Mabel Preble moved, and Jean Gaines seconded, to adopt the following state- ment: The Larimer-Weld Regional Council of Governments Governing Board has reviewed the project and has found it to be in ac- cordance with regional goals and objectives and recommends that the project be funded. Motion carried unanimously. 20. A-95 #74-12-27-02 Applicant: City of Fort Lupton Project: Fort Lupton Community Park Mr. Ron Hanson of the City of Fort Lupton made a presentation and answered questions on the City's proposal to develop a community park between Ninth and Fourteenth Streets and eastward in Fort Lupton. Jean Gaines moved, and Roy Moser seconded, to adopt the following statement: -6- The Larimer-Weld Regional Council of Governments Governing Board has reviewed the project and has found it to be in accordance with regional goals and objectives and recom- mends that the project be funded. Motion carried unanimously. 21. A-95 #74-12-20-01 Applicant: City of Loveland Project: Centennial Park Development 22. A-95 #74-12-20-02 Applicant: City of Loveland Project: Nine-Hole Golf Course Development 23. A-95 #74-12-20-03 Applicant: City of Loveland Project: Rist-Benson Park Development 24. A-95 #74-12-20-04 Applicant: City of Loveland Project: Indoor Swimming Pool Construction 25. A-95 #74-12-20-05 Applicant: City of Loveland Project: Chasteen's Grove Picnic Area Development 26. A-95 #74-12-20-06 Applicant: City of Loveland Project: Viestenz Smith Park Development Mr. Bob Morris, Director of the Parks and Recreation Department, City of Love- land, described the six park developments proposed by the City. Jean Gaines moved, and William Lopez seconded, to adopt the following state- ment with regard to the six projects described in agenda items 21 through 26: The Larimer-Weld Regional Council of Governments Governing Board has reviewed the projects and has found them to be in accordance with regional goals and objectives and recommends that the projects be funded. Motion carried unanimously. 27. A-95 #74-12-23-01 Applicant: Larimer County Project: McMurry Natural Area 28. A-95 #74-12-23-02 Applicant: Larimer County Project: Shiply Natural Area -7- • 29. A-95 #74-12-23-03 Applicant: Larimer County Project: Poudre River Trail Ms. Jan Schroeder, Planner, Larimer County Planning Commission, described the three outdoor recreation projects proposed by the County. Glenn Prosser moved, and John Michie seconded, that the Board adopt the follow- ing statement with regard to the three projects described in agenda items 27 through 29: The Larimer-Weld Regional Council of Governments Governing Board has reviewed the projects and has found them to be in accordance with regional goals and objectives and recommends that the projects be funded. Motion carried unanimously. 30. SECTION 208 OF THE FEDERAL WATER POLLUTION CONTROL ACT, AS AMENDED: COG Director Dick MacRavey advised the Board of the status of the possibility of the Region's seeking "208" water quality management planning designation. After considerable discussion, Warren Wolaver moved, and John Michie seconded, that the Region--through its agent, the Larimer-Weld COG--apply for "208" water quality management planning designation. Motion carried unanimously. 31. ESTABLISHMENT OF A LARIMER-WELD REGIONAL HUMAN RESOURCES COMMITTEE: William Lopez, Chairman of the COG Human Resources Committee, reported the conclusion of his committee that, in order to allow for more extensive study of human resource proposals, provide for more specialized expertise in human resource planning matters and involve those citizens directly affected by such decisions, the Human Resources Committee should be expanded. He directed the attention of the Board to the set of bylaws included with the agenda for the proposed expanded Human Resources Committee. Mr. Lopez asked that the Board accept the offered bylaws for consideration for adoption at the February 5 Board meeting and so moved. Gid Gates and Jean Gaines both questioned the need for a COG Human Resources Committee, expressing concern over duplication of functions already provided by other human resource groups. Warren Wolaver offered an amendment to William Lopez's original motion, appointing a committee to study the need for and the structure of the proposed expanded Human Resources Committee and, upon favorable recommendation to the Board, serve as a nominating committee therefor. Mabel Preble seconded the amended motion, and said amended motion carried unanimously. Chairman Billings appointed John Michie, Chairman, Mabel Preble and Corky Colgrove to said committee. -8- C32. ESTABLISHMENT OF THE LARIMER-WELD AREA AGENCY ON AGING COMMITTEE: COG Director Dick MacRavey reported that the Larimer-Weld Area Agency on Aging has been incorporated into the Council of Governments as of January 1, 1975, and advised of the need to establish an Area Agency on Aging Committee. The By-laws prepared by the COG committee on aging for the new Area Agency on Aging Committee,and included as an appendix to the January 8 agenda, were ex- plained to the Board. Furthermore, Mr. MacRavey stated that, when such a committee is established, it will be necessary for the COG attorney to draft a resolution defining "consumer" and "providers" of services to the aging in order to assure that the makeup of the committee complies with federal regulations. William Lopez moved to accept the By-laws for the new Larimer-Weld Area Agency on Aging Committee for placement on the COG Board agenda for final consideration at the February 5 meeting. The motion was seconded by Mabel Preble and carried unanimously. Chairman Billings appointed Fred Nuss, Chairman, John Cooper and Warren Wolaver to serve as the nominating committee for considering candidates to the new Larimer-Weld Area Agency on Aging Committee. 33. RURAL HIGHWAY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM: Thomas Koglin, Transportation Planning Coordinator for the Larimer-Weld COG, /h reported on the federal guidelines for funding under the Rural Highway Public �l Transportation Demonstration Program; and Alice Mack, Larimer-Weld COG Human Resources Field Representative, relayed the conclusion of many human resource agencies in the region that a better and more coordinated transportation system was needed for those seeking social services. William Lopez moved, and Vern Leuf seconded, that the COG staff assist the Weld County Department of Human Resources and Care-A-Van in the preparation of a proposal for funds under the Rural Highway Public Transportation Demonstration Program and that such proposal be submitted to the Board for consideration at its February 5 meeting. Motion carried unanimously. 34. COMPREHENSIVE EMPLOYMENT AND TRAINING ACT (MANPOWER PROGRAM) : Alice Mack, Human Resources Field Representative, L-WCOG, briefed the Board on the Comprehensive Employment and Training Act (Manpower Program) and the status of current Manpower programs affecting the Larimer-Weld Region. Chair- man Billings advised that the Weld County and Larimer County Commissioners would be meeting with Wayne J. Thompson, Jr. , Division of Manpower Director, Monday, January 13; and it was agreed that any action by the Board on this matter would be deferred until the Commissioners could report on that meeting. 35. SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET REQUEST FOR LARIMER COUNTY HUMAN RESOURCES DIRECTORY: COG Director Dick MacRavey advised of the preparation of the "Larimer County Human Resources Directory" now in progress and of the need for additional ® funding to enable completion. Mabel Preble moved, and Gid Gates seconded, to approve an expenditure in the amount of $1,000 from Account 31 (Projects) of the 1975 COG budget for the purpose of completing the preparation of the "Larimer County Human Resources Directory." Motion carried unanimously. -9- 36. ROCKY MOUNTAIN NATIONAL PARK IMPACT COMMITTEE: COG Director Dick MacRavey refreshed the memories of the Board members as to the Environmental Impact Statement that came before the Board for review and comment some months ago on the designation of 91 percent of Rocky Mountain National Park as wilderness area. He advised that there was to be established a continuing Rocky Mountain National Park Environmental Impact Statement Secon- dary Impact Committee and that the Board had the opportunity to name two representatives from the Larimer-Weld Region to serve on said committee. Warren Wolaver moved, and Mabel Preble seconded, to empower the Chairman to appoint two members to the Rocky Mountain Natinal Park EIS Secondary Impact Committee. Motion carried unanimously, and Chairman Billings so appointed Glenn Prosser and John Michie. 37. DENVER REGIONAL COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS 208 PLANNING COMMITTEE: COG Director Dick MacRavey advised that the Denver Regional Council of Govern- ments had requested the Larimer-Weld COG to name a non-voting, advisory mem- ber to its "208" Planning Task Force. John Michie moved, and Corky Colgrove seconded, to empower the Chairman to appoint both a regular and alternate non-voting, advisory member to the DRCOG "208" Planning Task Force. Motion carried unanimously, and Chairman Billings appointed Larry Simpson, Planning Coordinator for the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District, as the COG's regular representative on said Task Force and COG Director Dick MacRavey as the alternate. 38. EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES GRANT APPLICATION: Cal Goerdel, Executive Director, North Central Comprehensive Health Planning Association, advised the Board that the Federal Government will not consider funding of any more EMS grants until June of 1975. Mr. Goerdel asked that the Board vote to withdraw the Region's pending application and resubmit it, as part of that of the State Health Department, in June, 1975. Gid Gates so moved, and Corky Colgrove so seconded. Motion carried unanimously. 39. U.S. CORPS OF ENGINEERS LAND USE AND WATER RESOURCES STUDY: Dick MacRavey urged Board members to attend a presentation by the U.S. Corps of Engineers on its Land Use and Water Resources Study before the Land Use & Transportation Planning Committee at 7:30 p.m. , Wednesday, January 15, in the Exhibition Hall, Island Grove Park, Greeley. 40. OTHER BUSINESS: Dick MacRavey advised of HUD's disqualification of the City of Fort Collins (as a city with a population of 50,000) to apply directly to HUD for "701" funds for fiscal year 1975-76 and that it would, therefore, be necessary for the City to incorporate its "701" request in the regional "701" application. Robert Brunton, City Manager, City of Fort Collins, stated that the City was still attempting to negotiate with HUD in order to convince that agency to reconsider its position and allow the City of Fort Collins to apply directly for 1975-76 "701" funds. -10- fh/ Warren Wolaver moved, and William Lopez seconded, that, barring the City's successful attempt to submit its own "701" application for fiscal year 1975-76, the City of Fort Collins be allowed to be included in the Region's "701" application, and, furthermore, in order to accommodate the preparation of the required paperwork, that a request be submitted to the Colorado Division of Planning to extend the deadline for submission of the Region's application from January 15, 1975, to January 31, 1975. Motion carried unanimously. Commissioner Billings named the following Board members to a committee on comprehensive health planning: Mabel Preble, Chairperson, William Lopez, Gid Gates, Glenn Billings and Victor Jacobucci. Commissioner Billings named the following Board members to a committee on criminal justice planning: Warren Wolaver, Chairman, Jean Gaines, Corky Col- grove, Vern Leuf and Glenn Prosser. The Board was reminded of the requirement in the COG's Articles of Associa- tion that an annual meeting of all COG members be held, and were advised that said meeting was tentatively scheduled for February 27, 1975. Commissioner Billings, on behalf of all the reelected officers, thanked the Board for their vote of confidence in them. 41. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was, upon motion duly made, seconded and carried, adjourned. Mabel Preble, Secretary Treasurer C a • APPENDIX A BY-LAWS LARIMER-WELD REGIONAL HUMAN RESOURCES COMMITTEE ARTICLE I NAME The name of this Larimer-Weld Regional Council of Governments advisory committee shall be the "Larimer-Weld Regional Human Resources Committee." ARTICLE II PURPOSE The Larimer-Weld Regional Human Resources Committee, organized pursuant to Article V of the Larimer-Weld Regional Council of Governments Articles of Association, as amended, shall assist the COG in all matters of human resource planning as provided in these By-laws. The Larimer-Weld Regional Human Resources Committee effort is to aid and stimulate cooperative, comprehensive and continu- ing planning on the part of all concerned government agencies in the Larimer- Weld Region to the end that they develop and keep current a plan to provide human resource delivery systems. The Committee shall also aid the Larimer-Weld Regional Council of Governments in formulating and adopting regional goals and objectives concerning comprehensive human resource planning. ARTICLE III COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP Section 1. The Larimer-Weld Regional Human Resources Committee shall have no less than seven (7) nor more than twelve (12) voting members, and up to eighteen (18) members including non--voting members described below. Section 2. The membership of the Larimer-Weld Regional Human Resources Committee shall be appointed by the Governing Board of the Larimer-Weld Regional Council of Governments with the advice of a nominating committee as appointed by the Chairman of said Governing Board. Representation on the Committee shall be guided by the following: A. One (1) and up to two (2) members who shall be Larimer County citizens or members of the Larimer County government. B. One (1) and up to two (2) members who shall be Weld County citizens or members of the Weld County government. C. One (1) member who shall be a Fort Collins citizen or member of the Fort Collins city government. D. One (1) member who shall be a Greeley citizen or member of the Greeley city government. E. One (1) member who shall be a Loveland citizen or member of the Loveland city government. F. One (1) and up to two (2) members who represent the dis- advantaged citizens of Larimer County. G. One (1) and up to three (3) members who represent the disadvantaged citizens of Weld County. H. One (1) and up to and including six (6) members repre- senting human resource delivery agencies in Larimer and Weld Coun ties. (Any agency representatives serving on the Regional Human Resources Committee shall be non-voting members.) Section 3. The representatives appointed shall serve a term of one (1) year with eligibility for reappointment permitted. C -2- CSection 4 , In the event of a vacancy or the failure of a member to attend four (4) consecutive regular meetings of the Committee, the COG Governing Board shall appoint a qualified individual pursuant to the requirements set forth in Section 2 of this Article. Section 5. Each member shall be entitled to one (1) vote, with the excep- tion of agency representatives, who shall be non-voting members. ARTICLE IV THE COMMITTEE Section 1. The Committee shall, as soon as it is officially organized, elect from its members a Chairman and Vice Chairman and such other officers as it may deem necessary. The Secretary may be appointed from staff personnel © available to the Committee. Section 2. The term of office of the Chairman, Vice Chairman and any other Committee officers shall be for one (1) year, with eligibility for reelec- tion permitted. Section 3. The Committee shall, with the advice of the Larimer-Weld COG Director, fix the time and place for its meetings. Section 4. Except as modified below, a quorum shall be deemed formed when there are present one-third (1/3) of the then presently constituted mem- bership. In no case shall less than four (4) members present constitute a quorum. Section 5. A majority vote of the Committee present shall be considered a favorable vote upon all motions or resolutions considered by the Committee. Section 6. The Committee may appoint such subcommittees, task forces or technical advisory committees as deemed necessary. C -3- 1/ Section 7. Robert's Rules of Order, as revised, shall govern the con- duct of the committee meetings, except where modified by majority vote of the Committee. ARTICLE V COMMITTEE FUNCTIONS Section 1. The Committee shall perform the following functions in an advisory capacity to the Larimer--Weld Regional Council of Governments: A. Develop goals and objectives for human resource planning in State Planning and Management Region Two. B. Develop a comprehensive human resource plan in Planning and Management Region Two. C. Review and comment on all A-95 type applications for- warded to the Committee by the Regional Clearinghouse which pertain to human resource programs and planning. D. Review and comment on all matters referred by county and municipal human resource commissions and boards. E. Review and comment on all county and municipal human resource plans or parts thereof which are submitted for such review and comment. Section 2 All action as a result of the functions enumerated in Section 1 of this Article shall be submitted to the Council of Governments for final action. ARTICLE VI AMENDMENT OF BY-LAWS © Section 1. These By--laws may be amended at any