Sens. Bennet and Udall and Rep. Tipton are on board with Pueblo County’s application for Fountain Creek funds

From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):

Plans for flood risk management on Fountain Creek through Pueblo have gained more federal support. U.S. Sens. Mark Udall and Michael Bennet, both Democrats, and Rep. Scott Tipton, R-Colo., sent a letter to the Army Corps of Engineers last week to support any federal efforts to remediate levee conditions on Fountain Creek through the East Side. The letter supports the Pueblo County commissioners’ request for a $3.5 million Army Corps project that could be applied to the levee for strengthening banks, planting native vegetation, improving wetlands and creating riparian buffer zones.

The project would stretch from Eighth Street to the confluence of Fountain Creek.

“Ironically, where we had a fire a few days ago could be turned into a beautiful riverside community park,” said Commissioner Sal Pace. “It’s about time Pueblo got its fair share.”

Vegetation on Fountain Creek near the East Fourth Street bridge caught fire Tuesday. The lower section of Fountain Creek is occasionally subject to flooding as well when rainfall upstream in the watershed is heavy.

The project was given high priority in a Corps study of Fountain Creek needs in 2009.

In January, commissioners requested congressional support for the project, also mentioning projects in El Paso County that could benefit Pueblo County as well. The letter highlighted cooperative efforts of the two counties through the Fountain Creek Watershed Flood Control and Greenway District.

A local match of 35 percent would be required for the project. Local money for the project is $1.225 million, which would come out of the remaining $1.9 million Colorado Springs Utilities paid to Pueblo County for dredging Fountain Creek under the 1041 permit for Southern Delivery System. Another $300,000 of those funds was spent earlier on a Fountain Creek demonstration project for side detention ponds and in-stream dredging.

More Fountain Creek coverage here.

Stormwater: It turns out that Colorado Springs did need a stormwater enterprise after all

From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):

Colorado Springs has spent about $24 million toward $88 million in critical stormwater projects that would reduce the impact of Fountain Creek floods — those that were identified in 2005. Had its City Council not eliminated the stormwater enterprise in 2009, the full amount would have been nearly covered by now, Pueblo County Commissioner Sal Pace said. Although the city’s priorities have shifted toward new projects, it will continue working on the stormwater needs previously identified, Mayor Steve Bach and City Council President Keith King told Pace in a letter this week.

“Colorado Springs and its enterprises will continue to make substantial progress in high priority stormwater projects in the coming years, and (are) working diligently to design and implement a sustainable funding source and stormwater management structure to complete all the appropriate work,” they wrote. The city is concerned because the sufficiency of stormwater efforts required under Pueblo County’s 1041 permit for Southern Delivery System that have been raised by Pace, along with Commissioners Terry Hart and Liane “Buffie” McFadyen.

Colorado Springs plans to spend $46 million on stormwater projects this year, but much of that is for mitigation of damage caused by the 2012 Waldo Canyon Fire, airport drainage and Pikes Peak Highway projects that were not anticipated in 2005. The stormwater enterprise would have spent $17.6 million annually over five years to address the $88 million in critical projects that would reduce the impacts of flooding on Fountain Creek. Two of the projects were completed and $24 million was spent before the stormwater enterprise was dismantled by Council in 2009. Colorado Springs is reviewing its critical needs, and plans to address them, Bach and King said.

Pace plans to meet Monday with Colorado Springs City Council, with eight of the nine members newly elected since council’s decision to discontinue the stormwater enterprise. “They have spent about half of what was intended. Had they not eliminated the stormwater enterprise, they would have spent more,” Pace said. “The letter is positive, because it shows they recognize their obligation.”

From The Colorado Springs Gazette (Monica Mendoza):

The Pikes Peak Regional Stormwater Task Force set out this year to find a way to pay for the $900 million in regional drainage projects detailed in a report released in December. The group of business leaders, city councilors, county commissioners, water district representatives and Colorado Springs Utilities representatives has shortened its list to two funding options: a voter-approved tax or property fees. The task force expects to bring a final recommendation to the Colorado Springs City Council and El Paso County Commissioners in July.

[John Cassiani], who headed up a committee that examined several funding models, is pushing an option modeled after a stormwater authority in Arapahoe County that was formed in 2006 and includes the city, county and area water districts. The group, Southeast Metro Stormwater Authority, sets and collects stormwater fees to pay for construction, operation and maintenance of drainage projects. “The authority is a one-stop shop and responsible for taking care of all the issues,” said Cassiani, owner of RealTech Development. “It manages the programs and hires and contracts.”

In El Paso County, any mention of fees or taxes is risky business. The task force members know the political climate and voters’ reluctance to approve new taxes. In 2009, the Colorado Springs City Council ended a stormwater enterprise fund after voters approved Issue 300, which required the city to phase out payments from city-owned enterprises. But Cassiani thinks it’s time to try again. “We can’t be afraid of certain people in this community,” Cassiani said.[...]

The other model is the Southeast Metro Stormwater Authority, which includes Centennial, Arapahoe County and three water districts. The authority sets and collects fees, has a staff and oversees the projects for the region. Under that model, El Paso County voters would be asked to approve the creation a stormwater authority that has permission to set and collect fees. It’s a model that has more liabilities than the PPRTA model, said County Commissioner Amy Lathen. It would put a great deal of power in the hands of the authority, which would issue permits and be responsible for water quality, development and program management. Attorneys still are reviewing the legal issues of such an organization, she said.

More stormwater coverage here and here.

Waldo Canyon burn scar: Colorado Springs Utilities repurposes two drinking water reservoirs to flood mitigation

From KRDO.com (Rachael Plath)

The burnt ground left in the wake of the Waldo Canyon Fire has increased the likelihood of flash flooding and mudslides. This threat directly impacted two Colorado Springs reservoirs: the Nichols and the Northfield reservoirs.

“When we have rainstorms, it really churns everything up; brings out that vegetation and debris down into the streams and tributaries. It just makes it a little more challenging to treat,” said Andy Funchess, field operations manager for water systems with Colorado Springs Utilities.

According to Funchess, the area surrounding the two reservoirs was badly burned. The runoff and erosion around the reservoirs was affecting the water’s quality.

Funchess said CSU has the ability to treat the water, but the cost would outweigh the benefit. For this reason, CSU drained the two reservoirs. The empty basins will now help with flood mitigation, as in their empty state, the reservoirs will catch debris and water before it rushes down the mountainside.

