Board Meeting
October 26, 2026
Transcript
Castle Pines North Metropolitan District
7404 Yorkshire Drive, Castle Pines, CO 80108
Regular Board Meeting
October 26, 2026
6:00 PM
I. Call meeting to order
A. Pledge of Allegiance
B. Roll call, disclosure of potential conflicts, confirm quorum
C. Consider: Approval of the agenda
Proposed motion: I move to approve the agenda as presented.
II. Public comment period (three minute maximum per person)
Public comment is designed to share your thoughts and concerns with the district, but it is not an interactive discussion.
If you would like to participate, please sign up at the back of the room or if you are attending virtually, type your name and address in the chat feature to be placed in the queue.
III. Consent Agenda
This is a group of items to be acted on with a single motion, second and vote by the Board to expedite the handling of limited routine matters. The Board has previously received information on these matters and/or discussed them at a prior study session. Any board member may move an item from the consent agenda to the meeting agenda at this time.
Proposed Motion: I move to approve the items as presented in the consent agenda.
A. Approve September 28, 2026 Regular Board Meeting Minutes
CPNMD Board Meeting Minutes 9.28.26 DRAFT (PDF, opens in new tab)
B. Approve September 21, 2026 Work Session Minutes
CPNMD Work Session Minutes 9.21.26 DRAFT (PDF, opens in new tab)
C. Ratify claims for payment including check numbers 29861 – 298899 and electronic payments issued from September 17, 2026 to October 14, 2026 totaling $1,484,958.86
IV. Finance Report
The Finance Director will present an overview of the District’s financial condition, including budget performance, revenue and expenditure activity, cash balances, and other financial matters for the Board’s review.
CPNMD 10.26.2026 Finance Board Packet (PDF, opens in new tab)
V. Legal Counsel Status Report
Legal Counsel will provide an update on legal matters affecting the District, including but not limited to: contracts, compliance issues, ongoing or potential litigation, and other legal considerations for the Board’s information and guidance.
10.26.2026 Legal Status Report - CPNMD 4908-3579-7211 v.1 (PDF, opens in new tab)
A. Consider approval of HPMD Mill Levy Equivalent Payment Agreement Mill Levy Equivalent Payment Agreement (w Exhibit A) (PDF, opens in new tab)
B. Consider approval of addendum to Layne proposal
CPNMD A2 Pull Video Inspect Proposal 2026 Final (PDF, opens in new tab)Layne-CPNMD A2 Addendum Layne Signed (PDF, opens in new tab)
VI. District Manager Report
The District Manager will present a report to the Board regarding district operations, project status, administrative activities, and other matters pertinent to the District
District Manager Board Report 10_26_26 (PDF, opens in new tab)
CPNMD Distribution System Condition Assessment Presentation (PDF, opens in new tab)
VII. Operations & Engineering Report
These reports are included in the monthly Board Packet, this agenda item serves as an opportunity for the board to ask any questions they have regarding the reports.
Operations Report- September 2026 (PDF, opens in new tab)
Engineering Report October 2026 (PDF, opens in new tab)
VIII. Director's Matters
Board members may raise and discuss items of interest, concerns, or announcements that are not otherwise included on the agenda.
IX. Adjourn
Board President Jason Blankaert:
Good evening, and welcome to the Castle Pines North Metropolitan regular board meeting for October 2026. On October 26th, 2026, we will call the meeting to order and begin with the Pledge of Allegiance.
All Speak:
I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
Jason:
All right. Thank you. We'll move on to roll call here.
Board Member Director James Mulvey:
Jim. Present. No conflicts.
Board Member Director Tera Radloff:
Tera. Present. No conflicts.
Board Member Director Jana Krell:
Jana. Present. No conflicts.
Board Member Director Leah Enquist:
Leah. Present. No conflicts.
Jason:
And I'm Jason Blankaert present. No conflicts. And we have a quorum.
So let's move on to item C. I move to approve the agenda as presented. Second. Having a second.
Board Voting All Speak:
We'll move to vote. Jim. Approve. Tera. I. Jana. Approve. Leah. Approve. I approve as well. The motion passes. The agenda is approved.
Jason:
We will move to item number two. Public comment period. Three minute maximum per person. Nobody here is signed up to speak.
Do we have anybody on the line that signed up? No, sir. Okay. Having no public comments, we will go ahead and close out item two and move to item three, the consent agenda. This is a group of items to be acted on with a single motion. Second, and a vote by the board to expedite the handling of limited routine matters.
The board has previously received information on these matters and or discuss them at a prior study session. Any board member at this time may move to move an item from the consent agenda to the meeting agenda.
Tera:
I moved to approve the items on the consent agenda as presented.
Jana:
I second.
Jason:
All right. I'm going to second. We'll move to vote.
Board Voting All Speak:
Jim. Approve. Tera. Approve. Jana. Approve. Leah. Approve. I approve as well. The consent agenda passes.
Jason:
And we will go ahead and close item three and move on to the finance report with Molly. Good evening Molly.
Describer:
On screen.
TO: Board of Directors – Castle Pines North Metropolitan District
FROM: Eric Harris, Elevated Clarity (EC)
DATE: October 26, 2026
RE: Financial Report – October 2026 Board of Directors Meeting
General Fund Activity
Revenues totaled $1,801,899, which was $229,146 below the $2,031,045 year-to-date budget. The primary shortfalls were
indirect cost revenue from the Water Fund ($98,989 under budget) and from the Wastewater Fund ($68,930 under budget),
which mirror the lower indirect cost charges recorded in the Enterprise Funds below. Oil royalty revenues, general property
taxes, and City of Castle Pines IGA reimbursable costs were also below budget by $48,641, $14,408, and $12,525,
respectively, partially offset by interest earnings that exceeded budget by $12,696.
Total expenditures of $1,632,627 were $11,976 over the $1,620,651 year-to-date budget. Savings in Salaries and Benefits
($79,647 under budget), Firm Commitments ($25,693 under), Operations Support ($4,396 under), and Staff Support
($3,481 under) were more than offset by three categories running over budget. Office & Other was $70,267 over, driven
by Software Support ($124,403 actual against $56,516 budgeted, $67,887 over) and Office Furniture/Equipment ($17,234
over), partially offset by Phone/Security ($35,078 under). Property & Liability Insurance remains $40,755 over ($125,755
actual against an $85,000 year-to-date budget), reflecting the annual premium paid/booked in full in the first quarter.
Professional Services was $14,171 over, as the unbudgeted Security Master Plan, Risk & Resilience Assessment, and ERP
Update ($43,112) and the Rates and Fees Study ($15,704 over) were partially offset by Legal Services ($47,571 under).