regular meeting of the Larimer-Weld Regional Council of Governments Governing Board by a vote as -4- • described in Article IV, Section 4 of the Larimer-Weld Regional Council of Governments Articles of Association. Section 2 At least thirty (30) days' notice in writing shall be given to Governing Board members of any proposed amendments to these By-laws. The written notice shall also include the proposed amendments. Submitted January 8, 1975, and Considered February 5, 1975. C C S. APPENDIX B BY-LAWS LARIMER-WELD AREA AGENCY ON AGING COMMITTEE ARTICLE I NAME The name of this Larimer-Weld Regional Council of Governments advisory committee shall be the "Larimer-Weld Area Agency on Aging Committee." ARTICLE II PURPOSE The Larimer-Weld Area Agency on Aging Committee, organized pursuant to Article V of the Larimer-Weld Regional Council of Governments Articles of Asso- ciation, as amended, shall assist the COG in all matters of planning for older persons as provided in these By-laws. The primary purpose of the Committee is to carry out the objectives and intent of the Older Americans Act of 1965, as amended. ARTICLE III COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP Section 1. The Larimer-Weld Area Agency on Aging Committee shall have twelve (12) voting members and up to six (6) non-voting members as described below. Section 2. The membership of the Larimer-Weld Area Agency on Aging Committee shall be appointed by the Governing Board of the Council of Governments, with the advice of a nominating committee as appointed by the Chairman of the Larimer-Weld COG Board, subject to the following requirements: GA. Six (6) voting representatives of whom up to six (6) shall be from the former Larimer-Weld Area Agency on Aging govern- ing board, for the first term of said Committee, so long as they qualify under Section 3 of this Article; thereafter, the voting representatives provided for by this subsection shall include three (3) citizens from Larimer County and three (3) citizens from Weld County, so long as they qualify under Section 3 of this Article. B. Six (6) voting representatives who are actual consumers of services under the Committee's area plan, so long as they qualify under Section 3 of this Article. In the event that there is an in- sufficient number of actual consumers of services under the area plan available and willing to serve on the Committee, the COG Govern- ing Board, by policy resolution, shall designate agencies rendering services to the aging from which consumers could be obtained for membership on the Committee. C. One (1) and up to and including six (6) members repre- senting service delivery systems to the aging in Larimer and Weld Counties. (Any agency representatives serving on the Area Agency on Aging Committee shall be non-voting members. ) Section 3. Voting representatives as provided in subsection 2A and 2B shall generally be at least sixty (60) years of age. Section 4. Committee members appointed in accordance with subsection 2A and 2B shall generally be representative in terms of ethnic origin, sex, income level, geographic areas and population centers in the region; provided, however, this section shall not guide the COG Governing Board in the matter of appointments Qunder subsection 2A for the first year. -2- Section 5. The representatives appointed to the Committee shall serve a term of one (1) year with eligibility for reappointment permitted. Section 6. In the event of a vacancy or the failure of a member to attend four (4) consecutive regular meetings of the Committee, the COG Governing Board shall appoint a qualified individual pursuant to the requirements set forth in this Article. Section 7. Each member shall be entitled to one (1) vote, with the excep- tion of agency representatives, who shall be non-voting members. ARTICLE IV THE COMMITTEE Section 1. The Committee shall, as soon as it is officially organized, elect from its members a Chairman and Vice Chairman and such other officers as it may deem necessary. The Secretary may be appointed from staff personnel avail- able to the Committee. Section 2. The term of office of the Chairman, Vice Chairman and any other Committee officers shall be for one (1) year, with eligibility for reelec- tion permitted. Section 3. The Committee shall, with the advice of the Larimer-Weld COG Director, fix the time and place for its meetings. Section 4. A quorum shall be deemed formed when there are present one- third (1/3) of the then presently constituted membership. In no case shall less than four (4) members present constitute a quorum. Section 5. A majority vote of the Committee present shall be considered a favorable vote upon all motions or resolutions considered by the Committee. Section 6. The Committee may appoint such subcommittees, task forces or technical advisory committees as deemed necessary. -3- Section 7. Robert's Rules of Order, as revised, shall govern the conduct of the committee meetings, except where modified by majority vote of the Com- mittee. ARTICLE V COMMITTEE FUNCTIONS Section 1. The Committee shall perform the following functions in an advisory capacity to the Larimer-Weld Regional Council of Governments: A. Develop and submit annually, to the state agency re- sponsible for approval, an area plan on aging which conforms to federal requirements. B. In addition to the development and administration of an area plan, the Committee shall carry out directly, to the maxi- mum extent feasible, the following functions: (1) Provide leadership and advocacy on behalf of all older persons within the region. (2) Determine the need for social ser- vices in the region, with special attention being given to the needs of low-income and minority elderly. (3) Inventory the resources available within the region to meet the needs of the elderly and perform an evaluation of the effec- tiveness of the services provided by the public and private agencies within the region in meet- ing such needs. (4) Establish measurable program objec- tives and priorities for implementation of -4- the area plan in keeping with the objectives established by the State Aging Agency. (5) Plan with existing planning agencies and the providers of services in the region who are concerned with the needs of the elderly. (6) Either directly or through contract or grant, provide for an action program designed to: (a) Coordinate the deliv- ery of existing services for the elderly; and (b) Pool untapped resources of public and private agencies in order to strengthen or inaugurate new services for older persons. (7) Make periodic evaluation of activi- ties carried out pursuant to the area plan, includ- ing the views of older persons participating in such activities. (8) Conduct periodic public hearings concern- ing the needs of the elderly. (9) Collect and disseminate information con- cerning the needs of the elderly. (10) Make provision for technical assistance to providers of social services in the region. (11) Where necessary and feasible, enter into arrangements consistent with the provisions of the area plan under which funds under Title III of the Older Americans Act, as amended, may be used to provide legal services to older persons in the region, carried out through federally-assisted pro- grams or other public or non-profit agencies. (12) Where possible, enter into arrangements with organizations providing day care services for children so as to provide opportunities for older persons to aid or assist on a voluntary or paid basis in the delivery of such services to children. (13) Take into account in connection with matters of general policy arising in the develop- ment and administration of the area plan the views of recipients of services under the area plan. C. Develop a comprehensive and coordinated system for the delivery of social services to the elderly in the region. D. Review and comment on all A-95 type applications forwarded to the Committee by the Regional Clearinghouse which pertain to pro- grams and planning for the elderly. Section 2. All action as a result of the functions enumerated in Section 1 of this Article shall be submitted to the Council of Governments for final action. ARTICLE VI AMENDMENT OF BY-LAWS Section 1. These By-laws may be amended at any regular meeting of the Larimer-Weld Regional Council of Governments Governing Board by a vote as described -6- in Article IV, Section 4, of the Larimer•;Weld Regional Council of Governments Articles of Association. Section 2. At least thirty (30) days' notice in writing shall be given to Governing Board members of any proposed amendments to these By-laws. The written notice shall also include the proposed amendments. Submitted January 8, 1975, and Considered February 5, 1975. C C -7- CAll1DL 1 V RESOLUTION OF POLICY RE: MEMBERSHIP OF LARIMER-WELD AREA AGENCY ON AGING COMMITTEE WHEREAS, the Larimer-Weld Regional Council of Governments (hereinafter sometimes referred to as "Council") is organized pur- suant to law; and WHEREAS , the Larimer-Weld Regional Council of Governments has undertaken several area-wide planning and coordination projects in Colorado Planning and Management Region TWO; and WHEREAS, the Larimer-Weld Regional Council of Governments has a concern for the problems of the aging in Colorado Planning and Management Region TWO and has been designated the area-wide Agency on Aging (hereinafter sometimes referred to as "Agency" ) for the Region; and WHEREAS, the Agency is required under Title III of the Older Americans Act of 1975, as amended (P.L. 93-29 , 87 Stat, 36-45) (here- inafter referred to as the "Act" ) , and desires independently to have a citizen advisory committee to aid it in matters concerning the elderly in the Region; and WHEREAS, the Agency has determined that fifty percent of this advisory committee must be actual consumers of services to the elderly; and WHEREAS, the Agency has found that in the Region there are only two very limited programs funded under Title III of the Act from which the members of the advisory committee might be sought; and WHEREAS, the Agency has found that there are numerous organi- zations which provide services to the elderly in Region TWO, which are not funded under Title III of the Act but which provide many services to the elderly; and WHEREAS, the Agency desires to have an advisory committee which is generally representative of the elderly interests in Region TWO in terms of ethnic origin, sex, income level, geographic areas and population centers in the Region, and desires the advisory com- mittee to be formed from as broad a population base as possible; and WHEREAS, to have committee members only from the programs funded under Title III of the Act would not produce an advisory com- mittee representative of the elderly interests in Region TWO; and WHEREAS, there are only limited and vague guidelines set forth by the Department of Health, Education and Welfare concerning who may be an actual consumer required above ; and WHEREAS, the Agency desires to set forth by policy the cri- teria pursuant to which it will seek members to its advisory com- mittee so that said committee will be representative of the various elderly interests and otherwise be fairly distributed; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that it shall be the policy of the Agency to seek members of the Larimer-,Weld Area Agency on Aging Committee, to serve as advisors to the Agency, and that such committee members be sought so that the composition of the committee is generally representative of the elderly in Colorado Planning and Management Region TWO in terms of ethnic origin, sex, income level, geographic areas and population centers. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that those members of the committee who represent actual consumers of services to the elderly can be selected from any of the agencies and/or programs listed in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, so long as said members receive regularly the service, or participate regularly in the programs, of these agencies and programs. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the agencies and programs found on Exhibit A are not inclusive and other programs and agencies, if any, which provide services to the elderly may be considered when candidates are sought for the advisory committee, and Exhibit A may be amended by the Agency as facts warrant. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, if the federal laws and/or regulations are classified so as to direct where this agency may seek advisory committee members, then this resolution shall be disregarded insofar as it is necessary to comply with federal guidelines. THIS RESOLUTION, upon motion, was duly passed this day of , 1975. LARIMER-WELD REGIONAL COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS By Glenn K. Billings, Chairman APPROVED AS TO FORM: C -2- C EXHIBIT A Agencies and/or programs which serve the elderly in Colorado Planning and Management Region TWO and from which candidates for an advisory committee may be selected to meet the consumer requirements of federal law. 1. R.S.V.P. in Larimer County 2. R.S.V.P. in Weld County 3. Meals on Wheels sponsored in Windsor 4. Meals on Wheels sponsored in Fort Collins 5. Meals on Wheels sponsored in Loveland 6. Meals on Wheels sponsored in Greeley 7 . The Senior Citizens Center sponsored by the City of Greeley Recreation Department 8. The Senior Citizens Program sponsored by the City of Fort Collins 9. Human Relations Center, providing transportation to the aged in Loveland 10. Chew and Chat in Loveland 11. Homemaker Services provided by the Weld County Health Department 12. Home Helps sponsored by the City of Fort Collins 13. Weld County Department of Human Resources, provid- ing transportation services to the aged tLAPILAPIN/ER - WELOUNC ME IL OF GOVERNNTEi N/ERD REGIONAL C PHONE 1303) 661-3288•W_ ROOM 201 201 EAST 4111 STREET LOVELAND, COLORADO 80531 January 28 , 1975 Dear The purpose of this letter is to request your local govern- ment to pass the enclosed resolution indicating intent to join with other general purpose units of local government in the Larimer-Weld region to develop and implement a plan resulting in a coordinated waste treatment management system for the area. On January 8, 1975, the Larimer-Weld Regional Council of Governments Governing Board voted unanimously to seek designation of the Larimer-Weld region as eligible for area--wide water quality (waste treatment) planning (also called "208" planning) . The Fed- eral Water Pollution Control Act, as amended in 1972, declared that "it is the national policy that areawide waste treatment management processes be developed and implemented to assure adequate control of sources of pollutants in each state. " The section of the Act to implement this policy is Section 208 . It was also determined by the COG Board to request that the Larimer-Weld Regional Council of Governments be designated by the Governor as the "208" planning agency for the region. The Larimer- Weld COG Board decision on this matter was made after considering a number of factors , including: 1 . The water quality problems in the Larimer- Weld region are complex and extend beyond the prob- lems normally solved by municipalities and sanita- tion districts. These complex problems include non- point sources (agricultural irrigation return flow, storm runoff from feed lots and municipalities , etc. ) and ground water quality problems. 2. Area-wide waste treatment management plan- ning is the only method available to specific regions for developing plans analyzing the feasibility of solving complex regional water quality problems. 3. The area-wide planning process addresses the problems that will be encountered by municipal and industrial dischargers in meeting the more stringent water quality requirements of 1983 and 1985. Because previous planning efforts have not -2- emphasized these stringent requirements, the area- wide plan will provide a valuable perspective for local agencies having responsibility to meet the future requirements. 4. Recent discussions with State Water Qual- ity Control Division and EPA officials indicate that the Larimer-Weld region will eventually be sub- ject to "208" area-wide planning. The "208" planning will be performed by either the Federal/State Govern- ments or through the local governments ' own agency-- the Council of Governments. The Board felt the lat- ter choice was better. 5. Area-wide waste treatment management planning will deal with potential pollution prob- lems from sources which are basic to the economy and life style of the Larimer-Weld region. Planning by the Council of Governments, rather than the State or Federal Government, will insure maximum local par- ticipation in the planning process and considera- tion of all factors affecting the region. 