Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-06-26 - Partner Boards - Agendas & Packet MaterialsA. Call to Order - 11:00 a.m. B. Public Comments C. Approval of Minutes C.1 Approval of Minutes(Ahlstrom) D. Unfinished Business D.1 Introductions(Ahlstrom) D.2 Where We Left Off(Ahlstrom) E. New Business E.1 Community Survey Overview(Ahlstrom) E.2 Concept Alternative Descriptions and Tiers (Ahlstrom) THE INTEGRATED WATER RESOURCE PLANNING COMMITTEE OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA WAC AGENDA Monday, April 6, 2026 General Information If you are interested in commenting in writing on items on the agenda please send an email to comments@bozeman.net or by visiting the Public Comment Page prior to 12:00pm on the day prior to the meeting. Recordings of the meeting will be available after the fact through the Meeting Videos page. For more information please contact Shawn Kohtz, skohtz@bozeman.net This meeting will be held in-person only. This is the time to comment on any non-agenda matter falling within the scope of the Integrated Water Resources Planning Committee. There will also be time for public comment in conjunction with each agenda item in which a formal recommendation or decision is being made but you may only speak once per topic. Please note, the Committee cannot take action on any item which does not appear on the agenda. All persons addressing the Committee shall speak in a civil and courteous manner and members of the audience shall be respectful of others. Please state your name and place of residence in an audible tone of voice for the record and limit your comments to three minutes. General public comments to the Committee can be found on their Laserfiche repository page. 1 F. General Discussion G. Adjournment G.1 Next Steps(Ahlstrom) All meetings are open to all members of the public. If you have a disability that requires assistance, please contact our ADA Coordinator at 406.582.3232. 2 Memorandum REPORT TO:Integrated Water Resource Planning Committee FROM:Jessica Ahlstrom, Water Conservation Program Manager SUBJECT:Approval of Minutes MEETING DATE:April 6, 2026 AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Minutes RECOMMENDATION:I move to approve the November 19, 2025 TAC and PAC meeting minutes. STRATEGIC PLAN:6.1 Clean Water Supplies: Ensure adequate supplies of clean water for today and tomorrow. BACKGROUND:The WAC will consider the approval of the November 19th meeting minutes of the PAC and the TAC. UNRESOLVED ISSUES:None ALTERNATIVES:None FISCAL EFFECTS:None Attachments: PAC - November 2025 Meeting Minutes.pdf TAC - November 2025 Meeting Minutes.pdf Report compiled on: April 1, 2026 3 MINUTES Integrated Water Resources Plan Update | Public Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes Meeting held on November 19, 2025 Attendees • Grant Syth, Bridger Builders and PAC member • Suzanne McGee, Member of the Public and PAC member • Brooke Lahneman, Sustainability Board and PAC member • Megan James, Montana State University and PAC member • Ben Holst, Bozeman Health and PAC member • Jessica Ahlstrom, City of Bozeman • Eric Neustrup, City of Bozeman • Zach Magdol, AE2S • Matt Wittern, Raftelis • Makenna Sturgeon, Raftelis Meeting Minutes November 19, 2025 | 6:07 p.m. | Bozeman Fire Station 3 Public Comment [00:00:03] Matt Wittern, Raftelis, called the meeting to order and opened the floor for public comment. One person gave comment. • [00:01:59] Adam Sigler, Bozeman resident, thanked the group for their effort and presented several points related to water alternatives: o He expressed that it is critically important to maintain current irrigation infrastructure because it plays a vital role in groundwater recharge throughout the valley, not just in specific managed recharge projects. o He suggested a creative approach of connecting irrigation infrastructure with stormwater systems, specifically using retention and detention basins to infiltrate water between storm events. o He stressed the need to be proactive about emerging contaminants like PFOA/PFAS. This includes testing current levels and going upstream in the collection facilities to identify and address high-concentration areas, which would make sludge and wastewater reuse more feasible. 4 City of Bozeman IWRP Update Page 2 PAC Meeting – November 2025 • [01:32:23] Adam asserted that groundwater storage is essential to mitigate evaporative loss and bridge the peak demand/availability gap. He expressed that existing irrigation networks are a way to move water and recharge groundwater. He also recommended exploring the use of shallow groundwater for non-potable needs, such as irrigation, to delay or offset the need for enhanced treatment capacity at the Sourdough plant by reducing peak demand on the treated supply. Approval of Minutes [00:06:05] PAC approved the October PAC meeting minutes. Review Revised Screening Criteria [00:06:23] Matt reviewed the notable screening criteria changes that were made after hearing feedback from the PAC and TAC. He also reviewed the TAC’s screening criteria responses and explained how the screening criteria will be used to score alternatives after PAC ranking/weighting scores are received. Screening Criteria Scoring [00:11:13] The