From the Colorado Springs Independent (J. Adrian Stanley):

For months now, local leaders have breathlessly awaited [Dave] Rosgen’s Watershed Assessment of River Stability and Sediment Supply (WARSSS) study, a detailed explanation of how water will move off the Waldo Canyon burn scar and, more importantly, what we can do to stop it.

But as the study’s finally presented, it becomes clear that Rosgen can’t save us from the powers of nature.

His plan — thousands of pages long — represents a to-do list that likely will cost tens of millions. It’s currently largely unfunded, and will take years to complete regardless. And then there’s the biggest dose of reality: Even if the region does everything recommended, a five- or 10-year storm will still cause mass destruction and may claim many lives. “The increase in flow is going to be with us,” Rosgen tells the crowd. “It’s not going to change a lot. Flood peaks are a reality for the future.”

What the WARSSS can do is ease our suffering. The restoration work it recommends can hold back well over a million tons of mud in a normal monsoon season, ensuring that a two-year rain event doesn’t take out a neighborhood. Plus, it will help the burn scar heal more quickly.

More Colorado Spring Utilities coverage here.

El Paso County Commissioners approve a regional stormwater approach for mitigation and management

From the Colorado Springs Independent (J. Adrian Stanley):

On Tuesday, the soon-to-be-overhauled City Council approved a resolution to support a regional approach to stormwater management on a 6-2 vote. In the past, such a move may have been considered little more than ceremonial — most experts have long agreed that stormwater is best approached regionally. But Mayor Steve Bach has lately turned the issue into a political football…

Many believe the mayor is afraid that a regional approach will suggest a new tax to solve the area’s dangerous backlog of needed infrastructure projects, estimated to exceed $900 million. The mayor signed a pledge saying he would oppose any new tax, no matter how vital. But Bach’s long reach may not be able to control this process. With assistance from El Paso County, a Regional Stormwater Steering Committee, made up of dozens of citizen volunteers, is already studying how best to approach the problem.

More Fountain Creek coverage here and here.

Fountain Creek: Snow instead of rain helps with flash flooding potential at the Waldo Canyon burn scar

From the The Colorado Springs Gazette (Andrea Sinclair):

Heavy snowfall Thursday morning caused school delays, a power outage and a tough commute for Woodland Park residents, but weather analysts said it was a blessing in disguise. National Weather Service forecaster Patrick Cioffi said parts of Teller County county saw a foot of snow. If that had been rain, Cioffi said, flash flooding would have been a dangerous certainty. At 6 p.m., forecasters downgraded a flood watch in place for the Waldo Canyon burn scar to a flood advisory, a move that indicated the worst conditions had passed, for now.

Fountain Creek: ‘What things are they doing to rein in the floodwaters that arrive in Pueblo County’ — Terry Hart

From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):

Less than $2 million of the $46 million in stormwater projects on Colorado Springs’ list meet the criteria set out by Pueblo County commissioners for a 1041 permit for the Southern Delivery System.

The commissioners instructed water attorney Ray Petros to review the list submitted this week to commissioners and Pueblo City Council and he determined that most projects related to either the Waldo Canyon Fire or internal Colorado Springs issues.

“As a starting point, what we’re looking for is a list of major projects that have a significant impact for Pueblo County,” said Commission Chairman Terry Hart. “What things are they doing to rein in the floodwaters that arrive in Pueblo County and to assure water quality?”

The county still wants an accounting of the scope of stormwater control that was envisioned prior to 2009. While Waldo Canyon creates a new set of problems, Colorado Springs had agreed to address past problems on Fountain Creek through the stormwater enterprise, Hart said. Commissioner Sal Pace shared those concerns, adding that Colorado Springs needs to provide evidence of long-term funding, rather than shortterm emergency funds.

“That’s one-time money. What they need to do is show how there will be a continuous supply,” Pace said.

From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):

In response to criticism of his city’s stormwater efforts, Colorado Springs Mayor Steve Bach visited with several Pueblo community leaders Friday to make the case that the city is working on a stormwater solution. Bach was accompanied by Colorado Springs Council President Keith King, Councilman Merv Bennett and City Attorney Chris Melcher. “What we’re working on are steps to develop a full and definite plan that we can take to voters,” Bach said. “We want to make sure that we’re taking the best approach.”

Bach stressed that the Waldo Canyon Fire, which destroyed 347 homes in Colorado Springs last summer, is the top priority. But the city also realizes its commitment to protect downstream users from disastrous floods. Bach has initiated an independent study after a regional study found nearly $700 million in stormwater needs for Colorado Springs and $900 million for El Paso County. He wants Colorado Springs, not a new regional authority, to confront the problem.

Bach acknowledged the fact that development in Colorado Springs, coupled with the burn scar from the Waldo Canyon Fire, has increased the risk of more dangerous floods on Fountain Creek.

Colorado Springs has to come up with a way to continue annual funding to address stormwater needs that had been identified before 2009, when Pueblo County issued a 1041 permit for the Southern Delivery System predicated on the idea that a stormwater enterprise was in place.

Melcher said the Colorado Springs City Council’s hands were tied by voters in November 2009 that effectively eliminated the stormwater enterprise approved by council in 2005.

Bennett said a sustainable funding source for stormwater projects is needed, and King, a former state legislator, suggested several ways that up-front funding could be leveraged.

Bach promised to share more specific information about what Colorado Springs intends to do by no later than this fall.

The WARSSS study on the Waldo Canyon burn scar made public on Thursday. #cowx ow.ly/kGuKp

— NWS Pueblo (@NWSPueblo) May 3, 2013

More Fountain Creek coverage here and here.

Southern Delivery System: Colorado Springs stormwater plans fail to address Pueblo county 1041 permit requirements

From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):

Colorado Springs may be spending nearly $46 million on stormwater projects this year, but Pueblo County commissioners are trying to determine if the money is being spent in the right places. “It’s fine that they’re spending the money, but it really doesn’t answer our question about whether the list of pre-2009 projects is being addressed,” said Commissioner Sal Pace.

Colorado Springs Mayor Steve Bach and Council President Keith King Thursday responded to questions raised earlier in the week by commissioners about whether stormwater spending is fulfilling the 1041 permit conditions for Southern Delivery System designed to mitigate flooding on Fountain Creek caused by increased growth from SDS. “Considering these tough economic times and the daunting task of ongoing fire recovery efforts, we are pleased that staff was able to find a way to more than triple the initial projections of funding for stormwater improvements in 2013,” Bach and King wrote in a letter to commissioners and Pueblo City Council.