6 . If the "208" designation is approved prior to July 30 , 1975, the region will be entitled to 100 percent federal funding for the planning pro- cess. On initial consideration, it was not the intent of the Coun- cil of Governments to seek designation as a "208" planning agency. However, as the benefits to local governments in the region emerged and the ramifications of the Council' s not overseeing the planning process became clear, the Council decided that it should seek desig- nation. It is the intent of the Council that consultants be used to develop the plan under the direction of the Council and in close consultation with municipalities, sanitation districts, and all other parties and entities possibly affected by the plan. It is anticipated that only one qualified engineer will be added to the COG staff, per EPA requirements, to coordinate the work. That individual ' s salary will be paid out of the grant funds. A basic requirement for obtaining designation of the Larimer- Weld COG as a "208" planning agency is support from local governments by resolution. Without resolutions of support from county boards of commissioners, city councils and town boards of trustees, the Larimer-Weld Regional Council of Governments cannot be designated as a planning agency. The resolutions of support do not bind the counties, cities or towns to implement the resulting area-wide waste treatment management plan. By the resolution, the local government indicates its intention "to join with other affected -3- general purpose units of local government within the boundaries of the area to develop and implement a plan which will result in a coordinated waste treatment management system for the area. " Furthermore, it is not the intention of the Larimer-Weld Regional Council of Governments to engage in implementation of wastewater collection and treatment systems. This is a responsibility of local communities and agencies. A meeting on "208" planning will be held by the Larimer- Weld COG Governing Board at 7 : 30 p.m. , Wednesday, February 5, 1975, in the downstairs meeting room of the Northern Colorado Water Con- servancy District office building, 1250 North Wilson Avenue, Love- land. Representatives of the EPA will attend to answer your ques- tions regarding "208" area-wide planning. Enclosed for your con- venience is a booklet prepared by the National Association of Regional Councils titled "The Challenge and Opportunity of Water Quality Management Planning, " which should be a help to you in answering your questions about "208" planning. If you have any additional questions , please call Dick MacRavey at the COG office in Loveland (phone 667-3288) . The COG Board believes that your support of "208" area-wide planning will benefit the region. Due to the tight deadlines in- volved for receiving designation and funding, the earliest possible consideration by your commission/council/board of the enclosed resolution will be appreciated. Sincerely yours, Glenn K. Billings Chairman, Larimer-Weld COG Chairman, Weld County Board of Commissioners GKB/cs Enc. C RESOLUTION INDICATING INTENT TO JOIN WITH OTHER GENERAL PURPOSE UNITS • OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT IN THE LARIMER-WELD REGIONAL COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS • AREA TO DEVELOP AND IMPLEMENT A PLAN RESULTING IN A COORDINATED WASTE TREATMENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM FOR THE AREA. C WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 208 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972, P.L. 92-500 (hereinafter called "the Act" ) , the Administrator of the United States Environmental Protec- tion Agency has by regulation published guidelines for the identifi- cation of those areas which, as a result of urban-industrial concen- trations or other factors, have substantial water quality control problems (40 CFR Part 126) ; and WHEREAS, the Larimer-Weld Regional Council of Governments area (hereinafter called "the Area" ) satisfies the criteria contained in the Act and guidelines , and designation of the area pursuant to Sec- tion 208 and those guidelines is desirable; and WHEREAS, Section 126 . 10 of the guidelines requires, among other things, that the affected general purpose units of local government within the problem area must show their intent , through formally adopted resolutions, to join together in the planning process to develop and implement a plan which will result in a coordinated waste treatment management system for the area; and WHEREAS, such planning process and waste treatment management system is a necessary and significant measure to control present point and non-point sources of water pollution and to guide and regulate O future development and growth in the area which may affect water quality, in order to prevent , abate and solve existing and potential substantial water quality control problems; NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS RESOLVED that the (City/Town/County) of , recognizing that the Larimer-Weld Regional Council of Governments area has substantial water quality control problems, supports designation of the Area pursuant to Section 208 and the EPA guidelines. IT IS FURTHER RESOLVED that the (City/Town/County) of intends to join with other affected general purpose units of local government within the boundaries of the area to de- velop and implement a plan which will result in a coordinated waste treatment management system for the area. IT IS FURTHER RESOLVED that all proposals for grants for con- struction of publicly owned treatment works within the boundaries of the designated area will be consistent with the approved plan and will be made only by the designated management agency. PASSED AND ADOPTED, SIGNED AND APPROVED, this day of , 1975. (Name of City/Town/County) ATTEST: By Title the CHALLENGE and OPPORTUNITY of WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLANNING 0 QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS ABOUT SECTION 208 OF THE FEDERAL WATER POLLUTION CONTROL ACT AS AMENDED August, 1974 ViP �r National Association of Regional Councils 1700 K Street N.W., Washington, D.C. 20006 • TABLE OF CONTENTS Purpose and Importance of 208 1 Definition of 208 Management Planning 2 Non-Point Source Pollution and Urban Storm Runoff 3 Funding Situation 3 Geographic Requirements 3 Designation of Urban Industrial Areas vs. Non-Metros 4 Process and Options for Designation 4 Consequences of Not Meeting 1983 Standards 5 Implications for Local Government 5 Benefits of Designation 6 Current Status of Designation 6 Resolution Requirements 7 Degree of State Control 7 Local Appeal Process 8 Land Use Requirements 8 Regulatory System Requirements 8 Implementing Agencies 8 Relationship to 303 Basin Planning 9 Q Relationship to 201 Facilities Planning 9 Relationship to 402 Permit Program 10 • Relationship to Other EPA Programs 10 Relationship to Other Areawide Programs 10 Planning Application Requirements 10 Cost Effectiveness 11 A-95 Review Requirements 12 Environmental Impact Statements 12 Information Needed 12 Appendix I: Glossary 13 II. List of EPA Arr_e.6.1 Arr�••di III. Chart Outlieisg 308 P_ee..00 16 lire�11d . IV: Sai:.pl;, Packat, , for Bloated Offficiala 17. QThis report was published with federal financial assistance provided by the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. First printing, August 1974 Reprinted with some corrections, September 1974 C a • • THE CHALLENGE AND OPPORTUNITY OF WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLANNING Questions and Answers About Section 208 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act as Amended The quality of the nation's water has become an issue of increasing concern for the public and their federal, state and local officials. Everyone knows that pollution of our water is an omi- nous threat to our health and welfare which cannot be permitted to continue. At this juncture, Congress has given the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency the responsibility to get a handle on the problem and solve it by 1985. Congress enacted 1972 amendments to the Federal Water Pollution Control Act which set water quality standards and provide mechanisms for curbing pol- lution on a staged basis. The Act established as a national goal the elimination of pollutant dis- charges into the navigable waters by 1985. It further established an interim goal that by 1983 we would have national water quality which is safe for recreation and which will protect fish and wildlife. Section 208 of the Act provides local governments with an important tool for reaching the 1983 goals. CWhat is the Purpose and Importance of Section 208? Section 208 of the Act provides for areawide management planning in areas which, as a result of urban-industrial concentrations and other factors, have substantial water quality control problems. Through 208, such areas are provided funding to plan and manage a comprehensive program controlling local government and industrial wastewater, storm and sewer runoff, non- point source pollutants, and land use as it relates to water quality. Through a cooperatively controlled areawide planning agency, local governments can select a management plan that is most cost effective and implementable. Because of the timing, EPA has determined that 208 planning and management should focus on meeting the 1983 goals of the Act. The purpose of 208 planning simply stated is to provide information for sound decision making. Management is the key to the process. What makes 208 unique is that state and local govern- ments must not only develop a plan, but the approved plan must make the commitment to finance projects developed in the plan and to take regulatory action where necessary to solve non-point source and other problems related to achieving the 1983 standards. The implications of 208 for local governments are discussed in detail later in this report. Sev- eral points should be emphasized at the outset, however. CThis report is based on a NARC workshop dealing with the 208 planning process. The workshop focused on organizing for 208 management planning, the grant application process, and issues to be tackled this first year. The questions and answers which comprise this report summarize the basic discussion at that meeting. 1 • • It is national policy that 208-type planning must be done in areas where there is a substan- tial water quality problem. The only issue is who will do the planning and make the deci- sions--the state, local governments, or some special purpose agency. • 208 planning can be the essential tie between state basin planning (303) and local facilities planning (201). • 208 is a mechanism to help local elected officials gain information to deal with other prob- lems related to water quality, such as solid waste disposal, septic tanks, trailer courts and land use. • 208 is one of the only programs available to deal with non-point source pollution problems (i.e. those for which there is no specifically identifiable source, such as erosion, feedlot runoff, or runoff from agricultural lands). • Because areawide planning requirements of the Act will be fulfilled, those local govern- ments which are involved in 208 will have a better chance at federal construction grants in the future. • Through 208, local governments can impact on permits granted by the states for pollution discharges. • 208 is the means for making regulatory and implementation decisions. Through this pro- cess, local officials can work together to develop a management plan which determines who will do what, when, where and how. But most important of all, decisions made during the 208 process will have a tremendous im- pact on land use and other types of issues which are traditionally local prerogatives. If local governments want to continue to control these decisions, it is essential that they take on 208 responsibility. Further, any delay in undertaking 208 is to the disadvantage of local govern- ments. Right now 100 percent funding is available, but this will decrease to 75 percent next fiscal year (FY 76). It is vital to get the 208 process in the works as soon as possible to have any impact on meeting the 1983 standards. A later section of this report describes some of the actions which can be taken by EPA or citizens, if appropriate progress is not made. What is 208 Management Planning? The purpose of the 208 planning process is to formulate an areawide waste treatment manage- ment plan that can be implemented by a management agency (ies). The planning process must integrate both technical needs for pollution control and management arrangements capable of implementing the controls. The technical portion of the planning process is concerned with identifying the priority water quality problems of the area, recognizing any constraints in dealing with the problems, and de- veloping alternatives to achieve water quality goals. Management planning is an essential part of the 208 planning process, and should be conducted concurrently with technical planning. Ultimately, all components of the plan are geared to im- plementation and dependent upon the development of an effective management plan for their ac- complishment. 2 • Management planning first identifies existing water quality management problems, such as lack of authority for controlling certain pollution sources as related to areawide waste treatment man- agement. Any constraints on devising an effective management approach must be identified as Cvell. Based upon a management analysis, alternative management systems having the potential for effective water quality management are identified. Finally, such alternatives are analyzed in terms of their feasibility for implementing a given technical plan. Because the feasibility of implementing a plan may depend on acquiring proper authority, it is part of the planning function to ensure that the management agency (ies) has adequate legal authority to implement the plan. Accordingly, it is imperative that planning agencies consider management problems and alter- native approaches during the initial phases of the planning process. Will the 208 Planning Process Require Developing Programs to Deal with Non-point Source Pollution and Urban Storm Runoff? Yes. Section 208 is the most positive statement on the need to identify, and if present, devel- op a program to solve non-point source pollution. This is a difficult problem and the solutions will not be obvious or easy to correct. This problem will probably require more innovative ap- proaches than any other aspects of the Act. While EPA will continue to do research and pro- vide technical assistance to 208 planning agencies, it is recognized that the answer to non-point source problems must be tailored to the region. Each agency will have to define the parameters of the problem, and using existing research decide what measures might be financially, techni- cally and politically feasible. In the case of urban storm runoff, Section 208 requires this problem to be addressed if it signif- icantly affects water quality. What is the Funding Situation for 208? 208 is a contract authority program which is not conditional on the normal appropriations pro- cess. This means EPA has full authority to use all 208 monies provided in the Act, $100 mil- lion in FY 74 and $150 million in FY 75. The only constraint on 208 now is receiving applica- tions that meet EPA criteria. The funding strategy being followed by EPA is if an application meets EPA criteria--it is a sound designation that will help solve the water quality problem--then EPA will fund it. There is no quota or priority system. The number of applications EPA anticipates is 200 to 350. Cash outlay projections are made in the President's budget for 208 funding. EPA intends to stay within the target cash outlays if possible. This target is $26 million in FY 75. The FY 76 amount has not yet been set by OMB. What is the Geographic Requirement for a 208 Area? The geographic area in which 208 planning will be conducted is determined by the state using criteria established by EPA. The criteria are tied to EPA's detailed definition of a substantial water quality control problem. This definition emphasizes the areas the states have identified C;in their 303 basin plans "water quality limited segments" and/or areas having substantial non- source point pollution. 