PAC completed an independent exercise to assign weights to the overarching screening criteria categories. [00:30:35] After reviewing the results, the PAC acknowledged how closely their weights aligned with the TAC’s results. The PAC agreed that it is comfortable with AE2S moving forward with this data to score alternatives. Alternatives Review [00:34:12] Zach Magdol, AE2S, reviewed and requested confirmation of the alternatives that will be scored against the screening criteria. During this portion of the discussion, he shared notable changes to the 2013 list, alternatives the project team recommends removing, and alternatives that will be more challenging to implement. [00:48:04] Zach provided an overview of the alternatives scoring process. [00:52:04] Zach reviewed the universe of alternatives with the PAC line-by-line. [01:15:26] Jessica Ahlstrom, City of Bozeman, addressed the drought reserve alternative, clarifying that it was a recommendation from the City's first drought management plan. This alternative is unique because, unlike most other alternatives, it would not increase supply for future growth. Instead, it involves earmarking existing water specifically for emergency use during severe drought, functioning purely as a resiliency project. Jessica also reiterated that the comprehensive list of alternatives currently under discussion represents everything the City 5 City of Bozeman IWRP Update Page 3 PAC Meeting – November 2025 could possibly do and is a compilation of ideas from various sources. It is not a list of projects the City plans to undertake at this point, but a starting point for evaluation. [01:25:41] Matt repeated the study process and next steps for scoring and narrowing down the universe of alternatives. He also discussed public outreach plans for the rest of the process. [01:28:57] PAC members agreed that they are comfortable with this list of alternatives moving forward. Next Steps [01:29:54] Jessica shared plans for a possible treatment plant tour and a WAC meeting in early 2026. The WAC meeting will be scheduled at a later date. Meeting ended at 7:42 p.m. 6 MINUTES Integrated Water Resources Plan Update | Technical Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes Meeting held on November 19, 2025 Attendees • Clayton Elliott, Montana Trout Unlimited and TAC member • Alan English, Montana Bureau of Mines and Geology and TAC member • Holly Hill, Gallatin Watershed Council and TAC member • Danika Holmes, Montana Department of Natural Resources and Conservation and TAC member • Rebecca Kurnick, Association of Gallatin Agricultural Irrigators and TAC member • Tim Marcinko, Member of the Public and TAC member • Shawn Kohtz, City of Bozeman • Jessica Ahlstrom, City of Bozeman • Peter Scott, City of Bozeman Water Rights Attorney • Eric Neustrup, City of Bozeman • Zach Magdol, AE2S • Matt Wittern, Raftelis • Makenna Sturgeon, Raftelis Meeting Minutes November 19, 2025 | 11:11 a.m. | Bozeman Fire Station 3 Public Comment [00:00:08] Matt Wittern, Raftelis, opened the floor for public comment. One person gave comment. • [00:00:51] Daniel Hardy, Bozeman resident, commented on the City's water supply planning. He questioned why the City continues to pursue new sources. He expressed concern for the long-term health of the East Gallatin River watershed and detailed major projects under consideration. He concluded by asking representatives from Montana DNRC, Montana Trout Unlimited, and the Gallatin Watershed Council on the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) to advocate strongly for the watershed’s health and urged the City to listen to their concerns. • [02:16:34] Harley Harris, retired water rights attorney representing the Gallatin Water Trust, introduced himself and noted the Trust's interest in the committee's work. While still reviewing the process, he observed that the planning model described by Peter 7 City of Bozeman IWRP Update Page 2 TAC Meeting – November 2025 Scott, Bozeman Water Rights Attorney (see 01:27:02), is consistent with the thinking of the Gallatin Water Trust. He suggested there is strong ground for collaboration. He also noted potential commonality with agricultural and irrigation interests and concluded by urging the TAC to ensure that the approach described is among the items considered. Approval of October Meeting Minutes [00:03:55] Tim Marcinko, TAC, moved to approve the October meeting minutes. The minutes were approved. Screening Criteria [00:04:44] Matt introduced the City of Bozeman’s water rights attorney, Peter Scott, to support the meeting discussion. TAC members introduced themselves. [00:08:05] Matt shared the results of the screening criteria survey that TAC members completed independently before the meeting. When taking the survey, TAC members assigned weights to the screening criteria and sub-criteria. The consolidated results were an average of each category’s scores. The group also reviewed the minimum and maximum weights for each option. • [00:10:28] TAC members discussed the number of criteria and redundancy in the sub-criteria. Several mentioned that assigning weights was a challenging exercise. The group discussed whether the TAC should further refine the criteria. • [00:17:59] The