The church, different meeting to the community, and have this face here. We're really, really grateful for not my for giving us this face tonight. So I just really thought that was important to say and to thank not my, if anyone's members, please pass that along to the church. How grateful we are to have the meeting here. Interim critical call. I'm going to start. We'll start. Scott Wittkin, no conflicts Scott Wicken, no conflicts. Derek Price, no conflicts. Kerry Tex, no conflicts. Rick Paris, no conflicts. John Brown, no danger. No conflicts. First of all, I'll first go. I do have a new staff on the line. I'll be there to do some of the judges. Okay. Okay, great. Thank you. Okay, great. So I thought this would be a great opportunity to open this up to the public, to give you an opportunity to share concerns about the, not this is necessarily even concerns, but to be here to be present, to talk about things that you'd like the new board to be considering, as we're evaluating the previous water policies that were presented by the last board. We wanted to present this as an opportunity for you to just have an open format, to share your ideas, just being conscientious of time, if you could try and just keep your comments to three minutes, I think if you don't have, if you don't, if you need more than that, then we can kind of come back around but just to move around the room. But this is really your meeting and an opportunity for us to just get to know you and to learn more about you guys and what's important to you guys for us to be understanding and thinking about as we're moving forward over the next couple months and obviously into next year as a new board. So with that, do I need to, we don't need a motion or anything to go to all the comments? I do. I'm going to need a motion to just ask people to stay to the name and parcel or student or street address for the recording. Excellent. So feel free. First I'd like to say we suggest a five eight I'm going to deal. We did have a little bit of a community gathering last night just of the Sunday members of the community again. just of the members of the community. And I just wanted to thank the new board for being so open to this collaboration because I think you didn't feel that before, at least from the 100 or so neighbors that I've spoken to. And so this is very refreshing and I think there's a renewed confidence in the board and the staff and that we're kind of getting a lot of the concerns. Take care out of the way and the collaboration on the policy. And the race, it feels really great and important for all of us as neighbors. So I appreciate you guys, and I'm just going to know all the time you're putting in. Thank you. Thanks, Lisa. Thank you. You're welcome. Thank you. Thank you. Thanks, Lisa. Thank you. You did a wonderful job. I'll reiterate that this is amazing. I mean, not... Could you say your name? Oh, my name, I'm sorry. I know your name, but... Do you have the thoughts you wanted for my third home? We're going to do this half. Thank you. And so thank you for two things. Number one, just doing tonight, like this is refreshing. Like this is supposed to be back and forth. I didn't even know that. But you know, you're having a chance for us to make comments on something before you make a decision about it. That's amazing. It shouldn't be amazing. No, but it is. Thank you for making it like it's common sense and it's very refreshing. And I have some more ideas to talk about that. So thank you, thank you. Thank you, John. We're reaching through a lot 134, 128 was for road. I also just wanna express appreciation to the board for taking these issues on. And I think there's some good information circulated starting in the summer with a more detailed explanation of the limited resource we have to deal with here. I think it's easy for any of us when we see a bill or an overcharge to react. But at the same time, you know what I'm here to talk about this, because at the same time we have to figure out how to avoid overstanding on our word of budget. We only have 100 and some odd at your feet. And that can go really quickly if we're not using it through the leaf and people are using the water and the water and the collected rice or whatever the digital individuals just in the half are. And that can quickly affect all of us if we get it from any of our, you know, what are share agreements that we have through the data and we burn others. So I'm glad we're taking these issues on and we're gonna wanna, I think, try to be really thoughtful about how fairly but clearly make sure people understand that we only can use what we have and as a fairly limited amount, we're at the top of the base in two. So there's not really more water coming in from anywhere. So... Can I ask you a quick question? Carrie? Yes, you may. OK. You said Davis and Weaver. Do we own those shares or do we lease them or is it like a lease in perpetuity? You know, it hasn't been back to what my impression was, but I believe we own the shares. And I thought in the past, maybe it was least water. There is least water, at least there has been in the past in its neighborhood. Some of those leases ended, I think, some time ago, or are certainly not possible to get now. For the standard of leasing developed as much as it has, things were a little bit more free and easy, but as we all know, this baseness, number 35 I believe is pretty high on the state engineers list of concerns. We're over subscribed, if everybody uses all the water, the rights allow them to use, we're gonna be in a depleting situation where they're fast. So it all gets at least, I think, we can go on the share, but I'm sure. It's the lead conversation. Stephen Fox, 139, Tonya Road. So I've got to watch it for a year, maybe many others do. And it's over-creed. And so you mentioned there of the 400-odd acre feet did make me wonder how many of those we use. Not that we have, but for example I have this acre foot, you know it's hundreds of thousands of gallons. I don't use anywhere close to that. So that would be an interesting framework for us to think about, I'm going to talk about water for the board of the staff to go Hey, by going out on these meters on all these wells. Holy smokes we got this data Turns out we've got 400 You know ain't your feet to you. There's only you stuff Oh my god Might be a useful date when I be great to You know, that's just math that would be beautiful to look at that math So you know, if we're going to bring through these questions of like How much are we? How, kind of kind of how tense shower costs your B if we've got a 400 seven I think we've gotten close to that if I remember in the August meeting, we talked about the percentage of water we have with the percentage of overuse, and it was like less than 1% overuse based on the shares allotted. So I think some people have called the water engineer and it's been a lot with all of this. And the aquifers full and we're not from what I remember and we can get some definite data. I guess you guys can get some definite data. We are well under what we could be even with, you know, reaching out three million gallons a month for several months continually out of the solar bullet. So I don't think we even came clips on that. So I think we're actually in pretty good shape as far as what we have to the proportion of water that's actually used. And it's interesting with that the total would come out of the connected users as well as the well users I suppose for the whole area. Right? So that might be something interesting to actually get some data on that. Very, wouldn't that be so interesting? Thank you. So, Sally White, 1230, H. Rowan, echoing everyone's appreciation for the board. I don't know who I care at, and who came up with this idea, but this is like we used to meet here, and it's really great to have you here. Thank you so much for all the, so I did some research on the-on-water and it's actually only a bachelor meter. So I don't know if a board uses an overall metering system to tell how much water everybody's using can be used to get. But it's kind of like my electric bill, my gas bill, it says, you've used this much more than last month or last year. So it would be really, I think, amazing. Again, this is what other people have mentioned, to be able to have the dashboard be transparent. So it would be really, I think, amazing. And again, this is what other people have mentioned. To be able to have the dashboard be transparent. So as a whole, silvery creek, it would say, here's how much we can use total. And here's how much as a whole connected and all connected users are using. So we can see that cumulative culinary water usage. It's like, yay, we did the last or boo, we did more. That's my suggestion thank you okay I'm trying to answer your question and I'm sure Johnny Crystal I'm going to show up if I make a mistake here it's a hot-hot this sort of that serves area of own some water rights out right at least some water shares from places like the launch of irrigation company it's's kind of mess. And on your point in regards to data and our usage, one of the things I brought some of our into our house because of a very long story. Part of that process was the state we need to also help transducer, which monitors the water level in the aquifer. I've asked several times if we have that data, I have an answer, if we do have it, that would be great data to have. Because we can actually judge how the aquifer, with that particular piece of equipment, which is not that bad at all. As you know, it's live, you can record it, you can know exactly what's going on. And so salad, that's right, having like usage and historical usage and learning a tour, that's fantastic idea but also building where the aquifer is down inch super health data. Do we have them? We have them both in the district and green from the above. Can we publish that there? Yeah, it's a report. We can pull out a scatter system. Okay, that would answer a lot of questions. Sure. She's sound of us on that. What are the most, what are the most, what are the Sure. Just sound on that. What are the most common amongst the R&Bels? We're all on different gravel lenses basically. So you sound used wide. I play a lot with you all this time. But, you know, like if you go half-mind down the road from us, people have, you know, their wealth are completed at 60 feet. My house completed at 490. So it's, and I didn't just drill, you know, an extra $30,000 because of that too. So there's a lot of variance, you know, unaware people are going to water based on what they encounter. Basically, a lot of the way lenses of gravel are producing good water, but it creates some, I think, confusing results. You know, it's not where I think you could refer to it over, like, inside of it, like, the swaner. You've got much more of a gravel up face than they did in the model. Ruby Mars, you know, by you would be on any direction, five other things you'd be interested in, you'd see what suits the oscillations. So Rick, you're saying the results of that report would be not entirely accurate or... It would be accurate for the well that is the, that you're reporting on, but it wouldn't necessarily say what's happening. So for us to say you're gonna say, oh, the health of the entire aquifer is X. Right. That's not the case. You're saying, I think it's, yeah, that the aquifer is much more complex here because you've got a lot of, there is a lot of ways. I think our gene our community wells are completed 6,700, 8,000 feet. We're 800 plus on both wells. Yes. So, you know, the actual, yeah. But what Rick is saying is correct, is it's going to be very specific to the wells, because I'm probably through four aquifers, getting water on both our wells because of the depth. Ricks down to 400 feet. I don't know what it wears or what. I'm telling you, but there's some like a bus with it or like 120 feet. They're bearing in on aquifer. And so when you're starting to look at the data, you really need to look at the whole area. And you would want that life from John and from Rick and from all of us. So multiple points would give you more accurate. Yeah, so if you have on your