3 • . Is 208 Limited to Urban Industrial Areas? �'r C At the moment, EPA is focusing 208 funding in urban industrial areas. In recent months, how- ever, EPA has been looking at its designation criteria from the point of view of another national priority--energy development. The Act does not preclude the designation of nonmetro areas for 208 planning, but the emphasis is certainly on the problems in metro areas. But if water quality problems are substantial and complex in nonmetro areas obviously EPA would give serious con- sideration to any state proposal to designate such an area. Such areas might include those involv- ing mines and mining, development of other energy resources, recreational areas, and sites for waste disposal. What is the Process for 208 Designation? The governor of each state, after consultation with appropriate local officials, has the responsi- bility for designating the boundaries of a 208 area and designating a single representative agency to be responsible for the 208 planning process. Ultimately on advice of the 208 agency, the gov- ernor will designate local governments or other agencies to implement the agreed-on manage- ment plan and program. The governor actually has three options: he may designate a 208 area, he may non-designate all or a portion of the state, or he may remain silent. But in the interstate areas he can only designate or remain silent. This is important because non-designation precludes local initiative. What if the Governor Non-Designates? If the governor non-designates he retains the option of reconsidering and perhaps designating 208 areas and agencies at a later time. Or the state assumes responsibility for doing the area- wide planning under the Act. There are states which have been very emphatic that they don't want to designate, but these are few. The majority of states want to make designations, and are either going through the public hearing process or have questions. Nationwide, there are between 60 and 80 active, viable can- didates still going through the process right now. That's on top of the 17 designations EPA had approved through early August. If a State Non-Designates is it Eligible for 208 Funding? No. The law requires that areawide "208-type" planning be done in areas with a substantial wa- ter quality problem, but the states are not eligible for 208 funding. The intent of Congress was that this be a cooperative state-local effort and 208 funds are provided for that purpose. If the state non-designates, it assumes responsibility for undertaking areawide planning, but this would be part of the basic Section 303 state planning process to develop basin plans. Funding for state planning comes out of Section 106. The funding level for the total state program in FY 74 was $50 million and EPA does not expect any significant jumps in that level. In fact, OMB wants to cut it back. So any funding for states to undertake the 208 planning would come out of their 106 funds. The Cstates could decide to take their 106 program support funds and put them in planning, or else come up with the money themselves. • • • It should also be noted that if the governor waits to make designations, the state and local offi- ' cials are losing 100 percent planning funds. The 100 percent money is only available in FY 74 and FY 75. After that it's a 75:25 match. What if the Governor Remains Silent? If the governor remains silent, local governments have the option of applying directly to EPA for 208 funding as an areawide 208 planning agency. However, if local officials do not exercise this option and there is a substantial water quality problem, it is the state's responsibility to see that water quality standards are met. What Happens if Water Quality Standards are not Met? If EPA finds that states are not moving to either designate 208 agencies or undertake areawide planning themselves in areas which have a substantial water quality problem, there are a num- ber of consequences which could result. No federal hardware grants will be made unless there is a viable plan and program to achieve standards and progress made toward implementing such a plan and program. If no significant progress is made then discharge permits will not be issued or renewed. In addition, EPA or cit- izens could go to court to require the state or federal government to see that treatment facilities are built or development moratoriums imposed, or both, until state and local governments as- sume their responsibilities to do the job. Has EPA Made This Clear to State and Local Officials? There definitely appear to be misconceptions at the local level as to the stakes involved here. An EPA representative stated "At EPA we're not following the implementation of 208 at this point in time from the point of view if you don't perform this, there's going to be a sanction against you. We've established a mechanism, a process and we're saying there will be financial assis- tance for 208 planning and we think if you go through this process, you will solve your problem. We're basically relying on two things: (1) the fact that a local-regional area identifies that they have a water quality problem and they want to solve it--the only way 208 can work is if you have that kind of intent and willingness to solve the problem and work together; and (2) there is mon- ey available to help do that. " Are There Also Institutional Implications for Local Government? Very definitely. The 208 program is geared to moving policies and plans into some concrete action by staging facilities development, determining how they're going to be financed, who's going to do it, and making commitments of that nature. It's really implementation of the kind of things often developed at the regional level which are put on a shelf. The program directly determines who makes water quality decisions (which affect growth and land use) and who im- plements the decisions. So 208 does have an institutional consequence to the whole idea of local governments working to- gether to solve areawide problems. Local governments need to recognize that the best way to 0ontrol their own destiny and remain viable is to work together. This process is going to be one of the tests to see if that concept will work. 5 • Local governments have taken a rather ambivalent stand on 208 thus far. They find the state has no particular desire to get involved and they don't see the consequences of their not being involved either, even though they might be in an area which obviously cannot meet water quality standards with the type of 201 facility design and engineering provided for under the 1972 Water Pollution Act. Then it Really Benefits Both the State and Local Governments if the Governor Designates 208 Agencies? Very definitely. If the state does not designate, it will bear the burden of performing areawide planning without the advantage of 208 funding. And local governments will find that the state is in the position of making significant decisions affecting the growth and development of their com- munity. These water quality decisions determine a community's land use, waste treatment and sewer facility requirements, as well as future financial resources and capital improvement costs. How Can this Information Be Communicated to Local Officials? The Triangle J Council of Governments in the Raleigh-Durham area of North Carolina put toge- ther a successful package of materials for their local officials. This included a two or three- page summary of what 208 was all about and a copy of the resolution which needed to be adopted. (See appendix. ) All materials from EPA were omitted. One important point made at the meeting is that the entire area of water pollution is very techni- cal and one that has not evoked a great deal of interest by elected officials. In submitting re- ports to elected officials, it was felt important to point out the issues and options in nontechni- cal terms. The big question asked by elected officials appears to be, "Is 208 required?" The answer should be that it is not required, but here are the options if you don't do 208 planning and the implica- tions of each option. It is national policy that waste treatment management will be on an areawide basis. The plan- ning will be done either by the state or the locals, and in non-designated areas it will be done by the state, or even the federal government if the state doesn't do the job. What is the Current Status of 208 Designation? As of August 7, EPA has approved 17 208 agencies designated by the governors. As of July 15, 18 states had made one or more designations and EPA review of these designations is in process. Thirty-one states had non-designated but most of them have indicated that the governor will make designations at a future date. Only one governor (New Hampshire) chose to remain silent. As previously indicated, there are still about 80 viable candidates going through the designation process right now. Relative to regulations, EPA has published 208 area and agency designation publications, pro- gram and grant requirements, and draft planning guidelines. 6 • What is the Resolution Requirement? When the governor submits his 208 designations to EPA, this notification must be accompanied tow by formally-adopted resolutions which demonstrate that the general purpose local governments involved will join together to develop and implement a plan which will result in a coordinated waste treatment management system for the area. Specifically, the resolution must meet three criteria: (1) It must come from art affected unit of local government. (2) It must discuss and state explicitly a willingness to join with other units of government in the region to do a 208 study. (3) It must state a willingness and knowledge that hardware grants will go only to management agencies designated by the completed plan and approved by the governor. How Many Units of Government in the Region Must Adopt such Resolutions? Initially, EPA required that "all" units of government in the region had to adopt resolutions of intent, but this requirement has been relaxed. The fundamental criteria now is that resolutions be adopted by all governmental units needed to make the 208 plan work. If the exclusion of a unit of government would jeopardize the effectiveness of the 208 agency, then EPA would not approve the designation. The initial judgment on the adequate number of resolutions will be made by the state in its recommendation to EPA. ® Are Special Purpose Districts Included in this Requirement? If a special purpose unit of government in one way or another could determine the success or failure or significantly impact on the 208 plan, it would be required to pass a resolution. The real test is a pragmatic one--how important is that special purpose unit to the actual success of this plan? That has to be interpreted in light of each particular situation. Would an Interlocal Agreement that Established a Regional Council Suffice to Meet EPA Criteria? No. EPA wants a separate resolution dealing with this specific issue. The intent is for local governments to have a full understanding of what they are committing themselves to, especially with relationship to the agreements that will be necessary for regulation and possible questions of land use controls that will come out of the planning process. EPA wants this fully understood before they make a substantial monetary commitment. How Much Control Does the State Have over 208 Planning? To begin with, the state is integrally involved in the 208 area and agency designation process, simply because the governor makes the designation. Second, once the designation is made, the state is involved in the review of 208 grant application and finally the approval and certification of the plan on an annual basis. Therefore, the state has the final sign off on the 208 plan. The state also is responsible for establishing the local water quality objectives consistent with Cthe appropriate 303(e) basin management plan and the 1983 goals. The state should maintain continual involvement throughout the planning process to assure that the plan outputs are con- sistent with state program objectives including permits and construction grants. 7 • If the 208 agency submits a plan to the state and the state disapproves because it is not compat- ible with the state basin plan, the 208 agency is required to change it and comply with the state cprovisions. The Act and EPA's regulations are designed to ensure consistency between the 208 plan and the permit and construction grant programs. Can a Local Area Appeal to EPA? Yes. If the 208 agency feels the state decision is either unreasonable or impractical the EPA administrator, or EPA regional administrator, can require the state to make alterations. What are the Land Use Requirements for Conducting 208 Planning? Section 208(b)(2)(F-H) uses the term "land use requirements. " In essence, EPA has indicated that the 208 planning must relate to areawide and local land use policies and plans. However, there is no mandatory requirement that existing land use plans must be changed. Rather, it is recognized that the implication of these existing plans must be evaluated as to their relationship to achieving the water quality standards required under the Act. If existing land use plans will not interfere with the achievement of these standards, there is no requirement to alter such plans and they may be used as the basis for such planning. Local governments would only be required to reassess their land use policies if it is found that water quality standards under the Act could not be achieved under existing land use policies and practices. And in that event, it would be up to the local governments affected to develop an alternative that would best meet their needs. EPA stresses the need for meaningful land use plans throughout the area to define growth pat- terns and, in turn, provide the basis for the hardware designs and a regulatory program. What Kind of Regulatory System Does this Envision and Who Will Implement It? Section 208(b)(2)(c) makes provision for the establishment of a regulatory program to ensure that the management plan and program is implemented. Regulatory controls may vary from area to area due to state law and other factors. In most cases, this involves the use of existing local and state regulation processes. However, augmentation may be necessary to ensure the water quality plan is then taken into consideration, in such cases as the issuance of building permits or administration of subdivision regulations by local governments. In some cases indirect control, such as those over pricing policies, which would constrain water use may be applied. It is important to state, however, that the regulatory program can be im- plemented by the state, general purpose local governments and special districts when these units have in the aggregate the necessary powers to ensure the compliance with the manage- ment plan. There will be no requirement that the 208 planning agency obtain such powers. If additional regulatory authority is required, it could be vested in the units that are cooperatively carrying out the 208 planning. These decisions would result from the management plan and con- sultation with and decisions by state government. What is the Relationship between the 208 Planning Agency and the Implementing Agencies under the 208 Management Plan? Under the 1972 Act the areawide planning agency recommends to the governor, as a part of its management plan, the agencies and local governments that will implement the management plan. In all likelihood these will be existing operating agencies of local governments or special dis- 8 • . tricts. But consideration can be given to developing a single operating agency if the local gov- • ernments so desire. 4.raIn his designation to EPA, the governor must consider the 208 planning agency's recommendations ✓for implementing agencies to carry out the management plan. Only those implementing agencies finally designated by the governor can receive 201 hardware facility grants. Facilities provided for through the grant must be consistent with 208 management plans. Besides delineating implementing agencies for construction and operation of water treatment facil- ities, the management plan must also contain a regulatory system to assure adherence. This regulatory system will require definition of regulatory measures as well as agencies responsible for enforcing such measures. In almost all cases 208-designated planning agencies do not have the regulatory authority necessary to carry out a regulatory program. Therefore, local govern- ments and the state will have to accomplish the regulatory measures. What is the Relationship between 208 Planning and 303 Basin Planning? 303(e) basin plans are prepared by the state and constitute the overall framework within which 208 plans are developed for specific portions of ataslf. Basin plans: (1) provide water quality standards and goals, (2) define critical water quality conditions, and (3) provide waste load con- straints. The 208 areawide plan picks up load allocations and target dates defined by the state in a particular area and attempts to find the most reasonable solution to achieve these goals. 208 plans will be an integral part of the basin plans and must be certified annually by the gover- nor as being consistent with applicable basin plans. CHOW Does 208 Relate to 201 Facilities Planning? 