TAC asked how the weights will be used to score alternatives. o [00:21:47] Zach Magdol, AE2S, shared the anticipated process for scoring the alternatives with the weighted criteria. The engineering consultants will score each proposed alternative against every sub-criterion on a scale of one to three, with three indicating the most favorable outcome (e.g., highly constructible). Four individuals will perform this scoring for each alternative. This process is the second level of screening, following an initial "stoplight" assessment that determines basic feasibility, particularly concerning water rights. The Water Advisory Committee would then review the preliminary scores and discuss how to move forward with the alternatives. o [00:25:44] The TAC discussed and agreed that the group would like the project team to score the alternatives and bring recommendations back to them for review. The group requested the inclusion of an additional reviewer on the scoring team who brings a social, agricultural, and cultural perspective. They would particularly like this person to focus on scoring alternatives against the social criteria. • [00:36:40] The TAC requested one additional survey to establish each person’s top 10 across all the screening criteria. This may help further confirm priorities for later discussion. • [00:44:58] Some TAC members expressed interest in AE2S using the existing survey results to score alternatives, instead of refining criteria and completing the entire weighting exercise again. They expressed interest in more discussion after preliminary scoring is complete. 8 City of Bozeman IWRP Update Page 3 TAC Meeting – November 2025 • [00:51:15] The TAC asked for clarification on the committee's role. One TAC member asked whether the primary purpose is to identify water supply alternatives to meet anticipated population growth, rather than to define that growth. o The project team confirmed that the primary goal of the IWRP is to lay out water supply options that respond to variables, including growth, not to establish what growth will look like. The team clarified that the process is not solely about volume; the social and value-based criteria (such as ecosystem services and community perception) are integral, and the IWRP must consider the source of water and reflect community values. The discussion concluded with an observation that, based on the effectiveness of the 2013 plan (particularly conservation and system loss reduction), the committee's final recommendations will provide a very direct path and major direction for the City to follow. [00:58:32] TAC broke for lunch. [01:11:37] Matt briefly reviewed the screening criteria survey results, and the group agreed to revisit the criteria discussion later in the meeting. Alternatives Review [01:21:35] Zach reviewed and requested confirmation of the alternatives that will be scored against the screening criteria. During this portion of the discussion, he shared notable changes to the 2013 list, alternatives the project team recommends removing, and alternatives that will be more challenging to implement. [01:27:02] Peter acknowledged the TAC's struggle with ranking alternatives. He suggested framing the criteria along a spectrum of feasibility versus infeasibility or acceptability versus unacceptability, particularly for social elements. Peter noted that since the basin is closed, any new permit application would require mitigation through a change application process. He proposed thinking of water rights in two groups, private rights and rights held by public service corporations. He also proposed a possible opportunity within the planning horizon to facilitate cooperation, especially with agricultural organizations and ditch/canal companies, to transition toward more diversified water uses, potentially characterizing them as public service corporations to address diminishing revenue and infrastructure maintenance. Peter also explained the complexities associated with water rights transfers and Bozeman’s history of water supply planning. [01:47:00] Zach reviewed the updated list of alternatives that will be used for scoring line-by- line. He requested any final changes. [02:01:24] A committee member asked if all potential new local potable water sources would be conveyed back to the existing Sourdough Water Treatment Plant, or if secondary treatment plants might be necessary. • The City clarified that the decision depends heavily on proximity. If a new source is near the Sourdough plant, it might be feasible to convey and treat the water there. However, if a source is distant, the City would likely opt for a wellhead treatment system at the source instead of building a separate, centralized treatment plant. This cost-benefit analysis also applies to shared resources. 