On Monday, Pueblo County commissioners expressed concern about the progress of a stormwater task force in El Paso County. The task force was formed last year and determined there are more than $900 million in stormwater needs that should be addressed on a regional basis.

Bach, however, is seeking an independent accounting of the $686 million in projects that represent Colorado Springs’ share of the burden. He has advocated for Colorado Springs taking care of its own obligations.

Pueblo County commissioners want to know which of the projects on the list are among the $500 million in identified needs in 2009, when Colorado Springs indicated a stormwater enterprise was in place as part of conditions for the SDS permit. Colorado Springs City Council abolished the stormwater enterprise on a split vote following a 2009 election. Last year, city attorney Chris Melcher offered an opinion that Colorado Springs should be spending at least $13 million annually on stormwater to fulfill its SDS obligations.

“It seems like there is a lot of additional money being spent to address new flooding threats because of the Waldo Canyon Fire,” Pace said Thursday. “Colorado Springs has to meet that need, but that doesn’t replace what they should already be addressing.”

More coverage from the Chieftain:

Colorado Springs this week provided an accounting of $45.7 million in planned expenditures this year to address stormwater concerns.

$14.2 million for new grade structures, stabilization projects, operation, maintenance and salaries.

$681,000 for Waldo Canyon Fire mitigation projects.

$12.8 million for Colorado Springs Utilities projects, including stabilization of lines crossing creeks, and repair of damage from washouts related to the Waldo Canyon Fire.

$8.8 million for Camp and Douglas Creek restoration.

$1.4 million for Colorado Springs Airport drainage projects.

$350,000 for Pikes Peak Highway drainage.

$7.5 million for remedial work on the Waldo Canyon Fire emergency watershed projects.

More Southern Delivery System coverage here and here.

El Paso County Watershed Assessment of River Stability and Sediment Supply meeting May 2

From the Colorado Springs Indpendent (J. Adrian Stanley):

Ever since the Waldo Canyon Fire charred our hillsides, Colorado Springs and the small communities that dot our foothills have been at extremely high risk for flooding. The WARSSS is an escape route — a detailed plan on how best to control the water, mud and debris.

The WARSSS will tell us how water moves and how to trap it. It will show us where to build the detention pond that will prevent the Pleasant Valley neighborhood from drowning, and how to control a wild rush of water out of Williams Canyon that is pointed at the center of Manitou Springs.

Thus, it is with excitement that I tell you the study will be presented to the El Paso County Commissioners on Thursday, May 2. Woo-hoo, indeed.

Waldo Canyon Fire WARSSS to be Presented May 2

Colorado Springs, CO, Thursday, April 25, 2013 — The Watershed Assessment of River Stability and Sediment Supply (WARSSS) Study will be presented by Dr. David L. Rosgen of Wildland Hydrology at 2:30 to 4:30 p.m. on Thursday, May 2, 2013, in the Hearing Room at the Pikes Peak Regional Development Center located at 2880 International Circle, Colorado Springs.

WARSSS is a technical procedure for water quality scientists use in evaluating streams and rivers impaired by excess sediment. It will predict how water, sediment and debris will move along and off the Waldo Canyon Fire burn scar. Based on its findings, it will assist in providing a list of prioritized mitigation projects.

More stormwater coverage here and here.

SDS: ‘My central issue is that we need a concrete plan to identify stormwater needs’ –Terry Hart

From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):

Pueblo County commissioners want Colorado Springs to explain its stormwater plan as soon as possible, and hinted Monday that a hearing on the 1041 permit for Southern Delivery System could be necessary if answers aren’t forthcoming. “We as a community are very concerned that when the stormwater enterprise disappeared, the conditions in the 1041 permit disappeared,” Commission Chairman Terry Hart said. “The community has been patient.”

Colorado Springs City Council in 2009 eliminated its stormwater enterprise and $13 million annual funding for identified needs. Since then, a new majority of the council has been elected in 2011 and 2013, and Steve Bach was elected mayor under a new governance system. A regional stormwater task force has formed, but apparently it does not have Bach’s support and it won’t begin making recommendations on funding nearly $1 billion in projects until July at the earliest.

At a workshop Monday, commissioners reviewed several parts of the 1041 permit, including revegetation of the pipeline scar through Pueblo West and Walker Ranches and the potential for acceleration of $50 million in payments for improving Fountain Creek. But the big issue was stormwater. The commissioners want an accounting of which projects were on the Colorado Springs stormwater list, what was addressed when the fee was in place and what remains to be done. “My central issue is that we need a concrete plan to identify stormwater needs and how they are going to pay for it,” Hart said.

Colorado Springs Utilities has asked Pueblo County to wait until July to hold an explanatory meeting, in order to allow stormwater task force committees to complete their work.

More Southern Delivery System coverage here and here.

Waldo Canyon Fire burn scar: Flooding along Fountain Creek is a major concern

From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):

A heavy rain over the area burned in last summer’s Waldo Canyon Fire near Colorado Springs could cause significant damage downstream on Fountain Creek. That’s because thousands of tons of sediment and debris could wash down in a severe storm, Carol Ekarius, executive director of the Coalition for the Upper South Platte, told the Fountain Creek Watershed Flood Control and Greenway District board Friday. “Unless we have a ’99 type flood this year, they wouldn’t see the effects immediately in Pueblo, but there are water quality impacts that show up later,” said Ekarius, who is also a professional engineer.

CUSP is working with the U.S. Forest Service, Colorado Springs Utilities and other El Paso County groups to assess the damage from the Waldo Canyon Fire and develop a remediation plan. The group formed after the 11,000-acre Buffalo Creek Fire in 1996, which was the largest in the state at the time. Since then, fires have become larger in scope because of poor forest management. CUSP has been working to restore the 2002 Hayman Fire burn area for more than a decade. The group will unveil an action plan next week in Colorado Springs that will require $25 million-$50 million over several years to complete. About $10 million-$12 million from federal, state and local sources has been committed so far. There is also much remediation and flood prevention work to be done on private land.

The Fountain Creek district is considering whether to ask voters for a mill levy and decide purposes that would be included in a ballot question. “The question this board grapples with is could this be a part of our mission,” said Richard Skorman, who serves as liaison with a citizens advisory group of residents from both counties. “It’s hard to ask Pueblo County to pay for a disaster that happens in El Paso County.”

More Fountain Creek coverage here and here.