well, you know, that gives more data for your area. Yeah, yeah, okay. For when the hydrologists start looking at possibly even wells, their gathering is much data from everybody as well, depending on where you're going to put them up. So. So I love the co-op idea at Sally. You brought that up initially. I think Steve, you touched on it. I think it really weaves us all together in a way that we weren't previously. But as you guys are talking about the different strata, help me understand this. Does that really mean that, like if John's wealth has a different depth versus Derek's versus Carries, can we theoretically really even consider the idea of a co-op if we're all on such separate pools, not pool, but whatever you call it, a body of water or aquifer? Like is there just one big aquifer that we're all on such separate pools, not pool, but whatever you call it, a body of water or aquifer. Like is there just one big aquifer that we're all tapping into? Or are we localized aquifers that certain areas have? You know, that's more for a hydrologist, a answer. Oh, answer, you have one. So we retain the well-optured bill off them. It would probably be more more to answer that. But I do know that as you go deeper, you get more water, and it's the shallow ones that start to have issues and try to up and really start going until the drought times, where this is pretty well and then I bring to it while continuing to produce what we need to sustain. where this is pretty well and then green field continued to reduce the what we need to sustain. And you mentioned green field. That's the arsenic one that nine months. Is there a way to dedicate water sales from that? Hydrant, is there a hydrogen on that? Well, there's not a specific hydrant. It goes into the system and is blended and we use it, but we could probably add one in the future because there is a line coming right up. That's a great idea. Okay. That's a fantastic idea. There's Derek's idea. I still have for him. You're going to fill water for us. That's a great idea. So by the back, you're going to fill water to that. You want to actually have water. I have water. In our community, we have all these residents now that are metered. I only have 218 of them in the community that are actually using their sign up. Where I have water. So all the rest are not signed up, but they're not seeing the data that cell is talking so much about. And if there's any pitch out there tonight to be paid, get on eye-on-water, because it goes out in the newsletter, it goes out at the time of the webpage, how people sign up for eye-on-water. So they can see the same data that I see in the office. And then get those legal words or uses or whatever else benefit. Yeah, we'll continue to do messaging from the service area, but you guys have your own networks. So if you could just encourage, because there's really no reason, we were talking about this earlier today, No reason I can think of why you wouldn't want that. Yeah. And it goes to the data points. I mean, the more data points we have, the better, right? And as a group and as an individual. So within your own networks, if you can just encourage people. And it is a really great tool. It is. Because you see, you know, us trying to mitigate our issue that we had not even realizing how much we've once you get on there I've seen it go down every single month so that I know I'm doing right thank exactly figuring out the problem so it is a really it's a very useful tool at a neighboring party one time we all put down our phones and had iron water and the whole yeah you know I'm water parties yeah I am water campaign on next door. Say if you're not in the I am water, call us so we can catch you. Yeah, exactly. Happy to. Appreciate that. Question on that for Chris. Though you mentioned 218 of those are meter and you said not all of them are on higher water, is it correct that you guys still have you guys still have an island, right? So it's not like, yes, that's correct. I just see everybody else. Yeah. So the staff can access the legal for the entire neighborhood, even if the local resident doesn't install this path. Right. Yeah. But that is great. But I think it's important that there isn't a no, right? They should. Because that's example. This last week we had a basic home I'm assuming something froze they were getting an excess that they were using 10,000 gallons a day They are not on I have water if they were they would have a leak It ran for a couple of days before I noticed it I gave them a call and then cats someone coming come and shut off the water and I assume they're prepared. But for those, they went on with 30,000 gallons in three days. So I mean, if they were part of that water, they would have got to know us hopefully a cop quicker in that because we're not looking at everybody's and I'm not looking at several hundred things every day. But the big ones, yeah, this is going to take care of everybody. Chris, can you set the alerts on your own phone? Yeah, the US and the US. No, no, I mean you, like if there's something like that in this out of town, do you have an ability to do a lursing of those person? I, no. I absolutely have. People are like, oh, I'm falling. No. I don't know what that means. Okay. I'm going to be on my screen. Just to be close to each other. Uh, kind of. The visual response is a little bit. One down and five down. You know what I mean? Because there's toilets running. All right. You know what? I don't like that. My total is dripping. Yeah. For me to look at it and say, well, this person's running the 200 gallons an hour. Hey, I'm calling on everybody. Got some. Yeah. That makes sense. Any other comments from the public? I don't know if it's for this time, did you end up or future of our conversation, but I just want to put out a general sort of consideration request or no question which is what would it look like for service area 3 to offer, upper self-recreable, well-having residents, the option of being handed over their water right so the resident needs to file with the state rather than being managed by servicera in three water policies. Sean has an actually really interesting on that topic. You have a really interesting question. I'm happy to keep talking, but I've talked too much. Tell me about that. That's why we're here. Well, I've been a physician that I need to be here. And while it will be great to have hand-rope girls, they're not going to do that as an asset. These three souls are a lot of size. And that needs that. I've spoken to dozens of so-called great residents that offer pin more. All of them is well beside you. Because there is no reason for the service area to be between me and the private law. Like, my mom and I, this person, I come out with this. My job's not to try to commit it to my mom. So there's really no reason for the service area to be between me and my law. Historically, they said, no, there's a really hard time between watershed and water rights, and I was just impossible. That's not true, because shares and varieties move stuff around exchange applications, the people who are at least in water from, I know the first thing we're going to get is talk about it. This is a very soluble problem, and the best part about it is, A, you know, gets somebody out of the way and you know, well, be resistant to the service. You got a couple of big bills coming down the pipe for instance, the whole living room, the wealth, the cost was, the cost of computing, and so that's a few million bucks. And the minutes is trying to get along, and that's great, but that's hundreds of thousands of dollars in interest over a very long time. We don't have to spend the service area to be willing to offer us, I mean, a power out of check for 30 grand for a lot of tomorrow. And we get a couple of dozen must-do, and that's all for the service area. It's not uncommon, like, the only people who don't like this idea are people that I will vote for, but then we will lose leverage over our papers. The only reason we need to keep that is so that we can be controlled by people. That's the only way that I can agree from the governors, saying why they don't want to be like that. That's your problem. I don't know if that's what you're going to do on my judging, but I think it's a good opportunity. I think you're a good opportunity. I can chase that down, you guys never loved it. I heard from all the players, everybody spoke about the fires that looks like this data engineer, no problem. I mean, it's a very solid problem, and it's a lot of money in your pockets, and prevents us from spending a lot of money on interest. So, John, if I'm hearing you correctly, you're submitting that it's the service area 3's board decision whether to do that or not. Absolutely. The state doesn't have any say in it. State whatever water. You guys own rights and these threats from other people, you know, you might need permission from others other people, back in health with bad. If you guys want to do that, you can say John Christmas made this happen. Or at least, the very minimum of the request that you create, let's hop up, let's investigate this. Let's see if this is an option that solves a lot of problems. But in theory, and obviously this wouldn't necessarily be the case in practice, but in theory, if everybody in Silver Creek wanted, like, hey, that's a great idea. I want to do it. We don't know enough to satisfy everyone. Well, upper Silver Creek, people with private levels, that's possible from distribution or something. Yeah, but there are seven million knowledge with a label who lives for a crew who would love to run a check. And what is your thought if there's a variance of like, who could, some people may not be able to afford to do that, or some people may not want to do that, go through the process, because there may be like legal fees associated with that situation. How do you brainstorm previously in terms of thoughts about that? The way I would structure it, if I were, you know, ingrid it would be an opt-in or, in this case, an opt-out of service area management. So, you said, hey, anyone who wants to, anyone who wants to read a check and get out of here, no. This is what we can do. And if, like, a certain number of dozens't be, we're trying to do that. And Chris, how many people on dwells on paper are there? A whole lot of people are 300. And a paper? There's lots of people. Roughly 300 lots, but not a paper. And there's how many in lower? Two in lower. What happens to the seniority of that water right if it's divisible from the larger If you're changing ownership, it's a simple problem with the vision of our rights. It takes eight minutes to fill out. If you need to move through stuff around or have a lot of shares on the one-share patient's property, it's a very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, don't know if everyone else has seen this, Nathan did, show the different groups of water rights, and he specifically said that they were not divisible down to individual shares. Some were in batches of three, some were batches of 10, 20. So you referring referring to households likely to watch shares coming by the launch of your irrigation company. I think so. You mean it's a three-day. Yep. Nathan's right. The piece of paper that we had said, however, gentlemen, we need to talk to to make happen. Call him right now. I get to know have to run it as much as we can. These are very soluble problems. The problem is that the history of the service area has been people having wanted to do that. And so that's been shut down as an idea with a lot of different reasons. There. All I'm saying is, if it's impossible for a great that's fine, that's the other way up. Let's at least investigate it. If you want me to do it, I'm happy to do it. There's a bunch of qualified people who can do that as well. But this is already making my process, I'm very, I don't want to do that. Are there any triggers that you know of that if this were to take place, it would have a downstream impact on other people who choose not to opt in. The biggest uncertainty in my mind would be if we had to change some water rights and shares and move stuff around with division of water