9 City of Bozeman IWRP Update Page 4 TAC Meeting – November 2025 [02:06:45] The TAC discussed several questions regarding the defined groundwater alternatives: • Why is "Groundwater Development" restricted to City limits, rather than expanded to include the entire planning area or the wider basin? o The project team agreed that the scope should be expanded basin-wide. • Clarification on the "Groundwater Development Belgrade" alternative—specifically, whether this refers to a new well for Bozeman water, an interconnected system for shared use, or a combination. o The project team noted that this alternative would likely require an interconnect component to facilitate water sharing. • Why other shallow groundwater sources in the basin were eliminated as alternatives. o The consultant agreed to rework or add alternatives to expand the geographic scope of groundwater exploration and ensure alternatives like developing wells on alluvial fans are included. The discussion affirmed that the primary goal of the deep confined groundwater alternative is to find a reliable source for potable use. [02:36:56] The TAC confirmed that AE2S should move forward with scoring the list of alternatives after adding water marketing, refining the groundwater alternatives, and adding or modifying salvage water. Next Steps [02:39:05] Matt revisited the process to date. The TAC agreed that it is comfortable moving forward with the existing screening criteria responses. The group requested a deeper discussion about alternatives and scores after preliminary scoring. [02:49:48] The group expressed interest in seeing the top 10 ranked sub-criteria among TAC members. The project team said it would send out a new survey. [02:55:55] Matt reiterated that the project team will discuss including an expert on the team to score the alternatives through a social and agricultural lens. He confirmed the group will meet again in early 2026. That date will be determined later. The meeting ended at 2:12 p.m. 10 Memorandum REPORT TO:Integrated Water Resource Planning Committee FROM:Jessica Ahlstrom, Water Conservation Program Manager SUBJECT:Introductions MEETING DATE:April 6, 2026 AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Administration RECOMMENDATION:Introduce yourself to the WAC, provide an introduction and short bio of your relevant experience. STRATEGIC PLAN:6.1 Clean Water Supplies: Ensure adequate supplies of clean water for today and tomorrow. BACKGROUND:Water Advisory Committee and project team members will participate in an icebreaker to familiarize members of the formerly distinct TAC and PAC. The facilitator will share an overview of the WAC’s objectives and role in the IWRP update. UNRESOLVED ISSUES:None ALTERNATIVES:None FISCAL EFFECTS:None Report compiled on: April 2, 2026 11 Memorandum REPORT TO:Integrated Water Resource Planning Committee FROM:Jessica Ahlstrom, Water Conservation Program Manager SUBJECT:Where We Left Off MEETING DATE:April 6, 2026 AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Policy Discussion RECOMMENDATION:Consider the work done prior to the WAC breaking for the holiday season, setting the stage for the meeting's discussion. STRATEGIC PLAN:6.1 Clean Water Supplies: Ensure adequate supplies of clean water for today and tomorrow. BACKGROUND:The project team will briefly revisit where the TAC and PAC left off, setting the stage for the concept alternatives first round screening discussion that will take place during this meeting. UNRESOLVED ISSUES:None ALTERNATIVES:None FISCAL EFFECTS:None Report compiled on: April 2, 2026 12 Memorandum REPORT TO:Integrated Water Resource Planning Committee FROM:Jessica Ahlstrom, Water Conservation Program Manager SUBJECT:Community Survey Overview MEETING DATE:April 6, 2026 AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Policy Discussion RECOMMENDATION:Consider the community feedback presented by the project team. STRATEGIC PLAN:6.1 Clean Water Supplies: Ensure adequate supplies of clean water for today and tomorrow. BACKGROUND:The project team will review the results of the recently completed community survey, which informed first round screening of concept alternatives under the social criteria. UNRESOLVED ISSUES:None ALTERNATIVES:None FISCAL EFFECTS:None Report compiled on: April 2, 2026 13 Memorandum REPORT TO:Integrated Water Resource Planning Committee FROM:Jessica Ahlstrom, Water Conservation program Manager SUBJECT:Concept Alternative Descriptions and Tiers MEETING DATE:April 6, 2026 AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Policy Discussion RECOMMENDATION:Consider the different concept alternatives and the tiers they fall into. STRATEGIC PLAN:6.1 Clean Water Supplies: Ensure adequate supplies of clean water for today and tomorrow. BACKGROUND:The project team will describe the first round screening process and discuss the resulting concept alternatives that are now organized in tiers. The WAC will discuss how to move forward with tiered concept alternatives. UNRESOLVED ISSUES:None ALTERNATIVES:None FISCAL EFFECTS:None Report compiled on: April 2, 2026 14 Memorandum REPORT TO:Integrated Water Resource Planning Committee FROM:Jessica Ahlstrom, Water Conservation Program Manager SUBJECT:Next Steps MEETING DATE:April 6, 2026 AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Policy Discussion RECOMMENDATION:Consider next steps in the process. STRATEGIC PLAN:6.1 Clean Water Supplies: Ensure adequate supplies of clean water for today and tomorrow. BACKGROUND:We will end the session by sharing next steps and considerations for the May meeting. UNRESOLVED ISSUES:None ALTERNATIVES:None FISCAL EFFECTS:None Report compiled on: April 2, 2026 15