Although the change in funds available of $169,272 came in $241,122 unfavorable to the $410,394 year-to-date budget,
the fund ends the period with $693,282 available against a $608,176 budget, an $85,106 favorable variance driven primarily
by the favorable beginning-of-year balance ($524,010 actual versus $197,782 budgeted).
Molly Janzen, Accountant:
Good evening. Board. The finance information begins on page 13. Starting.
Is it not on?
Jana:
I can't hear.
Molly:
Thank you.
Castle Pines Resident:
I can't hear you please.
Molly:
Barely hear me.
Jason:
Oh, sorry.
Jana:
I can hear Molly from up here.
Molly:
You can.
Jana:
I thought I could.
Molly:
My lights on.
District Manager Nathan Travis:
You can’t really.
Deputy District Manager Rene Santin:
Is that better?
Tera:
Probably. Just get closer to the mic, Molly. Okay.
Molly:
Little better. I can talk loudly. So starting on page 13, okay, I can hear myself. ... Starting on page 13 of your board packet. We do have the monthly memo. I'm going to keep this very high level for the August financials.
We did have an opportunity to discuss with the board, not only the current August financials, but also the 2027 proposed budget at this month's work session. Will continue to talk about that at next month's work session, with the budget hearing scheduled then for the board meeting next month. So I'll just keep this really high level for now.
So on page 13, the little table that you see with general fund activity, actual amounts through August 31st, $524,010 beginning fund balance revenues of $1.8 million, expenditures of $1.6M. With a change in funds available of $169,000. Ending funds available $693,282. The message with this fund is that everything is still on track. We did have one unplanned line.
I think it's just one in this fund. The security study risk and resilience that is in the general fund and that was not budgeted for. So we'll continue to keep an eye on the expenditures to make sure that if we do need to amend the 2026 budget, we can do that at the same time, we do the 2027 budget.
Hearing. Any questions on general fund before I move on. Again, there's a lot more information in the text, but I'm not going to go into that.
James:
I had a question really. But just for our guests here and the people that may dial in or listen to this later, if you can just go through, maybe it's a Nathan thing, maybe it's a youth thing for the security study since it was out of scope.
Just overview.
Nathan:
Yeah. So earlier this year we were looking at various access control measures for the water treatment plant, for individual lift stations. Those originally were designed to be kind of built into those direct capital projects, and conversations with the board. And we had a vendor coming in present. We decided to pull all of that out of the scope of all of the lift stations, the water treatment plant, and create one cohesive, basically like security approach.
We also had our risk and resiliency assessment update, which is a pretty simple update, was due this year. So we folded that all into one program. And we've been working on finishing that up with Kennedy Jenks. So we've had 2 or 3 meetings and we're getting close to the end.
James:
Okay. Thank you. Appreciate it.
Jason:
Does it sound any better out there?
But we're still having trouble with the dais.
Nathan:
Gotta pull it up.
Nathan:
Check. Go check. One, two. Better? Better?
Jason:
Check. Is this fine? Still can't hear me?
Yeah, normally that's not an issue, but.
All right, I'll just yell.
Nathan:
Yeah, we cranked it up, I think we'll. Did they sit closer? Well, it's the speakers. I think we should be okay. Is that better? That sounds better. Okay.
James:
One. Two. Three.
Nathan:
Got it.
Jason:
All right, Molly, I think we can continue.
Molly:
Okay. Thank you. Okay. So on page 15, we have the summary of the water fund. You can see the actual amounts a little over $43 million, $5.8M in revenues, $9.9M in expenditures. For a change in funds available, a negative, which we expected of $4.1M. It is less than when we look at what we budgeted through August.
It is less of a decrease than we anticipated. With an ending funds available of close to $39 million. I did want to point out here in expenditures in the water fund and then revenues in the wastewater fund, we did budget for a $4.8 million transfer of funds from the water fund to the wastewater fund to help support the lift station project.
We are anticipating to need to have that in effect towards the end of the year. So Paul is going to be bringing that a resolution to the next board meeting, to spell out the details of how that will work. It's really just an inter fund loan. And it's very fairly simple, but we will have a document, for you to look at to, to have that happen.
Any questions on the water fund before we move on to wastewater?
Jason:
Not hearing any. Go ahead.
Describer:
On screen. Wastewater Enterprise Fund Table description.
Revenues of $2,235,997 (operating and non-operating combined) exceeded the $2,132,626 year-to-date budget by $103,371, led by Interest Earnings ($45,082 over budget), unbudgeted Connect Fees of $44,502, and Sewer Service Charges ($28,143 over budget), partially offset by Golf Course Water Delivery ($15,526 under budget).
Total expenditures (operating and non-operating combined) of $4,857,509 were $74,593 over the $4,782,916 year-to-date budget. Capital projects are tracking on budget, including Lift Station Renovations ($3,087,795), and the Flume Replacement – Daniels Gate and PCWRA Golf Course Improvements Cash Funding are not budgeted to be spent until later in the year. Within operating expenditures, Collection – Repairs and Maintenance ran $281,406 over budget ($479,346 actual vs. $197,940 budget), a variance discussed in prior months; we continue to evaluate whether the annual budget for this line needs revision. This was partially offset by Collection – Main Inspection and Cleaning ($137,830 under) and Indirect Costs to the General Fund ($68,930 under). PCWRA Golf Course Improvements Debt Service also ran $19,489
over budget ($51,051 vs. $31,562).
The change in funds available of $(2,621,512) was $28,778 better than the budgeted $(2,650,290), as revenues running $103,371 ahead of budget more than covered the expenditure overage. Ending funds available of $3,060,401 remain $400,060 ahead of the $2,660,341 budget, all in the unrestricted category (the Fund currently carries no capital-restricted balance).
Molly:
Okay. So then the next page, the wastewater fund beginning funds available of close to $5.7 million, $2.2M in in revenues. Again, if you look at what we adopted in the budget, $7.9 million. And that is again because of that $4.8 million loan that we anticipate from the water fund.
So that's why there's such a difference there. Expenditures of close to $5 million change in funds available down which we anticipated about $2.6 million. Ending funds available at the end of August, a little over $3 million. Again, a lot more detail in the text that you see below that table. But if there if there are any questions before we move on.
Jason:
I think we can move on.
Molly:
Okay. And just a reminder that these summaries are pulled from the detail pages that you see later in the board packet. So if someone is interested in what makes up these numbers, the different line items that make up these numbers that is available in the packet, I'm just trying to keep a real high level at this point.