rights, that would involve an exchange application, which it always helps. You know, somebody can prioritize it, somebody always protests it. But the worst thing that happens is you go down that road and it doesn't happen. There's no change. And then how would, so I think we have roughly, someone correct me, but 16 to 20 shares in reserve relative to the whole service area that would cover us if we egregiously go over as an entire group. If we have shares that leave, how does that impact the reserve? Well they were no longer owned like the water used by the product. Well that's pretenders, the example. I buy the large area. Then you've got to care about that. If your water rates and the water use would still be compared to the wet versus the air water. So would we report to the state then? You'd be reporting to the state then. So it's not that it's not reporting. It's just that anybody who opted in, for his example, would then be monitored by the state and not honored by the service area. Is it my understanding that correctly? It would no longer be service area problem. Right, it would be the responsibility of the service area, it would be the responsibility of the state to monitor the people who had opted in on that, on those shares based on that water. So two still limited the same amount of water. You still have the same exact amount of water. It's just that the service area wouldn't be the ones that would base. And you the notice or what you're doing. You still have water, but still be the same. It would just, if I understand correctly, it would just not be up to the service area to oversee that portion of the people who had opted in. Now the service area is still in charge of the roads and all the other things. It's just the water for the people who opted in would not be governed by the service area, they would be governed by the state. So what is the, for the people that want to opt in or out, but why would they rather be governed by the state than a local? The reason I've run a request was mostly just the frankly night marriage experience I had with the staff of service area three, multiple times coming home on property without permission, scaring my daughter, threateningly, if I didn't do it by a certain time, I would be a file that is unable to inhabit my home and my family would be accepted. Or the experience where that, that when I came and did like a coffee thing and sat with it and said, oh, hey man, that was like pretty intense and sort of comfort that he had with a degree of kind of authority and kind of oot on the neck that like my style of feeling was, I don't want to be under this man's authority. I don't want my family under this man's authority. I don't feel comfort with that in my community. And frankly, I have a bit of an edge that I'm just going to be candid about here, which technology is pretty wacky these days. There's some layers of like, well you know, for this video thing that we have on it, it's actually radio connected. You know, it did start out just modern, but actually we were able to actually set up a system where actually there's a lot of button actually actually so you're gonna need to do this actually for your bill because actually now we just push this button here so we're gonna need to do a send to our request. How do I say and so there's a sort of like just like soft little like banality of authority of authoritarianism that for my family, we don't see talk into if we could choose not to. That was the reason that we moved to service area three. We selected you as a mercenary, not to have an HOA. There's a certain sort of philosophical, you know? Probably rather have like full agency over my family's water. But you still own. It's the state. It's the state. But the state doesn't have a microscopic four person staff who will come on to my property without alerting me in advance, without my permission, without checking with the sheriff, I called the sheriff and let him know folks had come on. Okay, so I've heard this one before but I don't understand that your reason, okay? But you're talking about other things. Is everybody feel the same way? What the reasoning? Yeah, well I want to hear from Rick. There was a part of Scott's question. I want to make sure that we cover, which was, you know, there's this call for the rich account. You know, there's, you said 10 or 12. Short, it was like 14 or 16 or something. Because we're talking about 10. So that's 10. Is shares a defeat? What is it? 10 water rights. Because it's a 10 or 8 or 8. It's 8 or 8. 8 or 8? Okay. Which is a benefit that we all share under, you know, kind of as a collective insurance policy against a big overage. I think Scott was asking, well, how does, who benefits from that overage buffer if they go out on their own. I would say if somebody, any bus and bus over is over free, for example, headed out on our own so it's being opting out, you're going to leave behind that overritch buffer. That would stay with the service area, it would be the most sensible thing. I would say, it would make sense that that that went to basically consolidate within the community wells. So, you know, if the community wells, if there's a big leak, you know, we bust and soberble it, or that's correct. It is, and we're over on water. We're not truly over on water. There's that buffer. So I think that is an important point for everybody to consider if they, I don't know, you know, it sounds like you looked at this quite a bit and that's, you know, certainly interesting thing to consider and has some potentially, you know, interesting options for the certain series, well, individuals. But I think people would need to be clear that, acre foot will be your acre foot. Right now your acre foot is you, while there is a, and I've had my own challenges with not correct water master roles, but some of the kind of assessors of the water, I don't know well, I'm not on the system, but I do understand the frustration people have had with some of the exchanges that we've all been through. But you know if you go over your right foot, your answer goes to the state and where the state engineer at their department may say you're required to do the pretty slow and deployance. What does the state, Does anyone know what the state charges if you go over? You just basically, it's not really a charge. You're taking somebody else's water. It's up to, you know, and it's going to be probably somebody like Davidson Wheeler is going to come up and say, and you know, if that's over water, you just use. You will appropriate it to somebody else's water. And that's going to be kind of the old maximum of the pioneer ranchers around here, which was he's protruding the water's white. I feel like Nathan touched on that at some point because he was saying that he owns out near the ointress and he's on the well. And he would have had a good perspective on a question like that. But if you do go over in that situation what that looks like. So I kind of remembered from that it was either from one of the discussions here or from that. August. August I can't remember which one because there's so much information. But the state will look at whoever was John, you can correct them. So say, you know, a hundred people decided we're going to opt out. They look at it as a whole. When they're taking the calculation, they are not necessarily judging just the individual, they're looking at it as the whole. So I might say in mind but John might go over by 20,000 as long as what? As long as it's not over on the whole I don't know and that was something that was discussed a lot that anybody's coming to say oh you know you're doing this of course people who opted into that plan would have to understand that anybody's coming to say, oh, you know, you're doing this. Of course, people who opted into that plan would have to understand that it's a possibility, but I don't know that it's the grave danger of somebody coming in. That, I think, correct me if I'm wrong, but that was in the context of people who take their water rights and we've creating a water company. No. It wasn't? No, it was the state engineer when they look, and you guys can correct me. Are you talking about our reporting as a whole not as individual? Right, they look at our water usage in Silver Creek as an entirety. Not, you know, dare use this, carry use that, at least use the sand use that. It was more like the whole community has this to use and we have why use and we use pens. But if people leave, they're no longer part of the surface area. vision of water rights to the vision of drinking water. That's kind of the same you do on the vision of drinking water, so as if you have about seven connections, then all of a sudden it's a water company. But in my type of health scenarios, it would be individual water rights and individual wells. They would treat those as individual diversions of plants. And so, yeah, and so if, let's, to your concern, let's pretend I'm not going to talk about that. And I think something on it, I'd use a way over one year for over the year. They have some very big and very scary lawyers who all they do all day is go after people who do that. Most importantly, the state pays that bill, as opposed to right now. When I get into an argument with John or anyone we're paying the legal bills against ourselves and out of the bat you know we're we're neighbors on neighbors drum and I've had a poor experience with that and I'd really like to not have that again. I think the more we can make it so that we're, there's less on our plate and less opportunity for division and friction. I think that's good for us as a neighborhood, but that's my opinion. Thank you. It's an interesting concept for sure. I mean, I saw your hand up. Oh, yeah, so I'm Jenny Campbell. I'm at 8842 Highfield Road and we're on the, we've been regulating and watching our water since we got the report starting beginning in the summer, I guess. And we're close to our element. We really, we're really trying to change things. We have 30 big spruce trees and lots of trees. And so in the summer, it really, it's hard. So I guess I have a question because at first when you were talking about my water rights, like we would show by war if we could. But I don't really care who monitors it. I would just be nice if there was an option to buy more water. Because we don't want to be taken from our neighbors. And we're, I think we're going to make it, but it's really close. And so that was what maybe I'm just looking for clarification. Because I like to idea at first, but then when I find out that it's just, sink and a monitor, you know, the district monitor says, I were looking that if there's a possibility to buy more water rights, we would definitely be on that. I think there are some people that you can fund, they know that some John Dupont had some people approach. If you are able, if you want to, are you individual combined additional water, right? I think it's about $90,000. We're finding it pretty tough to find. It extends to six. But it's hard to find. It happens at the same time. Well, you could also, things you also just go over and pay the overage for. Right, if the overage makes sense. Right. Right. I'm sorry, if the overage makes sense. Right. Right. I'm sorry, I'm having a good question. Andrew McLaughlin, 700, Red Mode. And I'm sorry, I'm from New Jersey, so Water Rights is whole thing is like, mind blowing to me. But I have a question when we're talking about buying extra water rights leaving the sober creak. How does that affect the people who are on wells? to where like water rights leaving, leaving the sober creak. How does that affect the people who are on wells? And do we know the operating cost of the lower level system and that did connect it to the other, sorry, connect it to users? Does it will it affect how the cost of that and how we support the people we buy more of our life? If we individually, like if I were to we buy more, if we individually, like, they think we start off up to now. Or do we even know the cost of what it is to run the connected system? We do, but I guess the sum lines for you that is, the upper currently gets an annual fee of, sorry, to order it when they want to make $180.00. Right and lowers $107.00. $130.00 for the year for your $1.00 year for a while. On the lower system or on the water system, that is $109 per month for 20,000 gallons plus and over to go over the 20,000 gallons. Did that cover the cost of the whole system for each person? Correct. How many homes are connected? 