Colorado Springs Utilities plans to spend $6 million on efforts to mitigate the Waldo Canyon burn scar

From the USDA Blog (Mike Stearly):

The U.S. Forest Service and Colorado Springs (Colo.) Utilities recently announced a new 5-year partnership to help restore the areas burned by the devastating Waldo Canyon Fire that tore through part of the west side of the city in 2012.

Through the partnership, Colorado Springs Utilities will invest approximately $6 million in support of the watershed health goals and activities over the next five to 10 years. The Forest Service will complete on-the-ground project planning and treatment in areas that complement Colorado Springs Utilities investments.

During an event at the Flying W Ranch – a 60-year-old tourist attraction destroyed in the fire – Harris Sherman, USDA Under Secretary for Natural Resources and Environment, met with Congressman Doug Lamborn, U.S. Senators Mark Udall and Michael Bennett, and representatives from the Coalition for the Upper South Platte, El Paso County Commissioners and the city of Colorado Springs.

“This partnership will ensure improved water quality for the residents of Colorado Springs,” Sherman said. “Collaborating on watershed restoration will have a long-term positive impact on forest and watershed health and allows us to accomplish more on-the-ground projects.”

The innovative partnership between Colorado Springs Utilities and the Forest Service is preserving and protecting crucial watersheds that provide water to Colorado’s second largest city. The signing of the agreement establishes work to reduce wildfire risk, restore burned areas, minimize erosion impacts and coordinates pre-suppression wildland fire efforts.

“This agreement … solidifies a critical partnership with the Forest Service, a partnership that has benefited our water supply and community for decades,” said Gary Bostrom, chief water services officer for Colorado Springs Utilities. “Our ongoing relationship with the Forest Service will help us channel customer rate dollars in the most efficient way possible to protect our most vital resource and the forest that surrounds it.”

The human-caused Waldo Canyon fire started June 23, 2012, and left a scar of more than 18,000 acres, cost millions of dollars to fight, caused the evacuation of 32,000 people, destroyed 346 homes and killed two people. The fire has since been labeled the largest, most expensive and destructive fire in Colorado’s history.

More Colorado Springs Utilities coverage here and here.

Fountain Creek: ‘Colorado Springs has taken its job very seriously’ — Steve Gunderson

From The Colorado Springs Gazette (Barbara Cotter) via The Denver Post:

Nearly 10 years, $450,000 in penalties and $170 million in fixes later, Colorado Springs Utilities is done with a compliance plan the state imposed over series of wastewater spills into Fountain Creek and some of the tributaries that feed it.

“I would say this has been quite a success story, and Colorado Springs has taken its job very seriously,” said Steve Gunderson, director of the Water Quality Control Division of the state Department of Public Health and Environment. “Why we decided to take enforcement action almost 10 years ago is that we were seeing a pattern of problems. Really, it’s amazing how that pattern has largely disappeared.”[...]

Earlier this month, the Water Quality Control Division sent a letter to Utilities officials notifying them that it was closing the books on the order because all requirements had been met.

More Fountain Creek coverage here and here.

Fountain Creek: The Southern Colorado Business Partnership hopes to enable regional cooperation for stormwater management

From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):

A group representing thousands of businesses in Southern Colorado wants to take a crack at calming the waters on Fountain Creek. The Southern Colorado Business Partnership sketched out its plans Tuesday for the Pueblo Board of Water Works. The group wants to launch an effort to clear the air on issues surrounding Fountain Creek sometime later this year. “One of the things we can do is pull the right people together to reach solutions,” said Rod Slyhoff, president of the Greater Pueblo Chamber of Commerce and chairman of the partnership. “We understand the concerns in Pueblo and downstream about Fountain Creek.”

Slyhoff and Randy Scott, the partnership’s president, did not list specific actions about what should be done on Fountain Creek, but said the issue fits into its goal of finding “big picture” solutions to regional problems. The group, which includes chambers and business groups from Castle Rock to Trinidad, represents 5,000 businesses and 150,000 employees, Scott said. It also plans to tackle regional military issues, emergency preparedness, intergovernmental cooperation and air transportation.

Fountain Creek has been a controversial topic for decades. While a watershed improvement district was formed in 2009 after three years of regional meetings, its funding still is in question. An El Paso County stormwater task force reached some conclusions last year, but the level of funding still is at issue because Colorado Springs Mayor Steve Bach is seeking a second opinion on the costs.

Pueblo County commissioners and the Lower Arkansas Valley Water Conservancy District continue to pressure Colorado Springs about controlling stormwater as a condition of its Pueblo County permit to operate the Southern Delivery System.

More Fountain Creek coverage here and here.

The Fountain Creek District is sorting through funding options and projects

From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):

It’s like anticipating a wall of funding options rushing at you. Funding for water projects on Fountain Creek, that is.

The Fountain Creek Watershed Flood Control and Greenway District Friday looked at multiple efforts in El Paso County to answer questions about what should be funded, how money can be raised and when voters should be asked to support those projects. Tied up in the study is the continuing question of what role the district should play and how it will get the money it needs to carry out its own goals. “We need a timeline, so we have concrete steps we can take,” Pueblo Councilwoman Eva Montoya said. “We need a plan.”

The district is considering what questions it needs to ask in polling voters in El Paso and Pueblo counties about the possibility of a mill levy, how a question would be worded and when to place the issue on the ballot. Even after those questions are decided, there are questions about how to pay for an election and how to fund the campaign for a mill levy, since government groups could not pay for it.

At the same time, three separate investigations are proceeding in El Paso County — all of them related to Fountain Creek and potentially involving the Fountain Creek district.

● An El Paso County stormwater task force is trying determine priorities and funding sources for flood control. The Fountain Creek district board voted to manage a technical study, which would be funded by Colorado Springs Utilities and El Paso Coun ty. The study was suggested by Summit Economics, which launched the task force with an earlier white paper.

● Colorado Springs is reassessing its stormwater needs at the request of Mayor Steve Bach. A contractor will be chosen in April.

● The Coalition of the Upper South Platte is working with community groups to determine rehabilitation strategies for the Waldo Canyon burn scar.

Lurking in the background is the Southern Colorado Business Partnership, which announced its intention to seek a regional solution for Fountain Creek to the Pueblo Board of Water Works earlier this week.

More Fountain Creek coverage here.

Colorado Springs stormwater: ‘Ironically, Waldo Canyon may be the impetus to get them moving on stormwater’ — Sal Pace

From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):

While Colorado Springs debates how it will handle stormwater issues, critics of the city’s stance on flood control say action is needed now.