Describer:
On screen. Current Projects
Currently, EC is working with District staff and contractors on implementing the following process changes and projects:
● Continue work with Blackbaud Advisory consultants to strengthen the District's general ledger and financial system configuration. Current quarter priorities are to (i) build report groupings to streamline financial reporting and (ii) update the Vendor Master File in preparation for transitioning to the online AP function (Payment Assist) and expense management modules which will streamline and enhance monthly financial reporting.
● Continue work on the District Records Management Structure with District Staff and consultants. More details will be forthcoming as they become available.
● Establish accounts with InBank and CSAFE as authorized by the Board. The CSAFE account is now active, and transfers between CSAFE and ColoTrust have already occurred. Next steps will include development of a cash management tool to ensure cash balances are in alignment with the Investment Policy approved by the Board in
2025.
● Evaluate reserve levels and types of reserves to develop, recommend, and ultimately adopt a reserves policy.
● Update and streamline reporting for capital projects. For discussion purposes, a draft of a new report, Current Construction Capital Projects Snapshot, has been included in the packet.
● The 2027 Proposed Budget process and timeline have been established and discussed at the Board Work Session held on September 21, 2026. The 2027 Proposed Budget was distributed to the Board on October 15, 2026, and the 2027 Proposed Budget was reviewed and discussed in detail at the Board Work Session held October 19, 2026.
● Continue work with Bartle Wells, District staff and the Board to explore new rate structure scenarios.
Anticipated Upcoming Schedule (subject to change)
October 26, 2026 – Monthly Board Meeting – Budget Discussion and Discussion on Rate Plan
November 16, 2026 – Monthly Work Session – Budget Work Session With Board (if needed)
November 23, 2026 – Monthly Board Meeting – Rate Hearing and Budget Hearing
December 15, 2026 – Certify Mill Levy to the Board of County Commissioners
Molly:
All right then moving on to page 17. Just wanted to focus in on a couple of the current projects that we have. The second and third bullet up from the the bottom of the current projects. The second bullet up is the 2027 proposed budget process. We discussed the process. We've had our first work session. We will have our second budget work session in November, with the budget hearing being scheduled for November.
And then the other item I'd like to highlight is the third bullet up from the bottom. And that's update and streamline reporting for capital projects. We have included in the board packet this month a one page summary of construction projects. So when you look at what we've provided in the past, we've given you a lot of details on all kinds of projects.
The, the, security study that we just talked about. We have the condition assessment. So there's projects going on that aren't necessarily construction related. So when we started thinking about kind of the big picture, and some of the questions the board has had in the past, we said, let's just, let's just focus on those big capital construction projects and hopefully develop a one page simple report that we can provide to you every month.
That just gives you a snapshot. And we're calling it a snapshot of where we're at with those projects. And so that appears on page.
32. 32. Thank you.
Describer:
On screen. Current Construction Capital Projects Snapshot
Castle Pines North Metropolitan District · Inception to date through August 2026. This is page 20 of the CPNMD 10.26.2026 Finance Board Packet found in the On Board interface. This one-page report is described briefly by Molly.
James:
Okay. I'm just going to jump in for a second. And this is like what we were kind of going back and forth a lot with probably maybe a year ago, that this level of detail was really helpful because, you know, you. Well, Nathan Rene, deal with this stuff daily. And a lot of times we talk about projects and we use slightly different descriptors.
And sometimes it's hard to understand what project we're referring to. So having something like this that we can all use common language. And then you can see what the burn rate, you know, basically where we are in the timeline and where we are with the spending for me is very helpful. So thank you. I looked at this and liked it a lot.
Molly:
Okay. Yeah. Great. And that's kind of why we labeled it draft for discussion purposes is just to get the board's input on. Is this helpful? Is there other information that should be included. Is there information that's not helpful on here. So again just trying to keep it high level but give you a really good idea of where we're at.
And as you can see with this, this month's report. You know, out of a $21.2 million, total spend with construction projects, we're a little over halfway through. So it really gives you an idea of why we are spending our reserves the way we are. It's intentional. We still have a lot more to go.
And why, when we look at the 2027 proposed budget, we will likely be looking at, going looking for some loans or something to fund some of our projects in future years because we are spending our reserves. So, I appreciate your comments. Any other questions or comments on on this report?
Jason:
I like it a lot. It's something we've been asking for for a long time.
Tera:
Okay. Yeah, really nice visual, really easy to.
Molly:
Okay, great. If you do end up having something that you feel like this document doesn't answer, that would be helpful. Just let us know and we'll try to incorporate that. So. Great. And I think that winds up the finance section of the packet.
Jason:
All right. Any other questions. Hearing none from the board.
Thank you very much Molly. I appreciate all your hard work. And we will go ahead and close out the finance report and move on now to the legal counsel report. Good evening Paul.
Describer:
On screen. TO: Castle Pines North Metropolitan District
FROM: Seter, Vander Wall & Mielke, P.C.; Paul Polito, Esq.
DATE: October 23, 2026
RE: Legal Status Report for the October 26, 2026 Board Meeting
MATTERS FOR APPROVAL
MATTER: HIDDEN POINTE METRO DISTRICT – MILL LEVY EQUIVALENT
PAYMENT AGREEMENT
Status: The Inclusion Agreement with the Hidden Pointe Metropolitan District (HPMD) contemplates that, if the inclusion becomes effective before December 15, 2026, the District will certify its uniform mill levy for tax year 2026 (for collection in 2027) against property within the HPMD territory, and that the twenty five percent (25%) surcharge on water and wastewater charges currently applied within that territory will cease upon inclusion. Under C.R.S. § 39-1-110(1.5), however, a special district may not levy a tax against newly included property for the year of inclusion unless the court order of inclusion is recorded before July 1 of that year. Because the inclusion election will not be held until November 3, 2026, that deadline cannot be met, and the Douglas County Assessor has advised that the District’s mill levy will not apply to the HPMD territory until tax year 2027 (for
collection in 2028). Absent a further agreement, the District would serve the HPMD territory during 2027 without the benefit of either the surcharge or property tax revenue from that area.
Legal Counsel Paul Polito, Esq.:
Good evening. Board. The legal status report is on page 33 of your packet. I will be discussing the levy agreement as well as the A2 addendum.
But if anybody has any questions about any other items on the legal status report, happy to answer them at this time.
Jason:
I think we can move on to the hidden pointed mill levy.
Describer:
On screen. MILL LEVY EQUIVALENT PAYMENT AGREEMENT
This Mill Levy Equivalent Payment Agreement (“Agreement”) is entered into between
Hidden Pointe Metropolitan District (“HPMD”) and Castle Pines North Metropolitan
District (“CPNMD”). HPMD and CPNMD are referred to herein individually as a “Party” and
collectively as the “Parties.”