200. I'm connected. 200? I'm sorry. I missed all that earlier. It's 300 down the whole room, 200 down the upper. I was confused by that. Sorry. Thank you. No, that's just all right. Oh, okay. Yes. We have on the lower, just over 200 connections. 200 floor. 200, how many? I think it's around 209. Is the exact number? OK. Chris, maybe are you also asking, like, I think we talked about that earlier? Did you have like a rough estimate of that operating cost loss? I have. I have. I have. Oh, OK. I've got a bunch of numbers. OK, I know. I'm sorry. Okay. I'm sorry. Thank you all. Thank you. Thank you. I have a question. Two. It's reversed. Yeah, it's reversed. So you're to date, and this is a draft. Let me say it again. This is a draft. This draft. You're to date revenue. Not revenue, but how much it takes to operate the money. This will get us close to the number. So the year-to-date revenues, $956,000 per this spreadsheet that I was given. If this is through the end of October, figure it's 16% higher. So roughly $1,175,000 and correct me if I'm wrong. But there was roughly a $54,000 lost due to amortization from last year. Okay, again, this draft number. And that's to run and maintain connected users, that number. So, to running and maintaining connected users based on amortization going into the budget for next year, you're at a loss of $54,000. Estimated, we're not necessarily recognized, just that's a ballpark based upon. And that is including Scott, any current overages on connected users that have been charged throughout this year. Assuming they've paid their bill, this number reflects monthly overages for people on the water system. On the water system. Yes. Okay. Okay. So is, just going to one second, is with the overages from the well users be used to make up that 54,000? I think if we can appreciate it now, correct. Is that put in the positive that you've got? That's what Dave intimated at the last meeting. But again, he qualified his data by saying these are not finalized numbers. But that was the impression I got was that if you take out the amortization, it would have been exactly break even. So I mean with that information, how the overuse of That is up to the board. How about you and your director? I know that it's been discussed in the past that they would like to pay for purchase more. What do you want to raise? I think those oranges. But that's direction. That's the consideration of trustees. This is the whole thing. the consideration of trustee. Okay. Just to make sure that people understand what you're saying. So if we can assume that the revenue is roughly a million 175. From the look from the monthly connected users. So that's collecting that and any overages in the lower. But this also includes certain things like commercial water service connection fees permitting. So those are one-time fees that theoretically go into this total revenue number. The total revenue number is what is used to operate the water system, do the inspections on the meters, change out beacons, pay for the... All on lower. The cellular transmission from the beacon. All on connected users. Okay. Any user has a beacon on their meter, correct me if I'm wrong, but that beacon speaks to a point which provides data to you. But is the 1175 only on the lower beacons? That is the entire water revenue through October 31st. Because how often do you have to inspect? Well, I'd never had anybody contact to make that about a beacon or about my need about. That's why I'm asking this or love me there. How often is the service area inspecting well beacons or well-meaders? How often does that happen? So... To go into this charge, right? How much work is going in to that to understand what the number is? So typically the line coming out to inspect a well-meater, there's something wrong, and then it tells me you're on the system. Right. So as they, it's not transmitting any more batters did. Someone unplugged it in that town. That's never happened. I'm not even an hour. That's a hype to say. But, and I just get, at the screen, it doesn't know what it is. I turn off the report. We go out and do whatever it says. Five, no. It doesn't know. So, at the end of the year, you think maybe a dozen? Yeah. If you want to say that, a dozen or so per month on a radio basis? Well, out of 200 on a regular basis. Every month. Let's go. No, I think it's 12 out of 500. So that's the reason you just passed. The water system is still done. Is the revenue of the water system. It's not broken out just in the water system. Yeah, we're placing questions. It's just part of software. Yeah, we're playing some questions. So we're going to remain in the same place. Well, I'm only asking because her question was specific to connected users. So if there's a number in there that's not only connected users, that is also the entire area. If you're going to well user's home, 12 people who have wells every single month for an entire year, then that's a significant number of well users. If you're saying maybe once a month, but you're saying just so they can kind, so she can kind of understand, but the answer to the question. Just to point out, it could be more than that, because my report, I don't break it between well users and systems. It's just me. more than that because my report, I don't break it between what it is. It's just an oaks. But when we look at the system users, there is a list of a full page every month. So I've got to go look at for very street sense. Should I go on the other page? Connected you to? Yeah, or to verify, hey, this person used a hundred thousand gallons a month, I do have a nine-year check-in bill. I do have a check-in bill sure on the connected people pay, this need to be used correct. Right. Yeah. But I think, well, great saying, that's part of the operation and maintenance stuff. You're not being in the additional rent and do the job. The way is $1,000, you spend on the engine and the heater repair is to be punished by that service business. It's done in the ESO. But I think essentially, you know, I know we're still waiting to be crazy, you know, the religion of the top three long years, which is like that. But every meter, we have a mommy of good, okay, it's been a project. But every meter has a meter. So it's really not connected versus well, it's just every meter has a meter. And I think that's the first one I said earlier, I actually see 218 people well it's just every week because people are utilizing eye and water. I'm not going to say that. I'm not going to say that. I'm not going to say that. I'm not going to say that. I'm not going to say that. I'm not going to say that. I'm not going to say that. I'm not going to say that. I'm not going to say that. I'm not going to say that. I'm not going to say that. I'm not going roughly 400 years. Is there any thoughts in there that doesn't have any? I'll ask you. OK. Can I get back to Andy's question? Steve, I know you have a question, but I want to answer. OK. So one of the things that we did today, the four of us, and it was thrilling, was discuss how the budget revenue and expenses are broken out. And one of the things, and this is to no one's fault, but one of the things that was happening was all random expenses were getting bucketed, random revenues were getting bucketed, what we're truly trying to do is parse out where expenses are, and we're trying to avoid, I mean, at least some made a point in this last night that we brought it up today, the idea of upper versus lower. Like this is not North versus South. No. There are some, I'm upper connected. There's a woman who, I won't say names, but is lower, who's well. So in lieu of like pretending we can tip to around the nuances, we're also recruiters, as we all know. And some of us have wells, some of us are connected, regardless of where we are. And those expenses we hope will be broken out in a way. We're really sitting down and saying, okay, it's $180 a year to cover that meter, the beacon, the service. We're going to assume that it takes 3.5 man hours or person hours for christen as people to go out there, check it, fix it, dig it out if it's covered in snow or whatever. So we do not have the specific information to support an argument one way or the other that the revenue from connected is dollar to dollar, parry casue to what the costs are versus what the revenue is. I think it's a little bit better on the lower because it's operated that way for much longer. But this is something that literally the four of us collectively spent a dozen hours today trying to figure out. So we're, I think, around the same page. So did I answer that? Yeah. OK. Thank you. So you just followed that? Yeah. Okay. Thank you. So just follow up, we can think you guys were doing that. Who is smoked? There's no food offered. It was over there. Oh, I can't let go. We're not so gratitude. Yeah, I think that's a sort of upper lower question is, can feel like a bit of a puzzle. We've got a leaking silver bullet, we've got infrastructure, Doug, it provided to people's houses, and you got me again, who pump goes out, five G's, replace that, so my kids have a watermelon drink, like just like they just named your price, and you do that, that's what it is. So you can feel a little funny to sort of go like, oh we're all in this together, and you're like, yeah, feels like there's a different delivery of service for these different kind of basically infrastructural setups. The other thing that I was wondering about this, you mentioned that revenue, said that expenses made tracks somewhat similar to that. So we all pay property taxes to service area three. So this is a line item on account of property taxes. And so of course, that's based off of praise over volume. And so that's another interesting question where you go, wow, like, kind of just like a simple ROI map. And I'm like, I'm up here and stuff for Creek. What do I get from service area three? What am I paying them? What am I getting, right? So I just kind of look at that map and go, whoa, like property taxes every year. And I realized pretty marginally glad I got crazy bottles. They don't do anything for my water. It all except come up and barge in my land. Just feels like one of those, like, I don't know. This is a good deal for old fox family, young. Totally good. And so I think that's some of the question that can kind of easily be like, wait a minute. It's easy to get in these like, what the heck? How does this pencil? And so that's why you mentioned that, that's some real revenue right here in the million bucks a year, just on fees, and then what taxes look like, and then what is the value proposition of upper-served rehers that you get? And then I just think that's like our reasonable sort of like governance posture to say, hey, citizens, here's what it means to live here. Here's how we exist as a community. Because it right now feels a little like, you pay, you get nothing. Like, it little bit feels like that. Well, opera, it's only in the money and that's right, you know. And there are problems with that. Right, right. But the million that Scott used described. They're not in a month. Try to stop. It's described. It represents largely the connected system users. Because if you take 200 wells, multiply 180, that represents only 36,000 dollars. Sure, not much. which is not nothing, but that big number isn't that money is really what it as Christmas was writing costs the service area to make sure that our waterways are administered and the shares are maintained as well as, you know, that is, so we know it's still able to escape for work. And then the people are grossly overusing and potentially putting us in a compromised position with our ultimate, you know, irrigation companies and ditch companies that we have in shares with, we'll hand for water. So that's my guess about it. You could go one