“There have been any number of studies, and now it’s time for action,” said Jay Winner, general manager of the Lower Arkansas Valley Water Conservancy District. “You can do different studies and get many different results. The outcome may be: ‘We have no stormwater problem.’ ” On Monday, Colorado Springs Mayor Steve Bach announced a request for proposals to evaluate the city’s stormwater needs has been issued. The deadline for submitting proposals is April 5, three days after the upcoming municipal election. Bach has pressured Colorado Springs Utilities, which is governed by City Council, to pay for stormwater needs. Six of nine seats on council are up for election this year. A stormwater task force of El Paso County communities found nearly $900 million in stormwater needs on Fountain Creek, with $686 million in Colorado Springs alone. Bach requested a second opinion because the amount is 37 percent higher than earlier estimates. Colorado Springs should control the funding, management and construction of its improvements, because it faces the lion’s share of payments, Bach said in a news release. Pueblo County has taken the position that the needs identified in 2009 under a 1041 landuse permit must be addressed before the Southern Delivery System begins operations, said County Commissioner Sal Pace.

“From our perspective, they have a huge backlog of projects to address before they pump SDS,” Pace said. “As I understand it, they are quibbling about the amount through internal politics. That’s not our concern.” Pace said projects identified by the nowdefunct stormwater enterprise are referred to in the 1041 permit. Since then, Colorado Springs has a new set of problems associated with last summer’s Waldo Canyon Fire. The area is subject to mudslides and erosion until it can be revegetated and stabilized.

“Ironically, Waldo Canyon may be the impetus to get them moving on stormwater,” Pace said.

More stormwater coverage here.

Colorado Springs: Mayor Steve Bach is going to ask for an outside consultant for stormwater needs

From The Colorado Springs Gazette (Matt Steiner):

Mayor Steve Bach announced Sunday night that he’ll seek an outside consultant on Colorado Springs stormwater needs for a second opinion on an issue that’s drawn regional concern…

A regional stormwater panel has said the city has a backlog of $687 million in stormwater projects, the bulk of the region’s nearly $880 million in stormwater needs. The Stormwater Task Force has backing from El Paso County and smaller municipalities, but the city has been cool to the panel’s findings. Bach has contended that the estimate for Colorado Springs appears high and in January said a second look at the numbers, as well as the scope and proposed priorities of the stormwater work, was needed. “The city’s 78 percent share of the region’s $880 million in needed improvements means that Colorado Springs is by far the largest stakeholder in solving this issue,” the city said in an 8:41 p.m. Sunday news release. “The Mayor has welcomed other regional jurisdictions to use the services of the city’s consultant to also vet their own stormwater needs”

The city has set a April 5 deadline for bids for the consulting work.

Sunday night, the city said Bach also wants Colorado Springs to control cash that might be used for stormwater work in the city, rather than putting money in a regional pool for projects.

More stormwater coverage here and here.

The Pikes Peak Regional Stormwater Task Force hopes for a regional solution

From The Colorado Springs Gazette (Bob Stephens):

The group’s goals are to prioritize stormwater projects and identify funding to pay for the $906 million estimated cost of projects in the region.

Absent from the meeting were Colorado Springs city staffers, some of whom were scheduled to present information.

“This is a difficult, fairly charged issue,” said county commissioner Amy Lathen, who led the meeting along with Colorado Springs City Council member Brandy Williams. “We’re going to barrel on through.”

The event drew 50 people, including business representatives, county politicians, military officials, and officials from Manitou Springs and Fountain.

Williams said she’s excited about the task force moving forward with a regional approach and with representatives from across the community.

The task forces estimates that Colorado Springs needs nearly $687 million in stormwater work — 76 percent of the region’s stormwater problem.

Mayor Steve Bach has said his idea to pay for stormwater projects is to have public-owned Utilities shoulder the brunt of the $687 million.

More coverage from Barbara Cotter writing for The Colorado Springs Gazette. From the article:

There might be uncertainty about whether Colorado Springs will sign on to participate in a regional stormwater plan, but Public Works Director Helen Migchelbrink makes it clear the city isn’t waiting to tackle some high-profile projects this year. “The (regional) study is sort of a global look, but while we’re looking at everything globally, we still have to keep working on projects,” she said this week.

So, look for about $8.5 million in stormwater work to take place soon, including replacement of a decrepit drainage channel near Union Boulevard and Lexington Drive that crumbled during a heavy rainstorm in July, sending concrete chunks flying in the air. The stormwater flooded the basement of one home, and threatened a cluster of nearby townhomes in the Preserve at Briargate…

The Mirage Channel project is estimated to cost about $1.7 million, and will be paid for out of a $2 million appropriation from the general fund that City Council approved for critical stormwater needs for this year. The final design should be completed by May, and work could begin in early summer.

Other projects include:

• Beefing up a “drop structure” on Cottonwood Creek near La Madrina Lane. Drop structures are typically created with grouted boulders and are designed to slow the speed of water. The cost is $250,000.

• Bank stabilization at Cottonwood Creek near Vincent Drive and the Greencrest channel at Austin Bluffs Parkway, just west of Academy Boulevard. Each received a $3 million federal grant for pre-disaster mitigation. The Greencrest embankment is unstable, and erosion is threatening a nearby business and parking lot, Ross said.

• Installing two “debris racks” in the Waldo Canyon burn area near The Navigators headquarters, north of Garden of the Gods. Migchelbrink said the city is working with The Navigators to put in the “state of the art” devices to catch debris when it rains. The project is expected to be finished by the end of March.

The scheduled projects are not part of the 280 stormwater needs the regional Stormwater Task Force identified for the city.

More stormwater coverage here and here.

Woodland Park and Teller County gear up for Fountain Creek restoration project

From the Pikes Peak Courier-View (Norma Engelberg):

The first step was to convey portions of land Teller County that borders the creek to Woodland Park. These properties on Rosemount Road, Laura Lane and Sandy Wash of Fountain Creek were platted in 1948. They were deeded to the city because it is taking the lead on the project. An ordinance to make the deed transfer was approved on first reading at the Feb. 7 city council meeting. The county will consider the transfer at its Feb. 14 meeting and Woodland Park City Council will have its public hearing and second reading of the ordinance at its March 7 meeting.

The second step pertains to the East Fork of Fountain Creek, which runs from near Woodland Park High School to the creek’s main branch near the Auto Zone Store in Safeway Plaza. The East Fork goes under U.S. 24 and through an open ditch to the creek. The project will put the creek into a 72-inch pipe that will empty into the main branch of Fountain Creek.