RECITALS
A. HPMD and CPNMD, acting by and through its Water Activity Enterprise and its Wastewater Activity Enterprise, are parties to that certain Inclusion Agreement dated April 2, 2026, attached hereto as Exhibit A (the “Inclusion Agreement”), which provides for the inclusion of the HPMD Boundary within the CPNMD Boundary, subject to approval by the eligible electors within the HPMD Boundary at an election held in the manner described in §§ 32-1-401 et seq., C.R.S. Capitalized terms used but not defined in this Agreement have the meanings given to them in the Inclusion Agreement.
B. On June 22, 2026, the CPNMD Board adopted Resolution No. 2026-6-2 approving the inclusion of the HPMD Boundary subject to the terms and conditions of the Inclusion Agreement. On July 13, 2026, the District Court for Douglas County, Colorado, entered its
Order Setting Election on Inclusion of Property in Case No. 1984CV126, directing that the question of inclusion be submitted to the eligible electors of the HPMD Boundary at an election to be held on November 3, 2026 (the “Election”).
C. Section II.D.1 of the Inclusion Agreement contemplates that, if the Inclusion Date occurs prior to December 15, 2026, CPNMD will certify a uniform mill levy for tax year 2026 (for collection in 2027) applicable to all property within the CPNMD Boundary, inclusive of the HPMD Boundary.
D. Under § 39-1-110(1.5), C.R.S., a special district may not levy a tax against property included within the special district for the calendar year during which the property was included unless the court order of inclusion has been filed with the county clerk and
recorder prior to July 1 of that year. Because the Election will not be held until November 3, 2026, the order of inclusion cannot be recorded prior to July 1, 2026, and the Douglas County Assessor has advised that CPNMD’s mill levy will not be applied to property
within the HPMD Boundary until tax year 2027 (for collection in 2028).
E. Under Section II.D.1.a.i of the Inclusion Agreement, the twenty-five percent (25%) surcharge on water and wastewater rates, fees, tolls, and charges applicable to property within the HPMD Boundary under the Extraterritorial Service Arrangement (the “Surcharge”) will cease upon the Inclusion Date. Absent this Agreement, CPNMD would therefore provide water and wastewater services to the HPMD Boundary during calendar year 2027 without the benefit of either the Surcharge or property tax revenue from the HPMD Boundary.
F. CPNMD certified a total mill levy of 3.500 mills for tax year 2025 and anticipates certifying the same total mill levy for tax year 2026. Applied to the preliminary 2026 assessed valuation of the HPMD Boundary of approximately $17,983,090 reported by the
Douglas County Assessor in August 2026, a levy of 3.500 mills would produce approximately $62,900.
\G. The Parties desire to provide for HPMD to pay CPNMD, in lieu of the mill levy that CPNMD is unable to apply to the HPMD Boundary for tax year 2026, an amount equal to the revenue that levy would have produced, so that property within the HPMD Boundary contributes to CPNMD for calendar year 2027 on the same basis as property within the CPNMD Boundary, consistent with the intent of the Inclusion Agreement. It is anticipated that the Inclusion Date will be on or about December 31, 2026, and that property within the
HPMD Boundary will pay the same rates for water and wastewater services as property within CPNMD Boundary effective as of January 1, 2027, whether the rates are collected by HPMD or CPNMD. This Agreement is entered into as a further assurance under Section III.L of the Inclusion Agreement.
H. The Parties are authorized to enter into this Agreement by Article XIV, § 18(2)(a) of the Colorado Constitution and §§ 29-1-203 and 32-1-1001(1)(d), C.R.S.
Paul:
Okay. That brings us to page 39 of your packet. This is the mill levy equivalent payment agreement that we've discussed a couple of times. And again, just as a refresher to the board. This closes, that gap year that we were talking about. So essentially because the inclusion order can't be recorded before July 1st of this year, our levy, the district's levy does not reach the Hidden point territory until 2027.
So, but the 25% surcharge ends regardless if people do elect to to include. So again, this closes that gap. As a brief refresher, Hidden Point will pay us the equivalent of our 3.5 mills on whatever the final 2026 assessed valuation turns out to be, plus some apportioned, specific ownership taxes. We're looking roughly at about $62,900 at the preliminary EV.
And then the specific ownership taxes are about a 5 to $10,000 ballpark estimate. This would be remitted monthly within 20 days of hidden points receipt. The surcharge returns. If they don't pay that point, the agreement would be breached. And determination automatically if the election fails or once they've been paid in full. So as far as what's new within this agreement since you last saw just one minor change that the Hidden Point board, saw fit to add, and I have I have no issue with the addition.
So they took it up on October 20th. They added for one sentence and recital G which begins with it is anticipated and I'll just read it out. It is anticipated that the inclusion date will be on or about December 31st, 2026, and that the property within the boundary will pay the same rates for water and wastewater services as property within the CPNMD boundary, effective as of January 1st, 2027.
Whether the rates are collected by Hidden Point or by Castle Pines. It doesn't change the substance of the agreement. If anything, I think it's just an attempt from them to clarify that. Yes, on January 1st the surcharge will end. I think that was that was their attempt to clarify that, which again, I'm completely fine with. So I would advise that the board approve this agreement with that change.
I'll pause there if anybody has any questions, comments, concerns about the agreement.
Jason:
Questions? Board.
Okay. Let's continue.
Paul:
Well, the board could entertain a motion to authorize the agreement at this point.
Tera:
I'll make a motion to authorize the agreement.
Leah:
I'll second. All right.
Board Voting All Speak:
Having a second. We'll move to vote. Jim. Approve. Tera. Approve. Jana. Approve. Leah. Approve. I approve as well. Thank you. Paul.
Paul:
Thank you. Board. Next on the agenda is the well, a two addendum to Layne's proposal.
Describer:
On screen. ADDENDUM NO. 1 TO PROPOSAL FOR
A-2 PULL, VIDEO INSPECTION, AND EQUIPMENT FACTORY INSPECTION
This Addendum No. 1 (this “Addendum”) is entered into as of , 2026, by and between CASTLE PINES NORTH METROPOLITAN DISTRICT, a quasi-municipal corporation and political subdivision of the State of Colorado (the “District”), and LAYNE CHRISTENSEN COMPANY (“Layne”). The District and Layne are referred to herein individually as a “Party” and collectively as the “Parties.”
RECITALS
A. Layne submitted to the District a proposal dated August 25, 2026, for “A2 Pull, Video Inspection, Equipment Factory Inspection” at the District’s Well A-2 (the “Well”), together with Layne’s standard terms and conditions attached thereto (collectively, the “Proposal”).