201 facilities plans cover the planning and preliminary design portions of plans and studies re- lated to the actual construction of publicly-owned waste treatment works. Facilities plans, through the systematic evaluation of alternatives, are intended to assure development of cost- effective and environmentally sound local waste treatment systems. Thus, in contrast to 208 plans, facilities plans are limited essentially to abatement of pollution from point sources and those industries served or to be served by waste treatment systems. Facilities plans may be completed or in progress when the 208 areawide planning is undertaken. Such planning should be construed as a step toward and supplementary to the more comprehen- sive 208 plan. Features included in the approved 201 facilities plans such as engineering, cost data and scheduling should be considered as "existing" for 208 planning purposes. Generally, other facilities plans and ongoing facilities planning efforts should be reviewed by the 208 agen- cy, and agreements should be reached between the facilities planning and 208 planning entities for coordination of the respective efforts. Such coordination should be accomplished with views toward achieving maximum consistency with the 208 plan without unduly delaying ongoing facili- ties planning efforts. In general, no facilities planning should be initiated within a 208 area after 208 planning has been undertaken and until a 208 plan has been substantially developed. However, in some cases, such concurrent facilities planning may be justified and approved where urgency of solving a specific problem dictates the need for a shorter-term and more narrowly focused planning effort. Upon approval, the 208 plan will serve as portions of the facilities plan for the designated area. Subsequent applications for grant assistance for municipal treatment works construction 9 • including detailed design of specific facilities, preparation of plans and specifications, and actual construction, will be reviewed for consistency with the 208 plan. Also, subsequent detailed de- signs of specific facilities for which grant assistance is requested must not duplicate the con- tents of the 208 plan. How Does 208 Relate to the National Discharge Elimination System Permit Program (Section 402)7 The 402 permit program is designed to ensure that pollutant discharges do not exceed prescribed emission standards. A permit system can provide an essential tool for implementing a 208 plan. No permits may be issued for point sources which are in conflict with approved 208 plans, since the plans become a part of the overall 303 basin plan. The Section 208 management plan will not affect the issuance of discharge permits until the plan is certified by the state and approved by the EPA administrator. How Does 208 Relate to Other EPA Programs? If any portion of a 208 area is located within an Air Quality Maintenance Area, 208 efforts should be coordinated with the air quality planning and implementation process. During the 208 planning process, the state plans for solid waste management should be examined for recommended organizational and technological solutions pertaining to the 208 area. Local agencies within the planning area which are to have the primary responsibility for regulating and implementing solid waste management controls should be identified. In cooperation with such local agencies, the mutual effects of these programs should be considered and appropriate mea- r, sures taken to assure compatibility. What is the Relationship between 208 and Other Areawide Programs? The land use aspects of 208 planning provide a direct linkage with other areawide planning efforts within the area including those supported under the HUD 701, flood insurance and disaster pro- grams, transportation plans under DOT, and coastal zone management planning under NOAA. The 208 planning should be viewed as providing the water quality component of the comprehen- sive plan for the area. Consideration of other area planning activities will help ensure that their impact on water quality is incorporated into the 208 planning process and that 208 plans are con- sistent with these activities. Such consideration will also facilitate the development of a coordi- native relationship between 208 agencies and related agencies which should be carried over into the 208 implementation phase. EPA is meeting with HUD, DOT and NOAA to begin integrating these efforts at the national level and assure proper coordination of these programs with 208 planning at the working level. What is Required in a 208 Planning Application? The May 13, 1974 Federal Register contains an outline for preparing a 208 application. Some basic points to remember include: • The governor must certify that the application complies with 303 plans that are being de- veloped and that the program described is adequate to develop a 208 plan. The state must also certify that the 208 plan will not duplicate work already being done through 201 facili- ties funding, and that the application is approved by the state water pollution agency. 10 • • The application must also go through the A-95 process to assure that it is consistent with other environmental plans, particularly land use. CO • There must also be a statement that the planning process will continue after the initial man- agement plan is developed--i.e. that the plan can be updated annually to ensure implementa- tion. • The application should also spell out specifically what agency will be responsible for each work activity. How will consultants be used, if any? Who will be the members of the 208 staff? Will local government planning staffs be assigned certain tasks? Finally dollars, resources and work activities should then be correlated, assigned and scheduled! The point emphasized by EPA is that this must be two-way planning which is not only cost effec- tive but is politically effective and can be implemented. A great deal of time in the application process must be spent working with state and local gov- ernment staffs reviewing the proposals and assuring them of involvement. It is also vital that before an application is submitted, the means for participation by the various jurisdictions and interests are spelled out. Continued linkage with the state should be strongly built into the ap- plication. EPA regulations require a continuing and meaningful involvement of citizens in the formulation and annual adoption of the 208 management plan. EPA recommends the use of a citizens com- mittee in conjunction with a committee of the technicians from the participating jurisdictions. In addition, smaller advisory committees can be established to represent industry, smaller Ccommunities, etc. The biggest thing to keep in mind is that the plan must be completed in two years and tight man- agement control is needed throughout the process. While not a requirement, after a grant offer has been made, the 208 agency will have to followup with a schedule of work and the dates for com- pletion of specific tasks. It can help get application through EPA and also help 208 agency if costs are correlated with tasks and resources. The regulations allow for essentially 10 basic payments--10 percent at the initiation of the grant and 10 percent quarterly for the two-year period, 10 percent at completion of the grant. EPA will be looking to a correlation between these quarterly payments and completion of tasks. The payments are not automatic. What about Cost Effectiveness? A central criterion put forth in the EPA guidelines and the 1972 Act is the cost effectiveness of the 208 management plan. The costs are divided into four categories: the traditional resource costs, the social costs, the environmental costs, and the economic costs. These are spelled out in more detail in the guidelines. The question of effectiveness, is measured by the attain- ment of the 1983 water quality goals. Two additional criteria are also mentioned in the guide- lines: implementation capability and public acceptability. CIt is very difficult to measure social and environmental costs. There is no simple formula that you can plug data into and come out with an acceptable level. A process is suggested in the guide- lines to facilitate the comparison between resource costs and other costs. This should give 208 11 • agencies and the state and local governments at least one method to evaluate cost effectiveness of the 208 plan. But the ultimate decision must be based on the available federal, state and local tr. resources to achieve the 1983 water quality standards established under the Act. These resources %sr will determine in many cases the degree that a capital intensive solution for achieving water quali- ty standard is available to an area, and the degree to which other approaches such as pricing pol- icies (or other non-capital solutions) may have to be used. How Will the A-95 Review and Comment Process Apply to the 208 Management Planning Program? The A-95 process has an important role in the 208 planning activities. Under EPA regulations (Part 35, Subpart F, Section 35. 1054-1) the 208 activities are subject to A-95 review. This in- cludes the application to fund 208 planning and the plan developed under the 208 management plan- ning process. How Should Environmental Impact Statements be Handled in the 208 Planning Process? The Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 requires that the Regional Administrator deter- mine if an environmental impact statement is required for each permit and environmental facility construction grant, on a case by case basis. If it is decided that an EIS is not required, a nega- tive declaration must be issued documenting the reasons for that decision. EPA, as of June 1974, was still formulating its position on environmental impact statements covering the 208 manage- ment plan. While EPA recognizes the 1972 Act requires an EIS only on permits and construction grants, cit has been considering the possibility of an EIS for the 208 management plan which would then preclude individual statements on each permit and construction grant. What Information on 208 Should We Have? The first thing you should have is the EPA Water Strategy Paper for FY 74-75. The second is an EPA brochure on 208--it's mainly a public information brochure which explains the program and what EPA is trying to do (in process of preparation). In addition, you should have the regulations for both designation and grant assistance. They are two separate sets. (Federal Registers May 30, 1973 and May 14, 1974. ) Draft planning guide- lines (May 1974) are available and the final version will be published by September. All of these are available from the Water Planning Division, Environmental Protection Agency, Waterside Mall, 401 "M" Street, S.W. , Washington, D. C. 20460. In addition, EPA's public af- fairs department has published a bibliography of general information related to the water bill. A bibliography is also contained in the planning guidelines. C 12 APPENDIX I GLOSSARY C For additional definitions, see EPA's 208 planning guidelines (Draft dated May 1974); final due in September). Basin "The term 'basin' means the streams, rivers and tributaries and the total land and surface wa- ter area contained in one of the major and minor basins defined by EPA, or other basin unit as agreed upon by the state(s) and the Regional Administrator. " (proposed regulations 40 CFR 130.2(1)). Discharge of pollutants "The term 'discharge of a pollutant' and the term 'discharge of pollutants' each means (A) any addition of any pollutant to navigable waters from any point source, (B) any addition of any pollu- tant to the waters of the contiguous zone or the ocean from any point source other than a vessel or other floring craft. " (Act, Sec. 502(12)). Effluent limited segments "Any segment where water quality is meeting and will continue to meet applicable water quality standards or where there is adequate demonstration that water quality will meet applicable wa- ter quality standards after the application of the effluent limitations required by Sections 301(b) C (1)(A) and 301(b)(1)(B) of the Act. " (proposed regulations, 40 CFR Part 131). Facilities planning Pertains to "provision for cost-effective, environmentally sound and implementable treatment works which will meet applicable requirements of Sections 201(g), 301, and 302 of the Act. " (201 guidance, p. 3). Land use controls Methods for regulating the uses to which a given land area may be put, including such things as zoning, subdivision regulation, and flood-plain regulation. Navigable waters "The term 'navigable waters' means the waters of the United States, including the territorial seas. " (Act, Sec. 502(7)). Nonpoint source Generalized discharge of waste into a water body which cannot be located as to specific source, as outlined in Section 304(e) of the Act. Permits "The Administration may. . . issue a permit for the discharge of any pollutant, or combination of pollutants, . . .upon condition that such discharge will meet either all applicable requirements under Sections 301, 302, 306, 307, 308, and 403 of this Act, or prior to the taking of necessary Cimplementing actions relating to all such requirements, such conditions as the Administrator de- termines necessary to carry out the provisions of this Act. (Act, Sec. 402(a)(1)). The Adminis- trator shall authorize a state, which he determines has the capability of administering a permit program which will carry out the objective of this Act, to issue permits for discharges into the 13 , navigable waters within the jurisdiction of such state. " (Act, Sec. 402(a)(5)). The permit pro- gram is a part of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES). CPlanning agency "The governor. . .or governors shall. . .designate each 208 planning area including its boundaries, and for each area a single representative agency to be responsible for the planning. . . . The agen- cy shall be a representative organization whose membership shall include but need not be limited to elected officials of local governments, or their designees, having jurisdiction in the designated planning area. " (40 CFR 126. 12, 126. 13, 126. 11). Planning process Strategy for directing resources, establishing priorities, scheduling actions, and reporting programs toward achievement of program objectives. Point source "The term 'point source' means any discernible, confined and discrete conveyance, including but not limited to any pipe, ditch, channel, tunnel, conduit, well, discrete fissure, container, rolling stock, concentrated animal feeding operation, or vessel or other floating craft, from which pollutants are or can be discharged. " (Act, Sec. 502(14)). State water quality standards Standards of water quality set by the state for intrastate waters, that shall be at least as strin- gent as federal standards and shall further the goals of the Act. Waste load allocation C "A waste load allocation for a segment is the assignment of target loads to point and nonpoint sources so as to achieve water quality standards in the most effective manner. " (303 guidelines). Waste treatment facilities "Any devices and systems used in the storage, treatment, recycling and reclamation of munici- pal sewage or industrial wastes of a liquid nature. . . in addition, . . .any other method or system for preventing, abating, reducing, storing, treating, separating, or disposing of minicipal waste, including waste in combined storm water and sanitary sewer systems. " (Act, Sec. 212(2)). Also termed treatment works. Water quality limited segments "Any segment where it is known that water quality does not meet applicable water quality stan- dards, and is not expected to meet water quality standards even after the application of the efflu- ent limitations required by Sections 301(b)(1)(A) and 301(b)(1)(B) of the Act. " (proposed regula- tions 40 CFR Part 131). C 14 • APPENDIX E PHASE I--AIR QUALITY MAINTENANCE PLAN FOR THE LARIMER-WELD AIR QUALITY MAINTENANCE AREA (COLORADO PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT REGION TWO) Prepared by the Larimer County Health Department and the Weld County Health Department In Collaboration with the Larimer-Weld Regional Council of Governments and the Colorado State Department of Public Health, Air Pollution Control Commission, Air Pollution Control Division January 20, 1975 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 2. Organization and History 1,2 II. Purpose of this Pre-Plan 2 III. Goals 2,3 IV. Existing Monitoring Network and reporting system 3 V. Existing Enforcement 3 VI. Program Evaluation and Review 3,4 VII. Goals of the Phase I Plan 4 VIII. Resources 5 IX. Time Frame 6 X. Bibliography 7 C -1- • C I. Organization and History: In 1970, the Colorado Legislature created an Air Pollution Control Commission and delegated to it the responsibility for adopting air pollution control rules and regulations and ambient air quality standards. The Commission is responsible for reporting annually to the public and to the Governor on progress and program needs. The commission is comprised of nine members, appointed by the Governor for three-year terms.1 The Commission works through the Executive Director of the Colorado State Health Department.2 In 1967, the Commission through the executive Director designated the Weld County Health Department the Agency responsible for the enforcement of the State Law and the Commissions Rules and Regulations. In 1968, the Commission designated the Larimer County Health Department for the above. The Respective Boards of Health oversee the entire proceedure. The Commission declared the Larimer-Weld air pollution control basin in 1967 with due process of law. As a result of a recent court decision involving an interpretation of the Federal Clean Air Act, The U. S. Environmental Protection Agency (E.P.A. ) has required states to designate air quality maintenance areas (AQMA's) by mid-1974. AQMA's are those areas in Colorado which now exceed and/or are likely to exceed federal primary and secondary ambient air quality standards within the ten-year period 1975 to 1985.3 The Larimer-Weld Air Quality Control Basin was designated by the Commission in July 1974 as an Air Quality Maintenance Area, and the • -2- planning for this maintenance area now rests with the Larimer - Weld regional Council of Governments as the regional clearing house for planning, in conjunction with the respective County Health Departments.4 II. Purpose of this Pre-Plan This Pre-Plan outlines a course of action leading to a finished Plan that will, 1. Comply with the Federal, State and local Laws, Rules and Regulations relating to Air Pollution, by implementing the Plan and achieving the goals as stated in the Plan, and 2. Synthesizes for the State the local approach to Air Pollution Abatement Planning and Enforcement. III. Goals: �+ The Goals of the Local Boards of Health and their respective Departments are the same goals as the Commission. These goals are based upon the nature of the air pollution problem in Colorado and more specifically the nature of the air pollutants in the Larimer- Weld Control Basin.4 These goals are: - the adoption of ambient air (the general mix of the outside air) quality standards to protect the health, welfare, convenience and comfort o£ Colorado residents and to facilitate the enjoyment of nature, scenery, and other resources of the state. MAJOR APPROACHES INCLUDE: 1. Reducing motor vehicle emissions by improving vehicle exhaust control systems and promoting a greater use of high-occupancy C -3- vehicles such as buses and carpools,5 and 2. The control of emissions from stationary sources including industrial process equipment and power generation plants. In areas not presently exceeding federal and state ambient standards, to maintain existing air quality. MAJOR APPROACHES INCLUDE: 1. The use of transportation and land use planning to prevent a motor vehicle related air pollution problem from developing, and 2. The preplanning review of proposed stationary sources to insure that emission control regulations and ambient air quality regulations will be met when construction is completed and operation commenced. Improvement of the state's capabilities in order to better assess the trends of air pollutants and thereby determine program needs and effectiveness.3 IV. Existing Monitoring Network and reporting System: The local health departments presently operate an air monitoring system consisting of high-volume air samplers, tape samplers and one carbon monoxide sampler. The carbon monoxide sampler was installed in late 1974 and will monitor for a twelve month period. V. Existing Enforcement: The Larimer and Weld County Health Departments are presently enforcing the applicable State Law and Rules and Regulations of the Commission3 with the exception of Rule 9 relating to the Denver Metropolitan Transportation District.3 VI. Program Evaluation and Review: The Colorado State Health Department, Air Quality Control Section -4- makes yearly review and evaluation and recommends necessary changes for lawful conduct of local air pollution control programs. VII. Goals of the Phase I Plan: 1. Develop tests for significance and relavancy for the levels of pollutants as they regard: Land use; Transportation; Industrial Development; as these relate to economic expansion and population growth. 