In a resolution, council accepted a lump sum of $250,000 from Colorado Department of Transportation for its share of project costs. The city will pay the rest and will soon be seeking bids. Councilmember Eric Smith did not participate in the discussions and votes on both steps because he owns property that will be affected by the projects.

More Fountain Creek coverage here.

Colorado Springs Utilities’ funds to pay for stormwater facilities?

From the Colorado Springs Independent (J. Adrian Stanley):

After the election, Council did away with the Stormwater Enterprise and its hated “fees,” but quickly found a loophole that allowed Utilities to continue paying the city about $31 million a year.

Now, Mayor Steve Bach is seeking an even bigger loophole in Issue 300 — one that would allow Utilities to foot the bill for $687 million in needed city stormwater projects. That funding is especially crucial after the Waldo Canyon Fire, because flooding off the burn scar this spring is expected to be catastrophic.

In a recent interview with the Independent, City Attorney Chris Melcher said he had brainstormed several ways to get the money on Bach’s behalf, including: charging Utilities for the use of city land and water rights; reducing Utilities’ overhead costs and passing the savings on to the city; and creating an entirely new utilities service with its own charges (much like water or electric).

Echoing Bach, Melcher said he believes Utilities can fork over the money without increasing rates.

Yet Utilities spokespeople and City Council President Scott Hente — both of whom are also supposed to be represented by the city attorney — say it’s virtually impossible.

“[Bach and Melcher] think there’s this pot at the end of the rainbow laden with money, and it’s there for the taking,” Hente says. “It shows their complete lack of experience in dealing with large organizations that have large business and large obligations.”

During his campaign for mayor in 2011, Bach pledged not to raise taxes while in office. But the right thing to do for stormwater, Hente argues, is to ask for an increase…

Of all Melcher’s ideas for making Utilities pay, the most intriguing involves water and property ownership.

“Remember, the city owns the water,” Melcher says. “The city provides — all the water rights of the entire city are held in the name of the city, so the city provides the water to the utility company. The city also provides free access to all the right-of-ways in the city to the utility.

“For example, if you have a private utility, they pay taxes, [a] right-of-way fee, [a] franchise fee. So there’s a number of different things that need to be examined and researched to see if there are funds or monies that could be available for other purposes, such as stormwater.”

Of course, Utilities already pays the aforementioned $31 million to the city annually to cover some of these costs; Melcher just believes more may be justified.

But asking a municipally owned utility to pay for the use of city water rights appears to be unusual. The Independent contacted four Colorado water attorneys on the issue to see if such a scenario was legal, or had been used before. Two said they didn’t know the answer and wouldn’t comment anyway, because their work was connected to Utilities. The other two did not call back. Utilities’ own lawyers could not comment objectively on the issue because Melcher is their boss.

The Independent also called water service offices in Pueblo, Aurora and Denver. Each utility owns its own water rights.

The Colorado Municipal League says it doesn’t know enough about its member cities to comment on such an issue. The American Water Works Association did not return phone calls.

Only Aurora Water offers any guidance. Spokesperson Greg Baker says that leaders in his organization aren’t sure about the legality of charging for water rights, but they think such a scenario could run into problems with the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights and the state constitution, given language about the separation of municipalities and their enterprises…

Utilities spokespeople roundly object to the notion that the business is a cash cow ripe for the slaughter.

Nor do they buy into the notion that they haven’t done enough for their hometown. Spokesperson Steve Berry notes that Utilities already performs city stormwater projects, because they often protect pipes from damage. Those projects also incidentally benefit bridges, roads and neighborhoods. This year alone, Utilities will spend $12.8 million on such projects.

As for extra money, Utilities is about $30 million short in funding for its own capital projects this year, due to a sagging economy. That means fewer upgrades and less maintenance to the system, and a greater risk of costly failures.

If Utilities were suddenly saddled with paying for all the city’s stormwater issues, Berry says, rates would have to increase to cover those bills. And Utilities could be hit in another way, too, through higher interest rates on its billions in debt.

“The more you start bringing in another function, what then does that do to your ability to borrow at a low interest rate?” Berry asks. “Because that’s considered increased risk.”

More stormwater coverage here.

Fountain Creek: Mill levy on the horizon for Pueblo and El Paso counties?

Here’s a report from Chris Woodka writing for The Pueblo Chieftain:

A report from the Trust for Public Lands next month could help solidify plans by a Fountain Creek improvement district to ask voters for a mill levy. “Our current funding runs out at the end of this year,” said El Paso County Commissioner Dennis Hisey. “We may be passing the hat next year.”

The Fountain Creek Watershed Flood Control and Greenway District last year signed an agreement to work with the trust to poll voters about what kind of ballot issue would likely be supported to provide more sustainable funding for the district. “When we get to the big question, we have to find out what the will of the people is,” said Pueblo County Commissioner Terry Hart.

Under state law, the district can ask voters in Pueblo and El Paso counties for up to 5 mills. Apparently, the majority of voters in both counties would decide the issue. In other words, a mill could not be passed in one county and rejected in another.

Hisey said the size of the mill levy could depend on whether the district intends to fund its basic operations, leverage grant money or tackle larger problems. The distribution of funding could be arranged in such a way that El Paso County could pay more than Pueblo County and use money to address its nearly $1 billion in backlogged stormwater projects, the board agreed during discussion.

“But Pueblo money cannot go north,” Hisey said. Hart agreed.

“The formula has to make sure the money is being spent in the county being taxed,” he said.

The district so far has survived largely on funding from Colorado Springs Utilities and the Lower Arkansas Valley Water Conservancy District. Under its 1041 permit with Pueblo County, the district would receive the remainder of $50 million promised from Colorado Springs over five years after the Southern Delivery System is completed in 2016.

From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):

A district formed to improve Fountain Creek will put some additional money into a project designed to showcase methods to reduce erosion.

The Arkansas Basin Roundtable earlier this month kicked back a grant for an erosion control project on the Frost Ranch south of Fountain in El Paso County saying more matching funds were needed.

Last week, the Fountain Creek Watershed Flood Control and Greenway District board agreed to pay another $35,000 toward the project, while landowner Jay Frost agreed to contribute $7,000. The district is seeking $105,000 in funds — reduced from a $150,000 request — from the Colorado Water Conservation Board, with a $31,000 inkind contribution from Colorado Springs Utilities. The district, which already committed $10,000 to the project, will use money from the Fountain Creek master plan fund to pay its share. The fund is equally supported by Colorado Springs and the Lower Arkansas Valley Water Conservancy District.