B. The Proposal contemplates that the motor, seal, and pump removed from the Well (collectively, the “Equipment”) will be shipped to the equipment manufacturer for disassembly and inspection, with a third-party inspector provided to observe.
C. The Well has experienced repeated equipment failures, and the Parties share an interest in determining the cause. The Parties desire to clarify certain terms governing the inspection, the
custody of the Equipment, and the allocation of costs, and to confirm that neither Party’s rights with respect to prior work at the Well are affected by the Proposal or this Addendum.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants set forth herein and the Parties’ respective performance under the Proposal, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the Parties agree as follows:
Paul:
When we were last speaking about this, we were waiting on Layne's department on three open points. Layne did confirm on October 19th that the addendum is acceptable in the form that I did present it to the board at the last meeting. My apologies. So again, Layne confirmed on October 19th at the addendum was acceptable as we sent, and they did return a signed copy on October 22nd.
That's what is within your packet. So nothing left to negotiate at this point. It's here for approval and execution so that Layne can schedule the poll. Now, on where those three open points from last time landed again, all accepted. So as far as inspection goes. Mutual selection. We propose Layne can object within five business days, but only for lack of qualifications or independence.
And then otherwise, it's deemed approved. As far as cost allocation, the cost follows the cause of the break. So as of right now, it's a 50/50 split on the $70,000, $35,000 each to do this work. But it is interim. So once the inspection determines the predominant cause, the other $35,000 will shift to the to the right party at that point.
And then the last one was just the precedence of the agreement that the addendum does control over Layne's proposal, which again, without that, there is no there's no effect to it to begin with. So, they accepted that there's certainly reasonable. I'm happy to go through some of the addendum again as well for the board, if you'd like.
Otherwise, the board can entertain a motion to approve it.
Tera:
Well, it sounds like it incorporated everything that we discussed last time. Are you comfortable with it?
Jana:
No questions for me. As expected.
Tera:
Wonderful. Then I make a motion to approve the addendum. I'll second.
Board Voting All Speak:
All right. Having a second? We'll move to vote. Jim. Approve. Tera. Approve. Jana. Approve. Leah. Approve. I approve as well. The motion passes.
Paul:
Thank you board.
Tera:
Thank you. Paul.
Jason:
Thank you. Paul.
Paul:
And that is it from legal tonight.
Jason:
All right. Any other questions for Paul tonight?
Jana:
No. Thank you.
Jason:
Hearing none. We will go ahead and close out the legal counsel's report. Thank you Paul. And we will move on to item number six, which is the district manager's report. Nathan.
Describer:
On screen. Memorandum
From: Nathan J. Travis
To: CPNMD Board of Directors
Date: 10/26/26
Re: District Manager’s Report
AGENDA ITEMS
None
UPDATES
Water Source- Highlands Ranch Delivery Updates
• Beginning October 19th we have shut down the water treatment plant and are utilizing our interconnect with highlands ranch for our water source. We will continue to do so until Mid-December at which time we will begin utilizing the Water Treatment Plant again to facilitate work at the interconnect pump station. When that project is complete (mid January) we will shut down the plant for the remainder of the season
Wells
• Layne has agreed to terms. A2 will be pulled accordingly. We are working on establishing level transducers for all wells, with 2 approved at a rough cost of $10,000 each.
Stantec Regional Water Supply Study
• Final Draft due to providers 11/6/2026
• Final Comments due to Stantek 11/20/2026
• Final Report due to providers 11/30/2026
Conservation
• The new rebates are in place and are being well utilized, though sod removal has continued to be Slower through August. We have a projected $44,662.33 remaining of our $110,000.00 conservation rebate budget. 17012.5 square feet of sod has been removed under the program.
PROJECT UPDATES
(for additional information please refer to the engineering report)
Water Treatment Plant Update
• A solution has been selected for the damaged floor drain, work to complete is underway, as well as final painting and surface restoration. We are still on track to host an open-house this spring.
Castle Pines Parkway Rehabilitation
• Waterline work for the original scope has been completed. We anticipate waterline work to be complete shortly.
Distribution System Condition Update
• See the included report and presentation.
Lift Station Renovation Program
• Scope A (Lift Stations 1, 2, & 5) The project remains on schedule. All trails are currently open, a simple schedule and status for this project has been added to the final pages of this report.
• Scope B (Lift Stations 3, 4, & 7) A preliminary schedule has been set, and work is set to begin on this phase late this fall.
South Tank Rehab Capital Project
• Work is continuing on the South Tank Rehab Project. We plan to complete work on tank 2 this fall/winter. Staff is currently working with the Golf Course and Kennedy Jenks to consider abandoning tank 1, and constructing a new- larger tank at a different location on the same property. To allow for that evaluation and to provide sufficient time for long lead items, we are delaying the Tank 1 Rehab to next fall/ winter.
Interconnect Pump Station- Surge System Modifications
• Construction is set to begin mid-December
PCWRA Reuse Pond Project
• Holdover: This project is well underway with completion expected this fall
MISCELLANEOUS
Upcoming Time Off
• October 29th I will be presenting with Sigler communications at an AWWA seminar
Removed From Prior Monthly Reports
• JAM Ranch
Nathan:
Good evening. I don't really have any other updates on the wells apart from the one that Paul just gave.
So we'll get that scheduled as expediently as we can. Kennedy Jenks has identified two parties that they feel would be qualified. So we'll reach out to both of those run them pass Layne and get that process moving. Beyond that, what I wanted to primarily present tonight was just a quick presentation I put together, to get everyone updated on where we are at in our distribution system condition assessment.
Bear with me here.
Describer:
On screen. Slide 1
CASTLE PINES NORTH METROPOLITAN DISTRICT
Nathan Travis
Distribution System Condition Assessment
Progress report: what we know and what comes next
October 26, 2026
Nathan Travis, District Manager
Nathan:
Is it letting me share?
Perfect.
Describer:
On screen. Slide 2
CASTLE PINES NORTH METROPOLITAN DISTRICT
Line-break costs have varied over time, but are trending up
The line graph describes the approximate cost of line breaks from 2013 to 2026.
2013 - $20,000
2014 - $30,000
2015 - $60,000
2016 - $195,000
2017 - $380,000
2018 - $195,000
2019 - $120,000
2020 - $215,000
2021 - $325,000
2022 - $180,000
2023 - $230,000
2024 - $110,000
2025 - $495,000
2026 - $295,000
Prepared By: Rene Santin, P.E. Deputy District Manager
CONDITION ASSESSMENT / OCTOBER 26, 2026
Nathan:
Wanted to start with one of the pieces of information the board has been asking for for the last couple of meetings or so is really just kind of a Euro year over year expenditure on emergency line repairs. This data set is shift is kind of skewed a little bit by two large breaks. So you can see in early 2017 we had a line repair that cost us about.