2. Determine the need for a mobile emission program of testing and retrofit. 3. Explore alternatives for solving existing air pollution problems and projected problems. 4. Determine which pollutants are not now and will not be a problem 5. Develop the state-of-the-art for predicting air pollution problems. 6. Develop alternative means of determining the levels of pollutants associated with projected land use and transportation schemes. 7. Monitor existing transportation systems. 8. Relate the dynamics of air pollutants from one basin to another. 9. Develop long-term strategies and control schemes to comply with all applicable laws, rules and regulations, and show the costs and benefits for doing so with a workable program for attainment. 10. Perform impact research by 1976 so that alternative incentives can be evaluated. 11. Coordinate water quality "208" planning and Air Quality QMaintenance Planning. -5- VIII. Resources: - Use existing resources in the local and state health departments and develop an inventory as an intregal part of the plan. - Develop budget and allocate money for preparation of master plan. - Use E.P.A. contractors as they become available. Urge E.P.A. to select contractors conducive to Phase I Planning. - Use computer models of State Hiway Department and others to speed the process of projecting future levels of air pollutants. C C D.A.W. First Draft 1/17/75 -6- IX. Time Frame 1.. 12-15-74 Definition of roles and missions of local governments in maintaining air quality by the Council of Governments (COG) in AQMA's. 2. 1-15-75 COG synthesized Phase I plan for local determination in Phase II of an air monitoring system (using State siting, modeling, and laboratory support) , growth projections, transportation plans, and land use intentions. 3. 1-31-75 Rough draft available for public reading. 4. 1-31-75 Public hearing announcement. 5. 2-28-75 Smooth draft available for public hearing. 6. 3-3-75 One day of public hearings by the Colorado Air Week of Pollution Control Commission in each of the AQMA's 7. 2-3-75 Review of draft by State and local agencies, preliminary EPA review, use of state and regional A-95 clearinghouse process, and State Arrorney General review, start by increments 2-3-75 and complete by 4-30-75. 8. 4-7-75 Hold record of public hearings open for comment until 4-7-75. 9. 5-16-75 Revise AQMP based on hearing testimony and agency review completeing by 5-16-75. 10. 5-19-75 Submit AQMP to Governor for comment. 11. 5-27-75 Deliver AQMP to printers. C _7- BIBLIOGRAPHY 1. Organization Chart and Air Pollution Control Commission Membership. 2. Organization Chart of the Colorado State Department of Public Health. 3. Report to the Public 1974, an Annual Progress Report of the Colorado State Air Pollution Control Program by the Air Pollution Control Commission; Colorado State Department of Health. 4. Letters committing agencies to prepare Phase I Air Quality Maintenance Plan. 5. Clean Air Act Congress of the United States, and the 1970 Air Pollution Control Act Chapter 66-31, C.R.S. , 1963. Congressional Federal Register 40 CFR 51 Series of Federal Regulations for compliance with the Federal Clean Air Act. Senate Bill 393, 1973 Concerning air pollution control, and providing for the establishment of a motor vehicle emissions control program, and making an appropriation therefor. C APPENDIX F NOV 1 3 1974 • I j1 COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH 4210 EAST 11TH AVENUE • DENVER, COLORADO 80220 • PHONE 388-6111 Edward C. Dreyfus,- M.D., M.P,H,:Executive Director November 8, 1974 Larimer-Weld Regional Council of Governments 201 East Fourth Street, Room 201 Loveland, Colorado 80537 Attention: Mr, Richard D. MacRavey, Executive Director Dear Mr. MacRavey: Your assistance is requested in establishing local intergovernmental cooperation relative to preparation of an air quality maintenance plan by the State of Colorado. Such cooperation is required in the 40 CFR 51 series of Federal Regulations for compliance with the Federal Clean Air Act. A purpose of the required intergovernmental cooperation is to develop at the local level the sense of responsibility and capability required for community and county enforcement of many air quality measures, especially those related to land use. That portion of the State Implementation Plans which should have pertained to maintenance of air quality was disapproved nationwide by court direction. A rigid schedule was levied upon the states for preparation of air quality maintenance plans (AQMP) . Meeting this schedule while attaining the required intergovernmental cooperation necessitates drawing upon the structure and expertise of the councils of government in the air quality maintenance areas (AQMA) for which plans will be developed. Accordingly, it is asked by this Division that the Larimer-Weld Regional Council of Governments represent and coordinate the activities of its member governments and districts in providing intergovernmental cooperation for developing and reviewing those portions of the Colorado Plan relative to maintenance of air quality in Larimer and Weld Counties. Specifically, it is desired that input from Larimer-Weld Regional Council of Governments be provided to the Division on the following subjects: 1. Roles awl missions of Larimer-Weld Regional Council of Governments constit- uents described relative to their comprehensive planning and zoning function as it might relate to air quality. Where air quality has not been addressed by local governments, prospective concepts for taking cognizance of air quality maintenance in planning are desired. 2. In the absence of local thinking about air quality maintenance it is requested that the Regional Council of Governments provide the professional recommendations it will make to its members to encourage coordination of each other's plans in the interests of air quality. Factors for coordinated Larimer-Weld Regional Council of Governments Attention: Mr. Richard D. MacRavey November 8, 1974 c2 community consideration are their policies toward growth, density, open space, industrial and commercial development, traffic, public transit, parking, and orientation of growth toward transportation corridors. This information will indicate the extent of 3C planning that has or will occur under the Federal Highway Act. 3. Where the Regional Council of Governments feels it is not in a position to present the plans, policies, or intentions of certain members it should so advise the Division so that it may establish direct liaison with them. There are no State funds in the current Air Pollution Control Division budget available for covering the costs incurred by the Regional Council of Governments in responding to this request. However, the Environmental Pro- tection Agency is entering into level of effort contracts with a number of vendors whose personnel would be available to assist the Council of Governments in supporting State Air Quality Maintenance Plan preparation. Should this arrangement be unsatisfactory and/or should lack of an immediate cash grant preclude participation by Larimer-Weld Regional Council of Governments, please indicate so this may be communicated to Environmental Protection Agency and so that the State may immediately start to implement the Federal mandate to it by directly contacting local governments. Further participation by Larimer-Weld Regional Council of Governments in its A-95 role and in coordinating local government review of the draft State Air Quality Maintenance Plan is anticipated. A meeting between our staff members may be required for coordinating this effort. If so, November 19, 1974, at your office is proposed subject to your confirmation. Initial input is desired from you by December 13, 1974 with final material provided to us by January 31, 1975 to meet the extremely tight schedule the states are under. Alan Stewart, the Senior Planner on my staff is responsible for this effort. Please contact either of us relative to this request and for any assistance the Division may provide. Sincerely yours, Lane W. Kirk trick Director Air Pollution Control Division AS:pm • DEPARTMENT fr T OF HEALTH 4210 EAST 11TH AVENUE • DENVER, COLORADO 80220 • PHONE 388-6111 Edward C. Dreyfus,- M.D., M.P.H.:Executive Director November 26, 1974 Larimer-Weld Regional Council of Governments 201 East Fourth Street, Room 201 Loveland, Colorado 80537 Attention: Mr. Richard N.MacRavey, Executive Director Dear Mr.MacRavey: Subject: Air Quality Maintenance Plan Notification per OMC Circular A-95 Reference: Department of Health Letter dated November 8, 1974 re: Intergovernmental Cooperation The referenced letter constituted informal project notification under the ID provisions of paragraph 2, part I OMB Circular A-95 dated November 13, 1973, published November 28, 1973 in Part II of Volume 38, Number 228, page 32874, The Federal Register. Use of the A-95 process in preparation of Air Quality Mainte- nance Plans is directed in revisions to 40 CFR 51 to be published in mid-December 1974. This letter formally notifies you within the purview of A-95 that the State of Colorado intends to amend its Air Quality Implementation Plan (AQMP) by preparing an Air Quality Maintenance Plan as directed in 40 CFR 51. Said plan is to be prepared by the Air Pollution Control Division, Colorado Department of Health, to cover Air Quality Maintenance Areas (AQMA) cited under 40 CFR 52 proposed rules on page 25341, Federal Register, Volume 39, Number 133, July 10, 1974. The AQMP is to be prepared in two phases. The first phase must be submitted to the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) by June 18, 1975. The second phase is due to EPA by June, 1977. Phase I is a prospectus and schedule for the full plan in Phase II. Phase II has the objective of relating growth caused pollution emissions to air quality standards between the present and 1985. This is to insure that air quality is maintained within standards. Phase I will describe objectives, plans, and schedules to be developed and attained in Phase II, e.g., Phase I will identify contemplated strategies and the C - •r • C legal authority required, whereas, Phase II will fully describe strategies adopted through regulations, legislation, and ordinances. Critical milestones that must be met to attain the Federally mandated submittal date for Phase I are: (1) definition of roles and missions of local governments in maintaining air quality by the councils of government (COG) in AQMAS, 12-15-4; (2) COG synthesized Phase I plan for local determination in Phase II of an air monitoring system (using State siting, modeling, and laboratory support) , growth projections, transportation plans, and land use intentions, 1-15-75 (this is an advancement of two weeks from the original schedule verbally presented by Alan Stewart, the Division's Senior Planner); (3) rough draft available for public reading, 1-31-5; (4) public hearing announcement, 1-31-5; (5) smooth draft available for public hearing, 2-28-5; (6) one day public hearing by the Colorado Air Pollution Control Commission in each of the AQMAs, week of 3-3-5; (7) review of draft by State and local agencies,preliminary EPA review, use of State and regional A-95 clearinghouse process, and State Attorney General review, start by increments 2-3-5 and complete by 4-30-5; (8) hold record of public hear- ings open for comment until 4-7-5; (9) revise AQMP based on hearing testimony and agency review completing by 5-16-5; (10) submit AQMP to Governor for comment, 5-19-5; and (11) deliver AQMP to printers, 5-27-5. Councils of government within air quality maintenance areas have been requested to coordinate intergovernmental cooperation, provide planning guidance to their elected membership, and synthesize for the State, the local approach to pollution abatement planning and enforcement. Maintenance of air quality within Federal and State standards is a community responsibility to be achieved through locally adopted comprehensive plans for transportation and land use enforced under the general police power and local zoning ordinances. Pursuant to Federal regulation, the A-95 notification and intergovernmental cooperation process was initiated with the referenced letters and the meetings they requested between Divisional and EPA representatives and planners from local governments and agencies. Such meetings have been held and it is deemed that the intent of the regulations has been cooperatively initiated. Sincerely yours, 0613W-114aZiar Lane W. Kirkpatrick Director Air Pollution Control Division AMS:pm C • 77-11 December 11, 1974 Mr. Lane W. Kirkpatrick Director Air Pollution Control Didision Colorado Department of Health 4210 East Eleventh Avenue Denver , Colorado 80220 Dear Mr. Kirkpatrick: Pursuant to your letters of November 8 and 26, 1974 , and the meeting held among planners from the Larimer-Weld Region, Alan Stewart of your office and John Philbrook of the Environmental Protection Agency, it is a pleasure to inform you that the Larimer- Weld Regional Council of Governments, Larimer County Health Depart- ment and Weld County Health Department will participate with your office in the. preparation of an Air Quality Maintenance Plan for State Planning and Management Region TWO. This Region' s partici- pation will be to the fullest extent within our financial and technical capabilities. A copy of the Larimer-Weld 'Regional Council of Governments Governing Board policy motion is enclosed for your records . In response to your request for a definition of roles and missions of local governments in maintaining air quality, the following is submitted. The Larimer and Weld County Health De- partments are designated to maintain air quality in their respec- tive jurisdictions . City and county planning departments will consider air quality maintenance requirements in their comprehen- sive planning. County Commissioners, City Council members and Town Board of Trustees members will be urged to use their regula- tory powers to carry out their comprehensive plans. The Council of Governments, through the A-95 review and comment process, will recommend that no project receive federal funding unless it is consistent with this Region' s Air Quality Maintenance Plan, provided, however, that this Region has satisfactory participa- tion with your office in the development of the plan. While our commitment to participate is wholehearted, we cannot perform all the work which is involved in the preparation of an Air Quality Maintenance Plan Phase I. Parenthetically, as you will recall , you noted in your November 8 letter that there were no state funds available for covering the costs incurred by COGs in this effort. Therefore, throughout this planning effort, we shall need to rely upon technical expertise from the Air Pol- • • Mr. Lane W. Kirkpatrick -2- December 11, 1974 lution Control Division of the Colorado Department of Health and from the Environmental Protection Agency. It is our understanding from your letter of November 8 that the Environmental Protection Agency will have under contract several consulting firms who will have technically qualified personnel available to assist us in the preparation of our Air Quality Maintenance Plan. We anticipate that considerable assistance will be needed in the area of measure- ment of pollutant levels since this activity requires sophisticated equipment, trained personnel and possibly a laboratory setting. Throughout this planning effort, the Council of Governments staff, Larimer County Health Department staff and Weld County Health Department staff will be working with you to accomplish timely completion of each step of the process. Incidentally, in the development of our plan, we are prepared to speak to the relation- ship of contiguous air quality basins with Region TWO. If you require further information, please feel free to contact the following: Dr. Franklin Yoder, Director of the. Weld County Health Department; Mr. Douglas Wigle, Jr. , Director, Environmental Health Services, Larimer County Health Department; Mr. Dick MacRavey, Director, Larimer-Weld Regional Council of Governments; and Mr . CThomas Koglin, Transportation Planning Coordinator, Larimer-Weld Regional Council of Governments. Sincerely yours, Glenn K. Billings Chairman GKB/cs Enc. cc: Dr. Franklin D. Yoder, Director, Weld County Health Department Mr. Douglas Wigle, Jr. , Director, Environmental Health Ser- vices, Larimer County Health Department C It was moved by Trustee Fred Muss of Windsor and seconded by Commissioner Roy Moser of Weld County that the Larimer-Weld Regional Council of Governments and its participating governments implement and cooperate in an Air Quality Maintenance Plan for State Planning and CManagement Region TWO within the constraints of personnel , financing and time. The motion carried unanimously. (The above motion was adopted by the Larimer-Weld Regional Council of Governments Governing Board on Friday, November 22 , 1974 . ) • DEC 1 6 1974 ' BOARD OF HEALTH • velci County Health Department CLARENC I. SITIMAN. GREELEY FRANKLIN D. YODER. MD. MPH a 'O$C 1516 Hospital RoadALPH AAR. GREELEY DIRECTOR GREELEY. COLORADO 80631 CATHERINE BENSON. AULT (3031 353-0540 ANTHONY LEMBACH. GREELEY DAVID WERMING. DOS, GREELEY December 16, 1974 Honorable Glenn K. Billings Chairman, Larimer-Weld COG Weld County Ccnnissioner P.O. Box 758 Greeley, CO 80631 Dear Mr. Billings: This is in reply to your letter of December 11 concerning the Larimer-Weld Regional Air Quality Maintenance Plan for State Planning and Management Region TWO. QYour letter was called to the attention of the Prrd of Health and the following motion was passed on December 13: The Weld County Health Department will cooperate to the best of its ability with the rarimer-Weld Regional Council of Gevernments in supporting the Air Quality Maintenance Plan for this Region. This is a part of our close coordination as the local agency of the State Health Department and its Air Pollution Control Division. We look forward to working with the rarimer County Health Department and Larimer-Weld COG. Yours sincerely, Franklin D. Yoder, M. . FDY:tf ® cc: Mr. Clarence Sitzman, Chairman t,' Richard MacRavey, Director, Larimer-Weld Regional COG • / _.." t 7 197. t,\MEN to v 1 '. L°•LOKIoo 1 'a zoaitia. ae as tl31OOL8flti 200 WEST OAK ST. • FORT COLLINS. COLORADO 80521 • 482.3105 January 15, 1975 (- Honorable Glenn K. Billings Chairman, Larimer - Weld COG Weld County Commissioner P.O. Box 758 Greeley, CO 80631 L J Dear Mr. Billings: This is in reply to your letter.of December 11, 1974 concerning the Larimer - Weld Regional Air Quality Maintenance Plan for State Planning and Management Region Two. Your letter was brought to the attention of the Larimer County CBoard of Health at their January 9,, 1975 meeting and a motion was passed that the "Larimer County Health Department will cooperate to the best of its ability with the Larimer - Weld Regional Council of Governments in supporting the Air Quality Maintenance Plan for this region." ' We look forward to working with the Weld County Health Department and the Larimer - Weld COG in creating a Regional Air Quality Maintenance Plan. . If you have any questions please feel free to contact us. IAlS' cer y Yours, if. Doug s A. Wigle, M.P.H. Director DAW:ds cc: Mr. William Grove Sr. , President Larimer County Board of Health • Mr. Richard MacRavey, Director CLarimer - Weld Regional Council of Governments. PUBLIC HEALTH NURSING SERVICE • ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SERVICE • VITAL STATISTICS SERVICE • LABORATORY SERVICE APPENDIX G D RAF T PROPOSAL FOR EXPANDED RURAL PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS IN WELD AND LARIMER COUNTIES (COLORADO) Prepared by Larimer-Weld Regional Council of Governments, Weld County Department of Human Resources and Care-A-Van For Submission to Colorado Division of Highways and Federal Highway Administration February 6, 1975 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Introduction and Summary II. Weld County Department of Human Resources A. Existing Service B. "Competing" Services C. Proposed Expansion D. Financial Analysis E. Satisfying FHWA and UMTA Criteria III. Care-A-Van A. Existing Service B. "Competing" Services © C. Proposed Expansion D. Financial Analysis E. Satisfying FHWA and UMTA Criteria IV. Regional Approach A. Monitoring and Evaluation B. Unified Budget C. Demonstration of Public and Private Services D. Criteria Served by Combined Approach Appendix A. Support Material: Weld County Department of Human Resources Appendix B. Support Material: Care-A-Van C I. INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY On November 6 , 1974, the Federal Highway Administrator and the Urban Mass Transportation Administrator issued regula- tions to provide guidelines for administering the Rural Highway Public Transportation Demonstration Program, which was authorized by Section 147 of the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1973. The objective of this program is to " . . .encourage the development, improvement, and use of public mass transportation systems. . .within rural areas. . . . " The program is intended to increase mobility, encourage coordination by the various agen- cies providing transportation, produce a useful guide for rural areas needing public transportation, and become the basis for `✓ future national programs. In the spirit of this program, the Larimer-Weld Regional Council of Governments joins with the Weld County Department of Human Resources and Care-A-Van, a non-profit, public-purpose corporation, in the preparation of this proposal for expanded rural public transportation in both weld and Larimer Counties of Colorado. It is the desire of elected officials in Weld County and the Board of Directors of Care-A-Van to increase the mobility of that portion of the region' s population which is isolated due to its lack of transportation. Both the Weld County and Care-A-Van systems now provide limited transportation to the elderly, mentally and physically handicapped and the economically disadvantaged in their respective service areas. This joint proposal, if funded, would enable each system to -1- • expand its service through the addition of two operating vehicles to each fleet. Additionally, because the lack of any stand-by equipment has created problems, each system is requesting one extra vehicle for stand-by use. The effectiveness of the incremental additions to these two fleets will be closely monitored to assure that the objec- tives of the program are adequately served. The evaluation will be carried out by the Council of Governments, which will assure consistency of monitoring and interpretation of results. Not only will effectiveness in meeting known and perceived needs be measured, but this demonstration will allow a determination of the benefits of public as compared to private non-profit corporation means of providing the same basic type of service. �r Additionally, although the incremental service will be aimed to serve the same types of "transportation poor" persons as are already being carried, it will allow some assessment of the practicality of extending rural transportation service to other more mobile segments of the population. C -2- II. WELD COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES A. Existing Service Transportation is one of four services offered by the Weld County Department of Human Resources. The others are community social work, supplemental foods and Head Start. The transportation service is based at the Department' s main office at 2209 Ninth Street, Greeley. The program has a staff of five, a transportation coordinator, who also dispatches the service, three drivers and a transportation clerk who assists in the taking of requests. There is also available on call a relief driver who fills in when regular drivers are absent. Figure 1 is the organizational structure of the Department. This transportation program has served Weld County resi- dents since June, 1973. The objective of the service has been to increase the mobility of both the urban and rural populations so they may have better access to health care facilities, retail centers, social activities and additional community service organizations. Although there are other special-purpose trans- portation services in the area, the only public mass transpor- tation system is a two-bus system operating within the City of Greeley. Operating Monday through Friday between 8 a.m. and 5 p.m. , the Department' s program has increased the mobility of senior citizens and handicapped and low-income persons who do not have ® reasonable access to alternative public or private transportation. Measured in terms of ridership, it can be demonstrated how mobil- -1- C CO W V >1 U ?a 0 -W $4 m --1 Li O >r C au 4Ja v C U) 0U 0 as -H $ x a > b O 47 W x4 I I I U) I I � C u I 1 as o a 1—Jor— -P 0 0 0 $-i al 10 CO CD 5-I $04 0 u rn-i C.) -W Li a b C cn 0 0tH rt u) S{ 0 uu)04 W W O u �j O W X C £ it W C C.) W Li M O w 0 N b El Ga ri C C O • O N A 0 N•N -r4 $ -.1 M E0 4• m w ro E > w w CT m0 • 00 ° F w O W >.ca 00 C FC Ca -0 o v a C x +E 4) m w -0 0 G] Ca Li of g U) 0 W 0 C a b H x a 0 a,�''' O o 04 0 U)) Ca O Il -H W a S 0 C >, O -P o -H W C • w O 0 C Li O N W -H N 04 0 00 N -u x 0 4 � O 0 -H g3 w x w i 0 o H ° ri O "-1 .0 U 0 U) C City has increased. During the first month of operation, 64 round trips were served; in September, 1974 , 931 round trips were served. Most demand is in the Greeley area. At this time, rural ridership is ranging between 25 and 40 round trips by cli- ents per month. Indications are that demand is still growing. Figure 2 demonstrates the ridership increase. Part of the success of the program can be attributed to the type of service. Due to the sporadic and unpredictable nature of the requests for transportation, demand-responsive service has always been used. Transportation is provided free on a priority basis to those individuals who are eligible: first priority for doctor appointments; second priority for senior citizens; lowest priority for handicapped and low-income persons traveling for non-medical reasons. In general, reservations must be made the previous day with trips of the same priority being treated on a first-come- first-served basis. Persons are referred for service by various organizations and agencies such as the Weld County Department of Social Ser- vices, Weld Information and Referral Service and the Weld County Health Department. A list of referral sources is included in Appendix A. Although this program has done much to improve mobility, it does have deficiencies . Most important is its limited size as measured in terms of vehicles. Weld County covers about 4, 000 !� square miles and has a population estimated by the Colorado Divi- sion of Planning to be about 110, 000, half of which is located -d- • w u) 0 D 4 x >+ E a Z D 0 h Z w >+ z w D h a H >+ xi a w a H a a a a o o a a m z w o 44 H E • -4, 4 4 � a N C hr-i o a w w a Cr, a H E G U) O W Z U a • A O V Ul o w z w 41 D x z w 4 0 >+ E a Z D h E z � Drn a h) ,-I w a 1 1 1 1 1 1 i I 1 I 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ® a 01 00 1- t0 111 V' M N H H • �✓ in and around Greeley, the county's only urban area. With this vast area and large population and having only three, eight- passenger vans , two of which are committed to provide service to the Greeley area and one committed to the remainder of the county, service is inadequate. As it is now, the "rural" van travels north and/or west from Greeley on Monday, Wednesday and Friday; south on Tuesday and Thursday. Of course, two round trips are necessary each day to accomplish both pickup and drop-off at home. The "urban" vans provide service to Greeley and the adjacent rural areas. Closely tied to capacity and greatly affecting it is the nature of the demand. Not only is demand scattered geographically, ® it is scattered throughout the day. During September, which is the peak month for ridership, productivity was only 3 . 9 passen- gers per vehicle hour. It is possible that some efforts to fur- ther group riding could increase vehicle productivity in both the urban and rural services. An example might be to alternate service areas by time of day and accompany this with some form of publicity aimed at the target groups. B. "Competing" Services There are at least four other agencies or organizations now providing special-purpose transportation service within Weld County; two more are slated to provide additional service. Those now providing service are: 1. Weld Mental Health Center, Inc. , QStepping Stone: one van and one part-time driver used to collect and distribute clients of their adult day care program in Greeley. -5- 2 . RSVP: one van and one full-time driver-coordinator to carry volunteers in the Greeley area (about 200 one-way trips per week) ; one van and one half-time driver-coordinator to carry volunteers in the Fort Lupton area. 3 . Greeley Parent Child Center: two small school-type buses to carry 60 children to and from their day care center in Greeley. 4. Community Center for Creative Arts: one van and a part-time driver to take children to and from the center after school and to and from home in the evening. Those which will be adding transportation service are: 1. Weld County Department of Human Resources, Head Start: four 15-passenger vans and four full-time drivers to be used to trans- port children to and from the Head Start program which has a morning session (8: 30 a.m. to noon) and an afternoon session (noon to 3 :30 p.m. ) 2 . Weld County Community Center Founda- tions, Inc. : requesting one van from UMTA fund- ing authorized by Section 16 (b) (2) of the Urban Mass Transit Act to be used as an activity vehi- cle for five to ten hours per week to transport handicapped clients. Although these transportation services do not compete directly with the rural transportation service provide by the Department of Human Resources, every effort will be made to de- termine means for coordinating all social delivery transportation services. It is recognized that a merging of the resources now used to provide separate services could lead to economies through more efficient routing and larger loadings; and, because the vehicles and drivers could be utilized more efficiently through- out the day, it is likely that more and better service could ® be provided with the same vehicles so that the target clientel could be better served. -A- C C. Proposed Expansion In light of the short time available for reply to the Federal Highway Administration, it has not been possible to demonstrate conclusively the extent to which unmet transporta- tion needs exist. A questionnaire was administered by the Larimer-Weld Area Agency on Aging that had as one of its pur- poses a determination of problems of the elderly. Due to var- ious delays, the results of this survey are not yet available. The letters included in Appendix A and the data presented in Table 1 do indicate that the need for rural transportation exists. Realizing that there is the possibility for "over- estimating" the transportation problem in the Weld County area and realizing that much of the potential demand lies within the Ciyt of Greeley, the Weld County Department of Human Resources is limiting its request to only six 13-passenger vans. Three vans are to replace the three small-capacity vehicles now being leased; the fourth will have wheelchair capability; the remaining two will be increments to the system--one is to be in operation, the other to be used as a stand-by unit. This project is designed to demonstrate that a dependable, expanded rural transportation system can provide additional mobility to those segments of our society that are at a parti- cular disadvantage and at the same time increase the efficiency of the existing service. Additionally, it is expected that this demonstration will facilitate the evaluation of all special- purpose transportation systems and contribute data toward the overall regional transportation systems planning effort. -7- To adequately accommodate the elderly and handicapped, the service will continue to function at its highly personalized level, providing doorstep pickup and drop-off. In addition, the vehicle with wheelchair capacity will be used to increase the mobility of that particular segment of the population. The demonstration will be an augmentation of the exist- ing service with little or no change in the extent of the ser- vice area. The service will continue to be demand-responsive. The present pattern of sending a vehicle in different directions on different days will be altered so that a vehicle will provide service in each direction at least twice per day so that round trips from all rural areas can be accommodated. The vehicles will deviate from their normal routes to pick up and drop off those persons requesting service. The present method of referring clients and checking their eligibility for service will be con- tinued. It is not anticipated that there will be any change in the standards for service or the priority system of providing service. The expanded transportation will be carried out by the Department of Human Resources with assistance from the referral agencies mentioned previously. At this time, there is no plan to include any other operating systems in the expanded service simply because there has not been an adequate determination of their needs and how the services could