Engineer Graham Thompson explained the project would use natural methods and native plants to create a healthy channel. The Frost Ranch was chosen because the ranch is within an area that is otherwise healthy.
“It opens the door for other grant cycles,” Thompson said. “More and more I’m convinced that the sediment load in Pueblo County is coming from the banks (of Fountain Creek).”

While the board has limited money left in the master plan fund, about $100,000, projects like the Frost Ranch will provide leverage for future grants as well as show other landowners what can be done, said Executive Director Larry Small. “We have the money, so we need to do the work,” said board member Richard Skorman.

From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):

During a hand­off of seats on a board dedicated to protecting Fountain Creek Friday, Pueblo County Commissioner Terry Hart nearly fumbled the baton. Otherwise, things went smoothly.

Hart, who replaced District Attorney Jeff Chostner on the board, told the Fountain Creek Watershed Flood Control and Greenway District board he was pleased to be sitting at the “adults’ table,” invoking an analogy of Thanksgiving dinner. There were some amused groans from the “children’s table” in the audience and one committee member laughingly quipped he would have to “take out his pacifier” before addressing the board. Hart formerly chaired the citizens advisory group and has attended Fountain Creek meetings for the past year.

Chostner was lauded by his fellow board members for his service and involvement since the formation of the Fountain Creek Vision Task Force in 2006. “You’ve been the glue for this board in a lot of ways,” Richard Skorman, a former Colorado Springs councilman, told Chostner. “You’ve come to El Paso County a lot and reached out in a way no one else has.”

“The beauty of this board is that we can be friends,” Chostner replied.

The board elected officers for the coming year. Fountain Mayor Pro Tem Gabe Ortega was elected chairman; Pueblo City Councilwoman Eva Montoya, vice chairman; Colorado Springs Councilwoman Brandy Williams, secretary; and Fountain Creek Pueblo County resident Jane Rhodes, treasurer. Other members are Palmer Lake Mayor Pro Tem Michael Maddux, Lower Arkansas Valley Water Conservancy District board member Melissa Esquibel, El Paso County Commissioner Dennis Hisey and Hart. The district was formed by the state Legislature in 2009 to address common Fountain Creek concerns in El Paso and Pueblo counties.

More Fountain Creek coverage here and here.

Pueblo: Stormwater rates to increase 20% in February

From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):

Pueblo stormwater fees will increase 20 percent next month, after action earlier this month by Pueblo City Council. For most homes in Pueblo, that will mean between $2.40 and $4.20 per month. “We still aren’t up to the average rate in Colorado, which is $5 per month,” said Earl Wilkinson, Pueblo director of public works. “We haven’t had an increase in fees since they began in 2004.”

The increase will mean an additional $560,000 in revenue, on top of the $2.8 million generated each year under the existing fee structure.

Like Colorado Springs, Pueblo has a backlog of stormwater projects, but is tackling them in five­year bites focusing on projects which can be completed. They can be expensive, with whole streets torn up and rebuilt.

For example, a $1.6 million project is planned in the area near 29th Street and Baltimore Avenue. “There is continued high water in the area,” Wilkinson said. “While it hasn’t damaged any homes, there has been damage to streets and yards after heavy rains.”

The city’s stormwater fee also pays for employees and maintenance of more than 114 miles of storm sewers, 6,300 catch basins, 18 miles of storm channels and 31 detention basins. The stormwater fee also is repaying the Pueblo Board of Water Works $1 million over three years for a drainage pipeline from the St. Charles lakes to Lake Minnequa as part of a cooperative agreement that’s designed to keep more water in Minnequa as a new city park is developed.

In the future, fee increases will be more gradual, Wilkinson said. “We’re finally getting an idea of what kind of funding we’ve needed,” he said.

More infrastructure coverage here.

Proposed Colorado Springs’ stormwater actions on Fountain Creek will likely go to the voters

From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):

Colorado Springs is looking at several options to secure stormwater funding, any of which would most likely mean a vote of the people. “Technically, it’s possible to implement it as a fee, but it has to be in front of voters politically,” Colorado Springs Utilities executive Mark Pifher told the Pueblo Board of Water Works this week.

Pifher updated the board on the work of a stormwater task force created by El Paso County commissioners and the Colorado Springs City Council. The task force decided to recommend the county and cities study ways to find sustainable funding for more than 400 projects and $900 million in funding needs identified in the first phase.

Commissioners and the City Council are considering the recommendation.

The issue is of concern to Pueblo because the stormwater from the most populated areas of El Paso County funnels into Fountain Creek and could make flooding worse if not controlled. There is urgency in El Paso County because of commitments to Pueblo County for a permit to construct the Southern Delivery System and increasing damage from stormwater structures in place.

A white paper last year by Summit Economics outlined several possible funding sources, Pifher explained.
A new El Paso County entity, similar to the Denver Urban Drainage and Flood Control District, could be formed or the payment for stormwater could be managed by the Fountain Creek Watershed Flood Control and Greenway District. Another possibility would be to create a stormwater utility for Colorado Springs, which already operates gas, electric, sewer and water utilities.

Colorado Springs City Council abolished the city’s stormwater utility, created without a vote of the people, in 2009, after anti­tax activist Doug Bruce persuaded voters to approve city Issue 300, calling the stormwater fee a “rain tax.”

More stormwater coverage here.

Fountain Creek: ‘The plan was hit by a rain of criticism, however’ — Chris Woodka

Here’s a recap of this week’s Arkansas Basin Roundtable meeting, from Chris Woodka writing for The Pueblo Chieftain:

A plan to stabilize the banks of Fountain Creek on an El Paso County ranch went around a few more bends than usual at the Arkansas Basin Roundtable Wednesday. The roundtable routinely passes grant requests with few ripples, but the Fountain Creek proposal hit more than the usual number of snags. In the end, the plan was kicked back to its sponsors with instructions to obtain more matching funds.

“What we’re after is the long­term stability of Fountain Creek,” said Graham Thompson, an engineering consultant for the Fountain Creek Watershed Flood Control and Greenway district. “We’re trying to mimic the river’s natural flow.”

The district sought more than $150,000 in state grants to restore natural curves and stabilize banks on the Frost Ranch. The plan incorporated $30,000 in in­kind contributions from Colorado Springs Utilities, based on lessons learned at the nearby Clear Springs Ranch. Thompson said the Frost Ranch was chosen after 10 properties were looked at, partly because the landowners were willing to work with the district. The demonstration project could be useful in convincing other landowners to make improvements that are designed to reduce erosion and sedimentation.