It was like right around $200,000. And then we had the large one last year at Castle Pines Parkway and Monarch. That said, we are still trending up. This year's expenditure is just a little bit under $300,000. This is specifically waterline breaks. There will be we have a few straggling invoices that will come in this year that aren't included in this.
But our expenses are are definitely trending up in that regard.
Jason:
And the majority of these line breaks are from one certain portion of our correct boundaries. Okay.
Nathan:
And we'll get we'll get kind of talk through that here in a moment.
Describer:
On screen. Slide 3
CASTLE PINES NORTH METROPOLITAN DISTRICT
The original plan identified an area of poor pipe
Nathan describes.
August 13, 2026. The red-shaded area was marked as verified poor.
CONDITION ASSESSMENT / OCTOBER 26, 2026
Nathan:
I apologize. This is a little bit smaller on the screen that I had anticipated, but so this is the area, the areas that we primarily focused on.
It's a little bit difficult, but he kind of see my cursor here in the center. That's Castle Pines Parkway. Yeah if Rene can help me out a little bit.
Keep rolling. So the intersection kind of dead center. Top of that little graphic is Castle Pines Parkway and Monarch. So these are, generally speaking, the first few filings of the district. That red area. Perfect. That works. So the red area is where the vast majority of our breaks have gone. So we plotted all of those out. That's one area that we didn't really spend any additional time or effort verifying pipe condition, just because we've seen the pipe in that area so many times, we know it's in really poor condition.
What we really needed to do is figure out how the broader extent of that poor installation. So this isn't necessarily a condition like an age issue. It's definitely an install condition. Ductile iron pipe stalled appropriately can last 100 150 years. So to see these kinds of degradation this quickly is really more about how the pipe was installed.
And so it wasn't wrapped with poly wrap, which is a plastic coating that prevents corrosion cells develop developing between the pipe and the soil. And then it was also buried back with native soils, meaning they dug the pipe out, put the pipe back in the ground with what they dug out, and didn't put anything. Usually a product called squeegee, which is kind of like a really fine pea gravel that allows for a little bit of pipe movement, some ground shifts.
And so with the between the native soils and the direct bury installation, it's just been corroding really quickly. And so one of the primary objectives of getting through the pipe condition assessment was really identifying all of the areas in the district that have that poor install. So these are these are where we focused. You can see those delineated that say p h that is potholes.
So those are areas that we've physically exposed the pipe. And there was a couple other areas we look sorry about that. A couple of other areas that we looked at. But what was encouraging is all of this area. So you can see where we did ph4 11 filing 21. This is filing 17. There's another pothole. If you can scroll down all of these potholes in this area.
The pipe actually looked great. The installation condition was what we would hope to see. No real signs of visible degradation. In that top left corner where the purple is, is a little bit of a different story. This pipe isn't in poor, horrible shape, but it is installed improperly, and we have had multiple breaks. So there's been, just in the last 3 or 3 or so years, there's been two breaks right where you see that pothole six.
And then there was one break over here where pothole five is. And so we are going to ultimately include that in our recommendation. That pipe needs to be replaced. We were really focusing on pipe that was installed before 1996. And so we did some spot checks and some other areas of the district.
Describer:
On screen. Slide 4
CASTLE PINES NORTH METROPOLITAN DISTRICT
Original pothole plan: additional locations
Nathan describes.
Refer to the field status slides for later PH9 and PH10 findings.
CONDITION ASSESSMENT / OCTOBER 26, 2026
Nathan:
This is further north. This is the hamlet subdivision.
This is Glen Oaks, Glen Ridge. So this is right over there by Director Krell. These ones also looked really, really good. So pipe was wrapped. It was in proper bury condition. So these were all lines that in our initial condition assessment, we had almost assumed we would end up having to replace. But we were pleasantly surprised to find out that it was in much better shape than we anticipated.
So it's far enough out that it won't really show up on a capital replacement plan for another 75 or 80 years.
Zoom in a little impact a little bit.
Describer:
On screen. Slide 5
CASTLE PINES NORTH METROPOLITAN DISTRICT
Seven completed exposures were in good condition
10 completed potholes reported wrapped and in good condition
2 Poor installation- pipe needs to be replaced
Findings apply to the exposed locations. The Retreat Remains under investigation.
CONDITION ASSESSMENT / OCTOBER 26, 2026
Nathan:
So you'll have to excuse the seven exposures. That should say ten. So ten of the exposures were in great condition, and then two of them were poor installation. Those were the two that I identified in that purple area on the screen before.
Describer:
On screen. Slide 6
CASTLE PINES NORTH METROPOLITAN DISTRICT
Seven Retreat locations are planned and remain under review
Nathan Describes.
Seven locations are planned. Scheduling remains to be determined.
CONDITION ASSESSMENT / OCTOBER 26, 2026
Nathan:
The other area that we looked at, this is the retreat. So this is the neighborhood immediately adjacent to our office, right over here to, the west a little bit.
This one was a little surprising. So Yorkshire Drive, which runs right past the office here, was replaced in 2024. And then there's these two other lines up to the north, or at least the north side of this image, Berkshire, and Berkshire and Berkshire Lane and Tangle Oak. So these were actually replaced back in 2011 because they were in such poor condition.
It was confusing as all of this was installed, Yorkshire included was all installed, at least according to our drawings. It looks like it all went in at the same time. Same contractor, same set of as builds. So we had identified originally just two potholes in this area. Honestly, I thought we were just going to, you know, dig it up, verify that the pipe was in horrible shape and that wasn't what we found.
So where this Hydro PH6 is one that we had scheduled, we actually skipped that one because of what we found right here. So this line, even though it was installed, is the same time as the lines that we've had significant problems with, is one of the best looking pieces of pipe that I found in the district. It was beautifully wrapped.
It was bedded appropriately, really no visible signs of degradation at all. So we're not going to be able to, at least for this neighborhood, be able to rely specifically on those two potholes. So this neighborhood is still a little bit of a question. So we're switching modality. Originally the first potholes we were looking at, we were digging excavations large enough for somebody to get in.
And then we could do pipe pipe measurements. Really I just want to see what the installation condition is, which we can do much less invasive with a VEC truck and like a ten inch pothole. So we went from two in this area to seven of them. And these will all be hydro vac. We could we're working on scheduling those now.