of you. Two days control my life. Yes. Can I unpack part of it? Two days control, but also that it's just like the police, right? Nobody's happy when we get speeding to it. But it's good. The cops used to better at night knowing that somebody to make sure that my neighbor of the street isn't using the safety equipment, he should be using whatever foot. And potentially about a man, for instance, all of a sudden, I go dry. I don't want to be drilled if it's somebody else's overshadowed or shared. So that's what the one idea is, that's the value that we get when we make that. Steve, I'm sorry. The idea that people who are connected received free hookups is wrong. When I built my house, I had to pay for 600 feet of waterline, a hydrant. I had to pay the feed hookup. So I don't know what it was, but I'm sure it was the same. Does everybody, does everybody that all those who have down, you know, I'm assuming most of those are connected. Then they have to pay all those connections. You're tight East Creek? Yeah. Mountain Regional. Yeah. So anybody who connected, did they have to pay all those fees? Yeah. If you connect to our system, you had to. Yeah. At the time, the five, six thousand dollar connection to the hardware. Yeah. So that's significant. The infrastructure is not a giveaway. I just want to be clear with that. And I think most of us would agree that every tax dollar we spend, we question. I personally do. I'm a dynamo libertarian, and it kills me to pay taxes. But I do, because that's what we do. The irony for people who live farther up in Silver Creek is that they're using more of the road than lower solar creeps. So we can go down that road, but I think the reality is, none of us want to pay taxes. We have to pay taxes. And if we were in an HOA, the HOA fee would probably be more than 120 bucks a month. Like can we agree that that's a reasonable? Sure. So it's like, it's just one of those things that, like I love the FAA where our planes don't crash into each other. I mean, that's a really good use of our tax dollars or the DEA. I mean, we can go through this exercise, but the reality is it's FBI. You're so... Yeah. Marshall. Marshall? The DEA. DEA? Oh, no, why is that? OK. I want to be mindful of time. Just do kind of a time check. I know we've been kind of a little bit all over. This is fine for me. I just want to be procedurally conscientious. I think we're kind of in water pretty much. And I think we kind of skipped. I think we went general comments. I want to make sure that there's, I've heard from a lot of people. We've heard from a lot of people. Are there any other people here who wanted to speak and have an opportunity? I want you to have that. Hi. Hi. I'm T. We have eight one on one. What's your name, I'm sorry? T. What's your name? I'm sorry? Teague? Teague? Like leave me with a teague. Okay. I'm going to leave one line and have you able to do it for a series of important events. We haven't had a reside in our home for the past five years. So we haven't used any of our art and that will now change for the soon. I guess I was curious. We keep trying to approach this problem, trying to be like, okay, I don't want that. I guess I'm curious to be just approaches from a different perspective, as far as like, let's just go on a path that I go land, what if? Like we were all individual well owners and you guys wanted to form a water company, and you wanted to make the case to us why we should sign up to this water company. And I'm curious, how would you pitch us to sign up to this water company. And I'm curious, how would you pitch us to sign up for your water company? Just to change the field of view. That's a great question. There? Yeah. That's in the wrong, yeah. And one piece of it, I just came up recently with people. Yeah to manage to manage that water rights. In poverty and disability, you don't have to maintain that. You have to be out of poverty. That's where I'm from. So you're just, you've been on a water rights. I would say that would be a huge advantage. That one square-headed photo is staying one square-headed photo while you're part of a municipality. What do you use one gallon a year or all? You know, usually you lose laws and you talk about to sell it to service areas to municipality. Who do you not need to? OK. I just need that. I just don't want to do that. So to me, I feel like connected well, whatever. We're all one. So the only thing I'm really interested in at this point, I mean, that's a super interesting idea. I think we should go down the road and just see if people want to do that. They can do that if not. I don't think there's harm in checking out John's idea. If he wants to follow it and. And you know, we buy additional water rights. What happens? That'll be a question I have to John. But a reasonable rate to me would be the most important thing at this juncture. For overages? For overages. Yeah, right. Just where you have skin in the game, but you're paying something that's right in the bowl. You're using extra water, pay for your extra water, you want to water your trees, but you don't want to pay $80,000 to water your trees. I think that's a reasonable, $80,000 by water. Yeah, trees that you've had for 20 years. And I think that's what Rick, you were saying originally. Right. I mean, as long as, as a neighborhood, we're within our budget and can tolerate over just to a certain amount, I think at some point, you know, another 30, I don't know how many people also have left, maybe some ways we have. You know, too many people over too far will then be in a really tight spot. And I think in the service area, or when he's raised, you know, kind of touched off this entire debate, set those rates, they were kind of probably thinking, well, is that or somebody's gonna show up on the property, invited, run and invited, and would turn off the valve. And say, you've taken, you've got to make your foot, your three-acre feet into the year. You know, that's not your work. It's not our work. Right now, it sounds like we may have enough buffer that wouldn't have to happen, but 10 years from now with another 30-holes and people will look and we've seen, I think, we've walked a little bit shut down during the period of the process, we had a pandemic, and it seemed every road had two to three people and we were gonna have a hot. And just to use people of those ideas, and, you know, guide the street, it was definitely water, but isn't it? You can't encounter diverse, you can't count and divert, divert and found service for us. That's somebody else in the water, but people are starting to try to do that. And that's the kind of thing, and what we're used to, the kind of thing that's gonna get us all, especially if we're all the same with your system in trouble. Thank you. Mary? So. So. Please. So I have one of my first purchase to cash for shares from someone who will definitely go ahead and try to be. Are there the same people who are being drawn from the same waters, which was so example. No. And you have to be a woman from the same water source which is so exiled on the way. No. And you have to be a little more. You want to say a dream in your face then. But before I come from the same water source as right at the storage, we were thinking like that. That's just crazy. The situation is running out of water. Why are we allowing people to find shimmers from places that don't belong for the same water source. Good questions. My question is, so, and we have our own idea of our being not. It's been a critical water situation, which is why you are not. This water being foolish by allowing people to draw water shares from somewhere that doesn't keep from water. So, we're kind of sending them into the next message here. So that's very right. Are we going to buy our water so that you can go? And the answer is no. Then why are we being sure to do our neighbors while we're all the way construction companies and when we will just follow up to our heavens and take the footage? That's another session. But if we are a buyer, then why are we allowing people by shares from someone who's not drawing in the same box? Which is really the big sense. Can anybody like me? How can I ask? I think the history of the list is. Great, thank you. Any comments? I mean, I guess I neighbor. But at one of the meetings, the State Engineer showed a map of the East Creek and the Silver Creek drainage. There were two main drainage, well, there's three main drainage. But the East Creek drainage and the Silver Creek drainage and the one for us, many of these splits down the lead. So that over there on a ranch row who have been the other now back in the day, and I'm assuming this is a very recent. No, it's very difficult. Well, okay, I will have to get more details, but that surface water on a whole ranch row actually could be moved around if the state and junior teams had correct. Because the surface water not awkward during water, and those actual shares are the ones that we talk about getting the hair back. So some of those that we've seen that come from that side, the highway or whatever, coming this way are not worth the one-acre foot anymore. They're getting a certain percentage of it, and here at some of them are roughly around 12%, so we're actually getting a point of 8-acre foot valuation. And because of the surface water, they can have it put into the groundwater and the dock or I'm not a stage engineer and stuff, but is that kind of the best simple explanation job? Any duty and state engineer, the state of general is scrutinized that and scrutinizes those very closely. You know, it's not the service area at all. Right, that has something with the service area. I want to change application. Right, you have to go to the change application process that you make as John said, your name is John. Right, this is good. It's not good. But the change application process is the state engineers review of, you know, water right is to use a certain amount of water for a certain purpose at a certain location. So there's water rights for irrigation, there's water rights for domestic use, there's water rights for industrial uses, everything in this space is a combination of agricultural mostly irrigation, sound stopwatering and domestic. And if you have, so if somebody goes and purchases a water-right on an orange road, they only have the ability to use that eighth foot and stator foot of water on an orange road, which probably doesn't do that a lot of good, unless they really dislike watering, water is long as it has to go from a drain to a to use that water in silver creek they have to go through the change of the case process they can't just start pulling water out of the ground the state engineer has to improve that water so they might have to go through the shins of the free the two were fired from over and shut up but now they have to has the state engineer proof them? they have it I think the I I'm sure they I'm sure they I'm sure they I'm sure they I'm sure they I'm sure they I'm sure they I'm sure they I'm sure they I'm sure they I'm sure they I'm sure they on the people on the phone can't hear. I think the waterway is like, I'm sure they acquired a waterway that had been very surprised if the state of junior has a grand audition with a community that way. And if, for example, you didn't like that, you had a chance to discuss our quote. It's not, for me, it's not a vibe or not. I'm really, I'm just saying it. I mean, it's just, for me it's not a life or not, I really... Oh, I'm just saying it. Wait, I mean, it's just... It seems it's right in some of the meetings, there's a sense of urgency. We're going to travel, we're going to learn with water. That's what we have been trying to do, this is diving. And then... It's not so diving, we're actually finding, you're funny. And it would be nice to just have a straight share of your sight. This is me. You can get in. And there's punitive, there's not punitive. And it's very hard to take this whole wheat past punishment over the users. Because if you can't do this, those who can afford it will continue to overuse. But they don't care. Or they won't buy watches because they get afforded pay between 1680,000 or