be integrated. Each agency has its own special regulations and legal requirements Qand therefore must be considered separately in detail. Included in Appendix A are also statements of support -8- from other agencies and organizations which need and provide transportation. As can be seen, these statements all point to the need for additional transportation service in the rural por- tions of Weld County. It is proposed to fund the driver costs through the Office of Economic Opportunity. It has not yet been possible to receive a commitment from this organization to participate in the funding of the demonstration. Included in Appendix A there is a commitment from the Weld County Board of Commissioners to continue the program and specifically to provide gasoline, maintenance, repair, garaging and certain other services to the program. The time schedule for the demonstration is for vehicles to be ordered upon notification that the proposal has been approved for funding. Assuming that this notification is re- ceived by the end of April, 1975, the vehicles could be in service by the end of June, 1975, barring unforeseen difficulties relating to bidding and delivery. As discussed in a separate section of this proposal, the monitoring and evaluation will greatly affect the continuation of the project. Based upon available information, there is every reason to believe that the expanded program will be a success and will continue to be funded. However, if the program should not perform up to expectations, it would be modified. One of the advantages of demand-responsive service is that it can be changed in many respects without affecting the basic service. -9- M D. Financial Analysis At this time, the program is supported entirely by Weld County. The total annual operating budget for the existing ser- vice is about $39, 000 . (The detailed budget is presented in Appendix A. ) The addition of three vehicles will increase expenses for drivers, fuel, tires service and insurance by a total of $13, 500; overhead costs will remain unchanged. Vehicle rental costs and licensing costs would be decreased by $6, 300 per year. The additional driver cost ($10 , 700) is anticipated to be covered by funds from the Office of Economic Opportunity. The additional operating costs will be borne by the Department to offset the reduction which would be produced when vehicle rental costs would be terminated. The capital costs of the existing system are zero. The expanded system would require $26, 000 for five standard vans and $7,20O for a van with wheelchair capacity. E. Satisfying FHWA and UMTA Criteria (This section not yet written) -10- III. CARE-A-VAN A. Existing Service Transportation is the only service provided by Care-A-Van, a non-profit, public-purpose corporation with a nine-member board of directors. The objective is to provide mobility to the men- tally and physically handicapped, the elderly and economically- deprived individuals who have no other means of transportation. Care-A-Van wants to provide economical , efficient and considerate service to all those who quality. At this time, Care-A-Van is operating four buses and four vans; some of each are equipped to accommodate wheelchairs. All vehicles are radio equipped to facilitate the greatest mobility of service. The four buses are used to provide weekday service for mentally and physically handicapped persons traveling to the Foothills-Gateway Rehabilitation Center midway between Fort Collins and Loveland in Larimer County. Except for one group of 45 clients which returns to their home for their noon meal, all 175 clients using this service receive only one round trip per day. The four vans are used in demand-responsive service to provide transportation to those persons who are eligible. The priority of users is: first, mentally and physically handicapped; second, elderly; last, economically deprived. RSVP volunteers are also carried by Care-A-Van. In addition, the vans are used to provide feeder service to the buses to reduce the buses ' long collection tours. Excluding the feeder service, the vans serve between 1, 600 and 2,000 trips per month or an average of 90 one-way trips per day. Clients are generally referred to Care-A-Van by other agencies, but potential clients may also refer themselves. Care- A-Van has a half-time social worker who assists in a determina- tion of whether the person is eligible for service. Certifica- tion is important because this is the only way that Care-A-Van will be reimbursed for the service that it provides. The funding scheme is complex but simply stated; the referring agency usually pays for the client' s service. Con- tributions and grants are sought; a portion of the funding is provided by United Way. Care-A-Van has increased the mobility of its target groups; however, there are deficiencies in the service. Even though it has all eight vehicles operating weekdays, once the special-purpose buses are discounted, there are only four vans to provide service to the cities of Fort Collins and Loveland and the surrounding rural areas. Due to the larger concentra- tions of persons in the urban areas, the rural areas have not received the level of service that is deemed to be appropriate. The nature of the demand is also a factor. Because the area is large and because the demand is spread over the entire day, demand densities are low. Average productivity for the vans is only three passengers per vehicle hour. C -12- B. "Competing" Services There are three other agencies providing special-purpose transportation within Larimer County. They are: 1. Loveland Human Relations Center: one van, one modified van and two drivers used to transport elderly persons within the City of Loveland. 2 . Youth Services Bureau: one van driven by a staff member used to take clients to various projects. 3. United Day Care: one van with a part-time driver used to bring children to day care center. Although these transportation services do not compete directly with the rural transportation service provided by Care-A-Van, every effort will be made to determine means of coordiniting all social delivery transportation services. It is recognized that a merging of the resources now used to provide separate services could lead to economies through more efficient routing and larger loadings and because the vehicles and drivers could be utilized more efficiently throughout the day. It is likely that more and better service could be pro- vided with the same vehicles so that the target clientel could be better served. C. Proposed Expansion At this time there is limited information available regarding unmet demand for transportation among those groups now being served by Care-A-Van. A questionnaire administered by the Larimer-Weld Area Agency on Aging that had as one of its purposes a determination of transportation problems of the -13- elderly. Due to various delays, the results of this survey are not yet available. There have been indications from many agen- cies and organizations within Larimer County that there is a need for transportation service for rural areas. At this time only a small portion of the Care-A-Van service is to and from rural areas and little has been done to publicize the availa- bility of the service since the available equipment cannot meet the existing demand. To implement a meaningful rural service, Care-A-Van is requesting three vans, two of which will be oper- ated all day while the third will be used as a stand-by unit. This project is designed to demonstrate that an expanded rural transportation system that is dependable can provide ® additional mobility to those segments of our society that are at a particular disadvantage and at the same time increase the efficiency of the existing service. Additionally, it is expected that this demonstration will facilitate the evaluation of all special-purpose transportation systems and contribute data toward the overall regional transportation systems planning effort. To adequately accommodate the elderly and handicapped, the service will continue to function at its highly personalized level, providing doorstep pickup and drop-off. In addition, when a vehicle with wheelchair capacity is necessary, one of the existing vans will be used. The expansion will also be in terms of service area. At this time rural service is very limited with the majority -14 measured by ridership being to the Berthoud area. It is pro- posed to provide service to other areas where the need for such is demonstrated. Likely areas for service are Estes Park, areas to the south of Berthoud , Laporte, and the area in the general direction of Wellington. With two vehicles it should be possi- ble to serve all these areas on a daily basis. The exact nature of the service will likely not be known until more data is available regarding needs; however, it is not anticipated that there will be any change in the current set of priorities. The expanded transportation will be carried out by Care- A-Van which will receive assistance from referral agencies. At this time there are no plans to include any other operating agencies in the expanded service simply because there has not been an adequate determination of their needs and how the ser- vice could be integrated. Each agency has its own special regu- lations and legal requirements and therefore must be considered separately in detail. Included in Appendix B are statements of support from other agencies and organizations which need and provide transportation. As can be seen, these statements all point to the need for addi- tional transportation service in the rural portions of Larimer County. The time schedule for the demonstration is for vehicles to be ordered upon notification that the proposal has been approved for funding. Assuming that this notification is re- ceived by the end of April, 1975, the vehicles could be in -15 service by the end of June, 1975, barring unforeseen difficul- ties relating to bidding and delivery. As discussed in a separate section of this proposal, the monitoring and evaluation will greatly affect the continuation of the project. Based upon available information, there is every reason to believe that the expanded program will be a success and will continue to be funded. There are many organi- zations which might consider funding the continuation of the program beyond the demonstration period. If the program should not perform up to expectations, it will be modified in an attempt to make the service more effective. One of the advantages of demand-responsive service is that it can be changed in many respects without affecting the users of the system. C D. Financial Analysis At this time Care-A-Van is supported by a variety of organizations including United Way, the City of Fort Collins, Larimer County and the Larimer Community Centered Board. The total budget for fiscal 1974-75 is about $150, 000. (The detailed budget is Appendix B. ) The addition of three vehicles will increase expenses for drivers, fuel, tires, maintenance, repair and insurance. The total operating cost increase will be about $17, 000. Capital costs required to carry out the demonstration are estimated to be $15, 600. This brings the total one-year cost for the Care-A-Van portion of the demonstration to $32, 600. C E. Satisfying FHWA and UMTA Criteria (This section not yet written) -16- a • IV. REGIONAL APPROACH The combining of service expansions for both Care-A- Van and Weld County Department of Human Resources into one pro- posal affords the opportunity for increased mobility in both counties and keeps control of the programs at the local level. The use of a common monitoring and evaluation program will produce a better analysis and will allow the operators of each system to benefit from the experiences of the other. In addi- tion, the comparison of different methods for providing the same type of service will provide decision-makers with more com- plete information. QA. Monitoring and Evaluation Because this is a demonstration program, thorough moni- toring and evaluation are necessary to assure that the transpor- tation services meet expectations and effectively meet demand. System performance is much more than the number of passengers served and the vehicle miles traveled. Table 2 lists the data to be collected and the source of that data. The basic source is records kept by the two systems. If these are currently in- adequate, the record keeping procedures will be revised so that the data produced by the two systems are compatible. Additional information will be collected during the survey efforts . At this time, it is felt that an initial evaluation is necessary to provide a basis for making determinations of project success. Figure 3 is the form to be used for the on-board survey of system riders; Figure 4 is the form for the home interview survey. -17 TABLE 2 �✓ MONITORING AND EVALUATION DATA SOURCES Data Source Sample Size Ridership By Hour of Day Dispatch Records Ten Days Records By Day of Week Dispatch Records Two Weeks Records By Total Dispatch Records 100% By Origin and Dispatch Records One Week Sample Destination per Month of Project Labor Hours Monthly Summary 100% Vehicle Miles and Hours Monthly Summary 100% Productivity Monthly Summary 100% Service Times Special Notes on Ten Days Records Dispatch Records Passengers Trip Purpose On-Board Survey 100% Sample with Frequency of Use and Other Records On-Board Survey Alternate Mode During Two Evalu- Demographic Profile ation Periods. Reactions to Service Expenditures Wages and Fringe Project Budget 100% Fuel Service Repair Tires Capital All "Eligible" Persons Attitudes toward Home-Interview Statistically Special-Purpose Survey Valid Sample Size Transportation Systems Other Special-Purpose Other Systems What is Available Transportation Systems C ON-BOARD SURVEY FORM Time Dear Rider: Please pardon the inconvenience; your answers to the following questions will help us improve your transporation service. THANK YOU! fir✓ 1. Home address: 2a. Trip origin: 2b. Trip end: 3. What is the primary purpose of your trip? Please check only one. ❑ Work O Social/Recreational ❑ School ❑ Shopping ❑ Doctor/Medical ❑ Other (specify) : 4. What other transportation would you have used if this service were unavail- able? ❑ Auto driven by yourself O Regular city bus ❑ Auto driven by another O Walking person 17 Would not have made this trip ❑ Taxicab ❑ Other (specify): 5. Will this be a round trip by this service? ❑ Yes ❑ No The other portion of my trip is being made ❑ Don't know via (specify): 6. How frequently do you use this service? O Everyday O Occasionally (less than once per week) ❑ times per O This is my first trip !' 7. Which is the single most important factor that would increase your use of V this service? ❑ Service available day of O Shorter riding time (fewer stops calling for other passengers) ❑ Better estimates of vehi- cle arrival time ❑ More available service points; specifically, where? (i.e. , service agencies, work places, shopping, etc. ) ❑ Other factor (specify) : ❑ No service improvement would make me ride more often. 8. Is there anything you do not like about the service? (explain) 9. Should there be a fare for this service? O Yes 0 No 10. How many cars do you have available in your household? ❑ None ❑ One ❑ Two or more 11. How many people in your household have driver's licenses? 12. Do you have a driver's license? ❑ Yes ❑ No 13. Sex: Male Female 14. Age: ❑ Under 16 O 16-20 0 21-24 O 25-34 O 35-44 ❑ 45-54 O 55-64 ❑ Over 65 15. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS: Figure 4 C TELEPHONE OR HOME INTERVIEW SURVEY Name: Address: Telephone: Eligible for: 1. This is (name) calling for (agency) . We're trying to contact people who are eligible for transportation service. We would like to determine how familiar you are with the service and your reaction to the service. 2. First, are you familiar with the service offered by T ? 3. Have you used this service? Yes No 4. Do you still use it? Yes No 5. (If yes) How often? 6. We are most interested in finding out if the service is satisfactory to you. Is it? Yes No 7. (If no) What is unsatisfactory about the service? 8. Is there some specific service improvement which will help you to use it better? (specify) (INTERVIEWER: If you are satisfied that you have the desired information, thank the person and state, "We will try to incorporate your suggestions in our future planning.") 9. Categorize the general response. Unaware of service Totally dissatisfied and discouraged--will not try again Moderately dissatisfied--might use again Dissatisfied with service but continues to use it Neutral-- Does use Does not use Satisfied with service--will use on irrigular basis Satisfied with service--regular user B. Unified Budget (This section is not yet written. ) C. Demonstration of Public and Private Services One of the best aspects of the overall demonstration program is the opportunity to compare in detail service pro- vided by a public agency and a private, non-profit, public-purpose corporation. This demonstration will allow a compilation of the benefits associated with each type of service to facilitate a determination of which one is most appropriate. There appear to be benefits associated with each form of service; a recom- mendation for which type of service is "best" will be made with appropriate qualifications. C D. Criteria Served by Combined Approach (This section is not yet written. ) Appendix A--Support Material : Weld County Department of Human Resources and Appendix B--Support Material: Care-A-Van have not yet been prepared. C -18- Hello