We should be able to get them all done once we get permits and locates in place in the next couple of weeks. It'll really to get through all of those. It'll only take us a couple of days. And that'll be one of the last pieces we need to really find to identify exactly which pipe we need to repair and which pipe we don't.
Jana:
Do you think that Berkshire Lane pipe got replaced? Like, that's not the original pipe. I don't. But Pre-Nathan being.
Nathan:
We couldn't find any record of it. So we've had the same engineer with the exception of like a three year gap since the district was formed. So Kennedy Jenks was mere and associates. They had never done a project on it.
There's about a three year window, 3 or 4 year window where we didn't use Kennedy Jenks. I was actually able to get Ahold of the district manager at that time, and they said that they hadn't, that they didn't remember doing any projects in there either. So we will we will see what we find.
Jason:
But it was put in by the same people that did Yorkshire?
Nathan:
As near as we can tell. Yeah.
Jason:
Got that right and part of it not right?
Jana:
That's why it seems like it probably was replaced it and not documented correctly. Okay.
Describer:
On screen. Slide 7
CASTLE PINES NORTH METROPOLITAN DISTRICT
The Retreat approach has changed
Seven standard hydro-excavated potholes are planned
Primary purpose: confirm whether poly-wrap was installed on the mainlines.
Hydro-excavation will reduce disturbance in recently slurry-sealed areas.
Hydro PH1 through Hydro PH7 • Scheduling to be determined
CONDITION ASSESSMENT / OCTOBER 26, 2026
Nathan:
That's just kind of a brief summary of what we've already talked about.
Describer:
On screen. Slide 8
CASTLE PINES NORTH METROPOLITAN DISTRICT
Current assessment status
Nathan Describes.
CONDITION ASSESSMENT / OCTOBER 26, 2026
Nathan:
Regarding hydro excavation. So that leaves us with this map. And I know it's a little bit difficult to see at this scale, but basically all of the pipes that are read are what we've identified as DIPX. That is not an industry standard term by any stretch of the imagination. It's just easier for it's an easy way to track it in our GIS system for which pipe needs to be replaced.
So it's ducked a lion pipe. And then the X just means that we need to. We are assuming we need to replace it. And like I said, we'll know a lot more about this area in the next couple of weeks and we'll be able to get better measurements leaving out of this evaluation for the time being. You can see this red line runs here.
That's one of our primary lines that comes from our tanks. We have seen it and cut into it twice in the last year, as part of the Castle Pines Parkway and Monarch projects. It was not installed very well. So like the install condition, was not wrapped and it was direct bury, but the actual pipe condition really wasn't bad at all.
So we are as part of our tank, our tank project, we're going to bring in a company that can actually give us a full link, like through for the length of that pipe. It's about a full mile, wall thickness measurement. So we'll, we'll know for sure. But right now, there's really no reason to include that in our, in our current capital project or in this upcoming replacement project.
Like I said, it's in pretty good shape. It's probably assuming that that condition is consistent across the entire length of the pipe. We've probably got about 15 or 20 years before we need to address it.
Jason:
Is that like sonar that they do to determine the,
Nathan:
Yeah, basically they're, they're going to it's a technology that I haven't used, but yeah, they basically send us a specific frequency down the line.
There are certain pressure requirements that we have to hit, and then that somehow goes into a magic box and gives us average wall thickness across various areas. Cool.
Leah:
I have a question. Is, is this just an effort to understand? Is this just an effort to understand our current state? Is this something that we do on some type of cadence.
And then in general, like if you identify pipes that need to be replaced, is that more of like a proactive thing or a reactive thing or. It depends.
Nathan:
So these are the purpose of this evaluation is really to identify pipes that are currently, as we sit today, in need of replacement so that they can be moved into a capital program.
Which we would that'll kind of be one of the well will be one of the next steps once we get through. And I really, truly identify these pipes, is getting replacement schedules in place. Setting up capital projects and like we can talk a little bit about that at the end, but it's primarily to identify which pipes are in poor condition today.
Leah:
Thank you.
Jason:
Nate, next time, could you pinpoint all the breaks that we've had?
Nathan:
Yes I actually have that done. I'll I'll get that sent out and I'll update the presentation and send that out with it too.
Jason:
That'd be great. Thank you.
Jana:
And can you line a water? Can you line a DIP pipe?
Nathan:
You can. It is not easy to do inside of high service density.
So, the transmission main that we'll look at probably in 10 or 15 years is a great candidate. There's not a lot of services, there's not a lot of valves, but you can line them. The problem that you run into
Jana:
the transmission when you're saying the one that's running from the treatment.
Nathan:
Yeah, from the plant to the tank,
Jana:
that might be potential.
Nathan:
Okay. It's it's a lot harder to do in residential neighborhoods because with the vast majority of proven technologies, you still have to dig up every service line to reinstall, to reinstate the tap, and you still have to dig.
Jana:
Do you really? Oh, so you're just not running a cure through it? You'd have to. Yeah, yeah, every single house. You would have to open up the service.
Nathan:
Okay. And so there there is one company that does, Oh, well, three parts spun in place, epoxy that can run past services. You do lose a little bit of service line diameter. It's also relatively new and fairly unproven.
Jana:
But as I, as I was thinking about that, in order to put a new water line in, you have to dig up every single service also.
So to me, that might be a moot point. I mean, you're going to do it whether you replace it. Yeah, but there could be a cost savings with looking into lining. Yeah, I've only lined a sewer, so that's why I thought. I don't know if you can do it on a pressurized, but
Nathan:
yeah, we we can. You can definitely line them.
There's longer and something that we can look at and consider for sure.
Jana:
You're the expert on that. But I wanted to know if it even existed, like a put in epoxy product. Okay.
Nathan:
Yeah. The usually by the time you dig like that many excavations, the city understandably is going to want you to do like, like larger like asphalt repairs.
They don't want a street that has patches at every.
Jana:
And I understand that. But that would go along with replacing it also. Yeah. You know so to me it's a those are things you're going to experience no matter what. So if it was a but again if the pipe is in bad shape, you can't line it necessarily if it's corroding.
So it doesn't have a structure to stick to. So okay.
Tera:
So are you going to do the pipe assessment for the whole entire of the service area. Because this looks like this is mostly the older area.
Nathan:
Yeah. So this this is a pipe condition assessment of the entire service area. We were able to eliminate most of it.
So we didn't need to go through and verify a lot of different lines. When we have a higher degree of confidence that it was installed correctly. And so we really used that initially, really used the break history to narrow down the areas that just needed more specific focus. So the rest of the water lines in, in the district are just going to sit at their projected useful life.