watercolors. Those who care for it are rapidly trying to figure out what they can do to curb their water usage. Do I fill not aware of it. I'm fine. And I will be fine. But what I have to issue with is the human tenderness. And then seeing people randomly fall up, just take water and end up. And there's no way she's so good. Fine, not charging. Well, contract is a good thing. I just need something. I think there were complaints about punitive pricing that I think that's that schedule's gone away, right? And I don't think the new schedule is punitive. It's just saying, if you go over, you're going to pay. Which is cool, as long as it's fair. Right? So we there now? Are we there now? Are we each aware? We don't know. Well, that's what we're working on. In a phase of recent, a relative term, it fairs easily calculated based on the community's what is going on in our state. I mean, fairs are relatively easy things. So I guess that's my next question. Is our view there? Do we have this camera out? He's a fairer. I would say that we're not there. And I think that that's why we wanted to have this meeting. That's why we're not seeking to, I mean, everyone here, a lot of you probably are aware of the timelines that we need to adhere to to be compliant with government notices and whatnot. So I think that's why we're here tonight. I think that our focus of the next meeting, which is on Tuesday, which will also be in this venue here, will be to focus on our budget for next year. I think that the water topic will be something that we're still trying to understand as a board and that we will probably not get to a resolution for this calendar year, that it will probably be something that we seek to identify in the first couple months of the year. Because I think we're not trying to rush to make mistakes that the public had deemed were made previously. And I think we want to educate ourselves. And yes, there is like a new tiered one but as a board that was the old board's suggestion and the staff I know John is working with like kind of looking at okay there's a few different proposals out there and possibilities with the staff to say okay here's a few different ones. I think we need to plug it into kind of what Scott was saying, what we need, and what are the right numbers to figure out what we really need to maintain the lower system. And so I think it's like an analysis that we want to be really thoughtful about, so that if we make any changes that we don't put ourselves in a situation where we can't afford to operate the water system. But I don't think we also want to rush to do that because we also have very strict guidelines which we need to follow to make sure, procedurally, we're doing it properly. And so I do think that we're, like Rick said, I think we will come to something where it is tiered, where we hopefully find something really that people are not as upset about, and where we can still maintain the water system, but we're really not looking at this as a revenue stream to like stick it to the community. I think it's more like, what do we need to operate and to not be in a deficit as a community? And not you're not planning on using water rates and policy to fill other holes or to you know fix the silver bullet or I don't think that's our goal. Well, or anything like that. I would rather see instead of that because the water rates can harm property values, I would rather see something like that there's a different assessment or something and just be straightforward like, hey, we need to earn this much money for this project and then we kind of figured out from there, but it doesn't necessarily have to come from water or water or water or water or water to come from water or just because I think well we you can't count on water or just because most people are going to buy water right here you know and then you're not going to have that so something else will work but with that said I also miss this I'm not speaking for the board I'm speaking for my own personal like we live in a desert right I mean so we do have to be reasonable with our water usage and and I'm sure as a mirror. No, Sue. Sue, sorry. I have to say. Sue, like Sue said, in terms of you know going over like there's some people that can just afford it right they're gonna go over they're gonna go way over they're not gonna care. I could see that being a revenue stream like if there's people they're gonna way over that's not fair that's not what you want to do in your community and those people are probably not going to go over they're gonna mitigate some of the ways you're not gonna get that no she's talking to people that that will continually go over and don't care. No, we've only got 12 people in the entire community going over. It's going to be, I'll give you some data points. Sue, can I touch on what you said? You brought up two great adjectives, or one, which was punitive. What's punitive to somebody on a fixed income is different than to someone who has got a dual income, no kids. So it's somewhat subjective. They're opposite, but the idea of a deterrent becoming punitive is individual to whomever it is that has to write that check. So now give you a great example. My max budget for water is $400 a month in the summertime. And I asked Chris earlier to tell me how far I was over for that May to October. And I use a lot, I was over for that May to October. And I use a lot, I plan a lot of trees, it's my thing, I pay for it and that's it. If water was less expensive, I would use the exact same dollar amount of water but at a higher quantity. So for me, the tiered system that I'm on now is appropriate at $400. For someone else, it might be 300. It might be 200. It might be 100. And I'll do some quick math for you. If we can all agree that a watershed is trading for roughly 80,000, is that a number that everyone's comfortable using? 80? I don't know if it's comfortable, but I think that's the goal. So I've heard, I've heard I've heard 100. And I heard, okay. I'm just a blocker. And this area, they got a deal. It's a very reasonable. They got a good deal. Okay, so I'm gonna give you a quick number. Okay, the proposed tiered pricing. If you go above 100,000 feet, or excuse me, 100,000 gallons in a calendar year, okay, that's a third of an acre foot. It would cost you $2,850. Okay, $80,000 at four and a half percent interest, which is what the 30 year T-bills paying right now. Okay, the safest investment we can make for the time being. That would put roughly, call it, $3,700 in your pocket as a return. So if you're thinking about buying a watershed keeping that money in a tea bill is gonna put more money in your pocket less the cost of the proposed tiered pricing. So I'll get you in a second, but what I'm saying is is that economically just running the straight numbers 80 grand for a watershed, okay, versus 80 grand in a tea bill. That's liquid. That's paying you 3700 a year, whereas the watershed is basically saving you 2850. So no, that's the math. No, I know it's math, but the water share is going to increase the value of the quantity. I did this math before, so it's not. But it's what? It's just going to have water share is going to increase the value of the commodity, right? It's 80,000 today, it's going to be 120. Right. And by definition, by definition, any commodity is something that someone else is willing to pay for. Right. So there has to be a pricing scheme for this. So the first 100,000 gallons, if you use that money, will cost you 2.8 cents per gallon. Does that sound egregious? That sounds very visual. And it sounds to me that the amount of egregious is currently low. It's working that you are looking at it far more critically and carefully in going to the same choices as the portion with where I work 25 cents a year. That's crazy. That's just nuts. This was talking about 18% interest. We just know that that was an out-of-war age, you know, when I knew close to what I was talking about is for utilities. So it sounds like you are walking way back from those initials. Which is great. Yeah, none of us. you are walking way back from those initials. Yeah, none of us. You want to critically look at it and take your time to the research and do a way to come up with something that is fair and reasonable. And if you're over, you pay, but if it's not a punishment, it is that to my brain, you are, you have to be conservative. And you don't think what it is. And that's, I mean, this one, I was speaking for myself, but I go over, I pay. Annually, I do not go over, but month to month on the water system, you get killed in July and August, and that's just a cost of doing business. It just sounds like there's a far more reason. So thank you for that, and if you're taking the time and not Russian and looking at it, were they careful? I am not a happy teacher, I'm a good teacher, I'm a good teacher, I'm a good teacher, I'm a good teacher, I'm a good teacher, I'm a good teacher, I'm a good teacher, I'm a good teacher, I'm a good teacher, I'm a good teacher, I'm a good teacher, I'm a good teacher, I'm a good teacher, I'm a good teacher, I'm a good teacher, So, thanks Scott, love the math. But the very, you know, the variable that I would throw in is we used to just a second on a maniac fee schedule set by at that time a board and, frankly, a staff that said great, let's do the yay. And, praise God, you guys, I want to sit here right now and that's our current board. With the fee schedule, your promoting sounds awesome. Love that with you. So when you talk about a T-bill, we talk about a throw-in-off cash. We've got to assume that the numbers you laid out, but like, hey, here's the cost basis, this 180 a month, or, hey, here's the overcharge that you're holding in your mat, would just remain among future or its among future staff. So that's the little variable where you're like, you know, that's always the challenge of, as we talked about earlier, any kind of new taxing. Oh, it's just gonna be this. You're like, oh, a couple of years later. Son of a gun. So you can see the piece again. We're talking about usage. We're not talking about attacks. Well, I'm talking about the feasts so currently the matter Understand the map for your overcharge is based on a feast structure that seems sane The minute ago it was insane and it could easily become insane again if our board wasn't so awesome in five years But it's like anything else like we don't know if electricity is gonna be a dollar or kill a lot in six months sure But but we just pull it out on T. Bill math my brain is like yeah Four years that you come in here's your new fee schedule have a nice day six months. Sure, but we're just pulling out a T-bow map. My right is like, yeah, four years. You're coming, you're new, fee schedule, how have a nice day? I'm going to keep that in mind as you elect board members. No, no, I think what John said is probably the most intelligent thing any of us have said tonight, which is don't elect people who are going to do things that aren't advantageous for us as a community. Right. And we've all been asleep at the well and we've acknowledged that. We've acknowledged that for all of us. So thank you everyone. Being mindful of time, I know there's a couple board members who have commitments. And I just want to keep rolling through the agenda. We just kind of had administrative and financials a catch all community concerns. I think we've been here a lot addressing that. As we said, it's just for us, for it to be able to have this opportunity to hear from you. We want to continue encouraging people to come. The next two meetings for the rest of the year will be in the same spot. Tell your neighbors, tell your friends. They'll be obviously posted on the service area website in terms of planning for 2025. I think we alluded to the fact that the next meeting will be, we won't be voting on the budget, but we have all, we've given an initial draft of the budget, trying to ask our questions that's why several of us met today to talk to the staff to try and understand the line items in the budget. Then next week, I'm going to generally be posted and there will be other things on our docket in terms of evaluating what we need to really try to focus on that budget because we have a state mandate to approve our budget at the next meeting. And it does need to be posted seven days prior to that meeting. We will likely not fall into the category where we will do any increases this year because we will need a certain amount of time at the fall, probably in Christen Sieve, which I'm not sure, and it's just for one of the years on that date. In terms of I wanted to just make sure we talked about it, we feel like we've heard from the community at large that the self-autic discussion that happened in the center. It seems like that's kind of quieted and that may have been directed at previous decisions, previous like towards or whatever that may have looked like. I don't want to assume anything but I just wanted to make sure that since it was on the agenda that you know we're happy to if that comes back to the community and we need to discuss that but our understanding was that that right now there was no need to proceed with that self-added. I'm not the audit. Correct, I believe the community had asked. I feel good about everything. I feel like the new board is moving in the right direction and kind of cleaning some stuff up. I know, you know, he hasn't been meeting a lot. I think that's great. So from my perspective, I don't see any on those audit questions as being pertinent or necessary this time. I don't know anybody else here. That's just me. And I think it was the staff that was hearing the feedback and wanting to be conscientious honestly to think about, did they need to prepare that? I do feel like from my perspective, I have spent a lot of time with different members of the staff and feel like we've been making amazing headway. And what I can say is that maybe things procedurally weren't necessarily done the way they should have been, whatever that looks like. But I have felt that the staff has been super amazing about, okay, give us the direction that we need to put those checks and balances in place. You know, and an example, Chris and John have both been really great. Chris has been really proactive about, okay, how do we wrap our hands around the water sales, right? Like that's going to talk about the value that I was the biggest talking about. You know, Chris has directly ordered a beacon that we're gonna put on, I believe, a couple of the hydrants that are used by contractors, we're gonna work with this act to provide new agreements that look more like agreements where that anyone renting out a meter will have the understanding of how much they're paying for the water that we will bill monthly for that water usage, so that we're not in a situation when we're looking backwards to bill from 2021 or whatever it is or not capturing that. Of course, that would be a process and an adaption for those contractors who haven't been in that process, but from my perspective, the staff has been really awesome at partnering with the new board. On that, if we do, like, I don't know what's gentleman's name, but if we do get into a position where we are at a problem with water in the area, you know Chris, we got to cut those people off from taking water from us. Like we would have an understanding. You have an understanding that if the community is getting into a point where it's like oh my god, we're putting another 30 homes in here and we need to conserve our water just in Silver Creek that we can't allow people to come in and just take water and use it for their construction projects outside of silver creek. Some plants are there, so yes. Yes, that's all I have. That's in place. Yes, perfect. And I think also to that point, when we have a little bit of a better handle on me, during that and understanding that, I think it will, I mean yes, big picture they can kind of see that but if it's, we're really directing people to specific locations, we'll be able to A, start understanding that and B, like looking at patterns, right? Like, is this a potential additional revenue stream that we we missed it for that 54,000 dollars given my personal water like serious and so I think yeah I mean I think that the thought is that overall we're trying to just put in better best practices and give the staff the guidance to work with the board and work with the community so that we're able to tighten things up and look at some best practices from other service area districts. I know I spent the day with John at the annual special service district annual meeting in Layton and it was just really great to be there with other service district areas to understand what they're doing, what some best practices are, and what John was there more days and more time than I was and brought home some really great insights. So I think that we're all really trying really hard. It's a good idea. It's a good idea. It's a good idea. It's a good idea. It's a good idea. I mentioned your thoughts on the feedback I've been through months. Exactly. Yeah, I mean that's one of the things that we're looking at too is figuring out if we can purchase some locks and put them on the hydrants. That would be great. And you know there is a little bit of great area on that because the fire department is it excited about that but there actually is no code that says that we can't do that. There is also other water departments that are doing that locally and Chris has done a lot of research to see and has pictures so it may be just kind of something that we're gonna work with the fire department to kind of run those ideas and think about can we lock some of the hydrants direct divert the contractors to certain locations, meter that, and they then go to other ones and it may be just a neighborhood, you know, monitoring and letting us know, but I think the staff is really committed to trying to hone in on that. That's great. That's great. I think so that was that we kind of covered those things. We already talked about the water. You need to make a motion. I want to do it more. More water. No, it's not. It's not too late. It's been here. Yeah, it's not. It's not. It's not. It's not. It's not. It's not. It's not. It's not. It's not. It's not. It's not. It's not. It's not. It's not. It's not. It's not. It's not. It's not. It's not. It's not. It's not. grade and the new ones. So that's something you're thinking of tackling in the new year or within no starting now just starting now for a minute until you make sure that you have the right right and will you possibly do some kind of like community committees like a committee with the board and some community members on what the rate of fee schedule would be and on the water policy? I think the thought is that we do, we've heard the requests and people are really interested in policies and whatnot. In terms of that specific, I think that was part of what tonight was for, to kind of hear the public, continue, I'm sure it will come up in the next meeting for the public to kind of be able to ask those questions, even if it's not a topic on full-on or agenda. In terms of just buttoning up to the holidays and trying to look at something, I think we're just welcoming the feedback in these sessions right now. And then looking at other best practices, how we can build committees going forward for different areas. I don't know what those look like. I don't want to speak for the board. I've heard people ask for budget ones. I've asked for people beyond roads ones where you can start to leverage expertise. I find it always interesting to be at these meetings and to be hearing from different people and learning their expertise that they may be willing to volunteer that time. But I haven't personally met with the board to understand what those committees are like and what the interest is. I think we would love it because it's free XRTs. Like I can hear from a lot of people even here tonight that I'm like, oh, we'd love that person on a committee, right? Absolutely. But I don't think we've really talked about having exact committee, so I wouldn't want to stay at that. To answer your question, the rate and fee schedule was proposed at the last meeting, and that's online. So you can see that there. And that was before we were, that was not our rate and fee schedule. That's the exact method I used was from that schedule. But that was proposed by the previous board. No, it came out the last meeting. It's the 10 cents as the maximum rate above the budget. That was still like the old board had proposed that like I wasn't part of proposing that policy and I came in end of September. Like it was still something that staff had proposed. That was a 20 20 that was proposed in the. It's the exact same. August, 2024. It's the same exact rate schedule that connected users are paying. That's what was proposed in the last meeting. They're currently paying, but. Correct. It's still violating it. It's still violating it. It's what we're saying. It's 10 cents is still higher than what the norm is around the state. Perhaps? According to the rate of the fee schedule that I have looked at, and that's a very good thing. Perhaps. According to the rate and fee schedule that I have looked at, and that several members of the community have gone around and done, you know, 20 different communities. It is very much that sense is very much on the high side. Right. I've seen that study that was done and that co-mingled property taxes, which subsidize the rates. So you can't, it's not an arms length comparison. So we would then, what I would want then would be not just three, not just Sun and Park, Mountain Regional and Park City. I think we would do the legwork to say, okay, if they're co-mingling taxes in Sandy, find maybe seven to ten that aren't and see what those rates are to know for sure. I mean because we're only going with three that's not a very good cross section of rates and fees. Well, I understand where you are. So you're saying no it's reasonable but we don't really know if that's reasonable. So what I can tell you is the tiered, connected user rates as compared to mountain regional, summit park and park city are anywhere from 35 to 45% less expensive on the first 20,000 hours. Right. But then as you go, I've done this, I've looked at this study. I have two. And the only point where there's a delta, not in the favor of this service creek assuming SCS A3 is at 70,000 gallons. So you don't want to go and do a... Oh, no, no, I would encourage everyone to scour the entire state of Utah and get the data. But the problem is this. It's the one has to get the data. But the problem is is I Whoever does it is is not as critical but we have three areas that were geographically adjacent to size not comingling property taxes and that they are I can't are they water districts is that right or no service districts But I think the thought is as a board we do still have the opportunity to look at That is what was put on the site that was suggested by the staff in the prior board We can still look at other Policies and determine whether there's something different we want to vote on besides that one that one is proposed that one The new one that came out that is proposed That's why I've been saying. Right, it's proposed. Yep. But it doesn't mean that that's what we need to vote on. We can propose, we can have a couple options. We can make as many changes as possible, but then we have to vote on it as a board. And we haven't put that into place and haven't voted on that one yet. Right. And what I'm saying is I encourage everyone in this room to gather as much data as possible and lieu of relying on us to use three data points which are immediately adjacent. Right. So we'll go back to the drawing board so that we get a larger cross section of, you know, the state is the state, right? The entire state. So looking at just those three, I'd like to see more. So I can go and look for, you know, whether they're using the tax base, whether they're not, and I'm gonna be able to do that between now and the next meeting, you probably not. You guys probably can't either. But that's why we want the time. Right, so take the time to make a decision that we know for sure based on facts, if that's a process, followed exact process every