So the vast majority of them still have, you know, anywhere between 80 and 100.
Tera:
So the newer part of the city up to the north, which is why it's not on the map.
Nathan:
Right, exactly. So every everything, all the pipes that aren't included in this red area are assumed to be in good working condition, with plenty of life left.
Tera:
Assumed. Why?
Nathan:
Because they haven't been breaking. And we've got better install records than we do on a lot of the other ones. Heavier details. Any time that we've seen them, they've been installed appropriately. So it's really driven by that break history. And so it's pretty common to like, look at your break history and really focus on doing those.
The potholes individual areas is expensive. The the sonic or the acoustic evaluation that we're doing on the transmission line is going to cost us about $110,000. So it's really about making sure that you're effectively using we're effectively using our dollars to focus on the lines that we know need replacement. And then if anything comes up with the other areas over time, or we'll continue tracking that break history through our asset management, then we'll be able to identify.
Tera:
You were reading my mind. Those were my next questions. And so what's the difference in between the turquoise blue and the other blue?
Nathan:
The dark blue is a ductile iron pipe. The turquoise blue is PVC, c9.
Describer:
On screen. Slide 9
CASTLE PINES NORTH METROPOLITAN DISTRICT
The current DIP-X inventory covers 5.66 miles
29,891 feet
approximately 5.66 miles
Diameter 6 inches
Length (feet) 10,139.35
Approx. miles 1.92
Diameter 8 inches
Length (feet) 12,243.27
Approx. miles 2.32
Diameter 10 inches
Length (feet) 2,934.80
Approx. miles 0.56
Diameter 12 inches
Length (feet) 2,273.49
Approx. miles 0.43
Diameter 18 inches
Length (feet) 2,300.22
Approx. miles 0.44
Large mains from the water tanks are excluded. Inventory classifications remain under review.
CONDITION ASSESSMENT / OCTOBER 26, 2026
Nathan:
So this includes the Yorkshire, Berkshire retreat, in there. So this a lot of that we'll have to see which what the actual condition is. But right now, not including the transmission, the transmission main and including the retreat, we're looking at a total line replacement of about 29,891ft, or 5.66 miles. You can see the breakdown.
The vast majority of the pipe we're going to be replacing is eight inch. This six inch diameter pipe is largely just in cul de sacs, but a lot of those are fire hydrant runs. So every fire hydrant run a six inches. So you always end up with six inch pipe. And then really, really minimal on a 12 and 18 inch pipe that's inside of that.
Inside of that area.
Describer:
On screen. Slide 10
CASTLE PINES NORTH METROPOLITAN DISTRICT
The assessment will guide future priorities
Nathan Travis
Schedule and complete the seven Retreat hydro-excavations.
Record wrap and pipe condition, photographs, and measurements at each exposure.
Use the completed assessment to set priorities. Current footage does not fully establish replacement scope, cost, or schedule.
CONDITION ASSESSMENT / OCTOBER 26, 2026
Nathan:
Caught up. Yeah. So, really, our next steps are to finish the seven potholes. Kennedy Jenks is will take all of that information and compile it. They're the ones that will do the cost estimating, get us some different capital approach options or some some different construction options. We are also looking at a different a couple of different construction modalities that we want to consider.
We'll certainly add pipelining to that. One of the things that we're looking at is trying to really maybe put out like a, an RFP that's more built around replacing, existing with a few details and paralleling existing pipe, rather than going through the huge effort to re-engineer that entire area. And then we'd just, like, live capture the pipe as we go, since we have for a lot of it, we have really good information on what's in the what's in the ground utility, existing utilities, a lot of the things that you typically want to look for in those, like the the pre engineering phase of that, we might be able to save.
I've talked to a couple of different districts that have that have done similar things and had pretty good success, but all of that will kind of get out in the final report from Kennedy Jenks, which we should have in the next few weeks.
Jason:
RFP would go when? 2027. First quarter. Yes. Okay.
James:
A question on the replacement. Who does the inspections for that?
Nathan:
Kennedy Jenks does. Okay. And that's something that we can we've had previous discussions about bringing in, especially if Kennedy Jenks ends up as a design engineer. We would look at bringing in a third party firm like one of those. But historically, Kennedy Jenks has done the install inspections.
Jason:
Very good. Any other questions for Nathan?
Nathan? Is that all you have for us?
Nathan:
That's all I have.
Jason:
All right. Well, thank you very much. We will go ahead and close out. Item number six, the district manager's report, and we'll move on to item number seven. The operations and engineering reports. Nathan.
Nathan?
If the board has any additional questions on those, I am happy to answer them.
Not hearing any Jim. You look like you had something to say.
James:
I control myself better these days.
Jason:
All right. I guess we have no questions on the operations and engineering report. We'll close out item seven and move on to item eight. Directors matters. Does any of the directors have anything they'd like to discuss?
Leah:
I have one question. I know last year we started our.
Jason:
Can you talk into...
Leah:
Started our review process for the district manager. I don't remember when do we kick that off?
Nathan:
So we did it. We did it mid-year last year. I was under the impression that we were going to target the first part of 2027. So, like, start that process in January to kind of get back on that like a normal annual rotation.
Leah:
All right. I mean, that works. I was just I was just curious. I didn't remember where we left that. But now that's getting closer to the end of the year. I wanted to check in.
Jana:
Does it make more sense to do that at the end of the year? I mean, yeah,
Jason:
We don't do meetings in December. Yeah. So we've got we've got November and then we'll look to vacate December.
Jana:
January is fine.
Jason:
Unless you want. (members laugh).
Leah:
But when did we is January though when we submit it or is January when it's due.
Nathan:
January is when we would start the process. So I think the target date for the actual review would be February for the contract date. Okay.
James:
Going back, I have a question. We talked about some sort of acoustic or RF or whatever you're going to do for the main lines to. Anytime I do an analysis or work like that, I always have to correlate my analysis to reality. How do they do that? Do they dig up holes and kind of see the condition of the hole?
Or we just they do their thing and we just believe it.
Nathan:
Yeah. So we'll be we'll go with them. But there's you're required to have access points. There's like minimum access points that we have to provide to the pipes so they can actually get their equipment on. And so as you move down, you'll be able to kind of compare, like you said, compare reality to what they're putting in.
But I think we need to create access. I think it was like every 500ft, 3 to 500ft. So that's either out of valve or we'll have to dig a couple of excavations to get them access to it, but we'll be able to verify when we do that.
James:
Okay. Thank you.
Jason:
All right. I guess that's it for directors matters. We'll go ahead and close out item number eight. And we will move to item number nine and adjourn the meeting. Thank you everyone. Thank you guys.