time, can know that that is actually fair. And now to say, well, we've done these three so expect. Because we don't really know. It's not. We looked at the, that's excuse me. We, I specifically looked at the data. I think that your referencing, because I don't know, but it was comprised by someone who, it was in their best interest to do it. I think we're talking about the same data points. Well, I've done it myself and I've done it. In my, what I'm looking for in all of this, because I don't know that how much it pertains to connected users, well users, I have heard from so many people that are connected, that are not able to pay the current fees. They're having a hard time paying the current fees. So if that's the case, and it has nothing to do with the person you're talking to, because that family isn't even going to be involved in any of this anymore. Because they wreck, right? So it has nothing to do with them. It has to do with what's fair for the entire community and I think we're hearing so much feedback from people that what we're currently doing is a hardship for a lot of people here who just want to live and have a reasonable rate and what you're talking about currently is not reasonable for those people. And it's not myself. No, I know. It's for people that exist on the connected life, more so than people because there aren't that many people on the well side that are having the same kind of a problem. It's more for the people of a connection. Right. So I think it does, it would be nice for this board to go, what Harry's saying, like let's get more data on that and if it's, you know, take the tax base out of it. So then let's find those communities so that we can see what they're doing. And you might be totally right. Ten or ten says it might be great. But you guys have the opportunity to put in whatever rate you want. Right, the data, sorry if you're gonna say something, but the data points were the same data points that were utilized when the water study was done in Q1 of this year. And I'm saying, I'm not saying that I grew at that 25 cents. I know the rate with Park City, it was that graph that Vince made that didn't really have a lot of numbers on it. So I went through that graph too and I kind of tried to determine between 20,000 and 40,000. I'll send you. In fact, if anyone wants the data, I will send you the published rates from the three water companies. I went through the published rates to us so that I got the actual. Just counting those rates going to this meeting that I went to, the overwhelming detail and these were from other areas that were more similar to ours than comparing to these couple data points and in general even talking to the auditor and John and I have done some of this conversation is those data points are still high. That 10 cents is still considered a higher. That's why I'm thinking what what I'm saying is we we can vote at some point right and look at the numbers but there may be an opportunity for us to look at is it 10 cents or is it six cents that was in place from the 2021 policy and was six cents be enough you know in those situations to still help us maintain the costs of our system. I think that that's just the thought of us looking at, because we as a board have an opportunity to have a clean set of eyes and decide this. Right, and to speak to the person, I think that your referencing whose trees died, I don't want to say the person's name, but they spoke publicly. That water usage was in excess of half a million gallons of water. That's the only one. But what I'm saying is hold on. There is always an interpretation to what we're being told. And it does require a little bit of extra questioning. Understood. OK. But if there are several people, we've gathered the community several times. And we get more people pretty much every time. It has really calmed down, I will tell you now, that you all are here. Less people are very angry, right? So they're not as willing, you know, they're not coming, they're calling or they're saying this back. It's not only that was a surprise, that one that came up, but prior to that, that so many residents that have lived here for a long time are having a hard time on the lower end that are connected. And I think you guys do have an opportunity to help that where, like I said, don't just go without well they did this one study on three service areas and it's correct. I found it to be correct also when I got the actual information but I don't think it's enough. And that's just my opinion. I don't know how many people here agree with that opinion but you guys have an opportunity if you can to make it better for people who live here. So I'm always in favor of casting a wide net. My question, I guess, would be if we're looking, if we try and gather data points from throughout the entire state, assuming it's not subsidized by tax money, is that an apples to apples if we're comparing some accounting water rates whoever the agency is to Washington County or Ogden? Is there any is there and I don't know the answer to them? Is there anything unique about you know the three water companies here that cause their rates to be different than, say, someplace that's four hours from us. Yes. The division water rights drew a circle around the spendable base in 1995 and we're torn in, taking water from anywhere else in the state. You can't put it into the business to your questions. You can't exchange water from Washington into the spendable base. They'll walk in. That's what water should work. So then it would not be an apples to apples comparison to say, hey, I found that they're charging 0.000001, you know, sent down in St. George. We should do that here. That's not a logical. It's different. Yeah, okay. Okay. A lot of reasons. One of the largest law-decker. Yeah, so that could actually, I mean, casting that white net is good on one hand, bad on the other because we're going to end up apples to apples to oranges and people are going to be like, well, we should do that. Well, we can't do that to your point. Well, I think that thought, I agree what we did, what the community has said multiple times, if we look at what we did in 21-22, let's say, and we back in the numbers that we need to get to, and we look at it and we're like, this makes enough money to sustain the water system and we're not looking at this as a different just an additional revenue stream and that we are trying to get people behaviorally like Rick was saying to not just say screw it I'm just gonna go over and we're shifting the behaviors that's kind of where I'm thinking it's not like I'm not as interested in what Cedar City does or stands very because like those were the people I was sitting against next to and they may have a very different perspective but if our thought is not to just generate extra revenue to offset cost what is the number that we can look at that we make enough to be whole. I think that's what me personally I can't speak for the board, but what me personally I want to know that number. Well you always have to know what the goal is. Is the goal to create revenue or is it to change and moderate behavior? Right, that drives the conversation. So... Are we going to have us a 501? Are we not a profit? No, sir. Could we be? Could we be? Could we need any money here? Or you just want to make your company beautiful? You know, pay our staff. This is a decision. I've written no more. Can we be, can we, from, does anyone know from a tax perspective kind of state? But I'm a serious perspective, I guess that would be a question. Government anything, so I don't know that. I don't know if we can. There's a government to take. I don't know if we can. I don't know if we can. It's a government entity. I don't know if we can. We want to. We can let loose its armory issues and protections and things like that. I know that we got 30% forgiveness on the $7 million bond because we're a government entity. And if that's a 40-year bond, my guess is that we would probably lose that. I'm curious. We would probably lose that To look at what you need and then do the rate Let me let me I want to push back on that a little bit because like if we're not trying to generate Revenue like we're trying to make a profit when I don't have shareholders that we're trying but we have community members So if if people are going over and we're charging them a rate for overages that is similar to Three surrounding communities that are you know similar that makes sense if we end up collecting more money Then maybe it lowers it keeps us from having to raise the rate For instance connected users, you know, that rate was $99, you know, it's $109 pretty soon. Or we can go up again. We can go up for a higher compassion rate. Or that was the other thing I was going to say is you could have some people that are really looking at that. Hey, I remember there was a woman that came to the meeting last year or last month. What was your name? Sorry, I'm not a fan. Yeah. And I mean, interiors and talking about our trees. And I remember Scott offered to go to our property and help her manage her helper out in terms of like, look at her system and stuff like that. I mean, there's things we can do in terms of fixing problems and saying, OK, you have an issue with them. I don't think what we're saying is dissimilar. I think it's pretty much the same. But I'm just saying, I don't like the idea of people saying, oh, you charge more, you're trying to make more money. Like, we're not pocketing it. We're not, you know. How much do we need to maintain, but also have a cushion. We're not like, can you prevent it? Right, exactly. Right. If there are those situations where you need to fund for people like that. Right. I think we're saying the same thing. And the other data point, I think that would be great to have maybe a larger capacity rate. And the same thing, to Steve's point, if there are people that are on the well, and you know, kind of going, what are you doing for me now? Would you definitely play for me? If there was something that, if somebody is really in a heart behind, that there was something that, you know, I'm hanging those overgives in here, you know, getting, you have that cushion, that somebody has well, and they're like, I just can't afford $10,000 to fix my well. Maybe as a community having that fund, maybe there's something we can do to help that person. Because there are new people who have moved in and they have more money in the community exchange a little bit, still that whole of those people who've been here for a long time that are suffering a little bit financially and the economy and you know that is kind of where you know that that spot is where I wish we could help you know. So sorry Kerry but to to that point Kerry and I before Derek was elected met with the service area and we specifically asked about how to mitigate cost increases for people over a certain age and they're working on They're working on that now. So again, I just wanted to be very clear The idea of the excess charge is a deterrent. It's not meant to be punitive. It's truly meant to deter people from using so much that it impacts that Reserve which kind of insulates all of us. And where people are getting upset about that, honestly Scott, is the water that's leaving the area. That's where those two things are very hard for people to go. Okay, conservation, we're catching it in conservation, but we're spitting water out there. Totally, totally great, but I think the Carrie's point, she and Chris and John have made concerted efforts to figure it out. And. But if we're in trouble, we shouldn't be selling water. So the idea of being in trouble is, once you're in trouble, it's too late. I understand. So then we shouldn't be selling water. Or other than savings, if you're going to be generally restricted to your citizens, let's apply the restrictions to everybody. Yeah. Yeah. OK. I'm so sorry. We have a board member that we have to keep on as a club. And so I would like to thank you all for coming. Thank you guys. I encourage you guys to come to the next meeting. I'd like to make a motion to adjourn and session. Second. Yay. Hi. Hi. Thank you. Thank you everybody.