The Fountain Creek district board last month committed to pursuing more grants until it can put permanent financial sources in place. The district has been looking at asking voters for a property tax, but otherwise will continue to patch together budgets until 2016, when it begins receiving $50 million that was promised by Colorado Springs Utilities after the Southern Delivery System goes online.

The plan was hit by a rain of criticism, however.

On a technical level, some roundtable members questioned whether the improvements would hold up to the next flood. “You’re messing with Mother Nature and things tend to get moved around in high flows,” said David Taussig. On a financial level, some asked why Colorado Springs and the landowners are not putting cash money into the improvements.

Others thought it more important to try to make improvements on Fountain Creek. Beulah rancher Reeves Brown said paying some of the bill for landowners has the same value as a conservation easement.

“This plan has good things that will benefit the roundtable,” said Betty Konarski, who represents El Paso County. “If you can show a project that works, you’ll have more people working with the district.”

More Fountain Creek coverage here and here.

Restoration: The Fountain Creek watershed district plans to spend $25,000 for stream bank stabilization in 2013

From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):

A district formed to fix Fountain Creek plans to line up more projects next year as it prepares to ask voters for a mill levy at some point in the future. The Fountain Creek Watershed Flood Control and Greenway District board agreed Friday to use up to $25,000 of its $240,000 budget for 2013 to leverage other grants for projects to improve stream banks, reduce sediment or make other improvements along the creek.

Projects are being developed in cooperation with the Lower Arkansas Valley Water Conservancy District and Colorado Springs Utilities. “It’s a great opportunity to do some things to make the district more visible,” said El Paso County Commissioner Dennis Hisey.

Executive Director Larry Small said up to nine locations along Fountain Creek have been identified for potential work. Many grants require just a 5 percent match, and communities along Fountain Creek have shouldered the bulk of matching funds in the past. Grants could come from either federal or state sources, explained Carol Baker of Colorado Springs Utilities.

Board member Jane Rhodes of Pueblo County, who represents landowners along Fountain Creek, said projects are needed. The district played a role in getting Great Outdoors Colorado grants for trails in Pueblo and parts of El Paso County this year. It also helped the city of Pueblo in a demonstration project aimed at flood control and sediment removal. But landowners have seen further damage from relatively minor flooding.

“I just feel it’s time to look up and down Fountain Creek and get something done for us,” Rhodes said.

The district, formed in 2009 and encompassing all of El Paso and Pueblo counties, has not set a timetable for when it would ask voters to approve a mill levy or decided how much the mill levy would be. State legislation forming the district authorizes it to ask for up to 5 mills.

More Fountain Creek coverage here and here.

Jeff Chostner has, ‘been at the center of water fights for the last decade’ — Chris Woodka

From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):

When Jeff Chostner becomes Pueblo district attorney in January, he will jump from one pool of water issues to another. It’s not the first time. Chostner’s been at the center of water fights for the last decade. “It’s bittersweet,” Chostner said, of leaving his current posts. “I’ve come full circle.”

Chostner was on Pueblo City Council when it voted on intergovernmental agreements in 2004 — he voted against them — that removed the city’s opposition to the controversial Southern Delivery System proposed by Colorado Springs and its partners to divert up to 78 million gallons of water daily from the Arkansas River to El Paso County.
In 2006, he was elected to the Pueblo County Board of Commissioners, and was part of the board when it staged public hearings on SDS and issued a 1041 land­use permit for the project in 2009. During that time, he became active on the Fountain Creek Vision Task Force, and helped to form and now chairs the Fountain Creek Watershed Flood Control and Greenway District.

In those roles, he has been a watchdog for the 1041 provisions of SDS, making sure they are followed and overseeing several changes that improved Pueblo County’s
end of the deal.

Now, moving into the district attorney’s role, Chostner will inherit a piece of the contentious dealings outgoing District Attorney Bill Thiebaut set in motion. A decision earlier this year by District Court Judge Victor Reyes ordered the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment to rework the SDS waterquality permit.
The state and Colorado Springs have appealed the decision.

If the appeals court rules in favor of Reyes’ decision, it’s likely to be appealed to the Colorado Supreme Court. If it overturns it, Chostner would review whether to appeal. “If it goes against Colorado Springs, I would certainly defend a successful case,” Chostner said. “If it goes against us, I would have to read the language of the opinion before making a decision.”

Even though there will be three new county commissioners and a new county attorney after the first of the year, Chostner thinks Pueblo County staff is well aware of the conditions of the 1041 agreement. Three conditions, in particular, require Colorado Springs Utilities to fund projects affecting Fountain Creek. Colorado Springs also is required to make other improvements at property it owns south of Fountain under the 1041 conditions. The city also indicated it would fully fund stormwater projects.

Sewer lines

Colorado Springs Utilities is required to spend $75 million by 2024 to fortify sewer collection lines that cross tributaries of Fountain Creek. The county has to assure that the money is being spent on identified projects, and that the projects do not duplicate other regulatory efforts. So far, annual reports from Utilities indicate those payments are in line. In November, at a meeting to tackle regional stormwater issues in Colorado Springs, Chostner questioned Springs officials on whether any amount of the $28 million in stormwater projects would be applied toward the $75 million commitment. He was assured they would not.

Flood control

When SDS is complete, probably in 2016, Colorado Springs will make annual payments totalling $50 million over five years to the Fountain Creek district. “That money is to be spent in Pueblo County,” Chostner said. “At the time (2009), I talked to Sen. Ken Salazar, who agreed that $50 million was a good settlement and we would be able to parlay that into $100 million or $150 million for a dam or other water restraint systems on Fountain Creek. That money is there for a dam, if that’s what the district chooses to do.”

While The Pueblo Chieftain editorially has championed building a dam — the idea originally was proposed by Pueblo County water attorney Ray Petros — much of the discussion has focused on smaller detention ponds. Colorado Springs, at the insistence of Pueblo County, is helping to fund a federal study of hydrologic impacts of flood control structures, using part of the $50 million. Regardless of the final decision, Chostner is confident the money will be spent in Pueblo County.

Dredging

Chostner also has zealously guarded funding projects from the $2.2 million Colorado Springs paid the county in 2010 to satisfy a requirement for onetime dredging of Fountain Creek through Pueblo. Of the money, $350,000 already has been spent on a city of Pueblo demonstration project that includes a sediment collector, which removes sediment from the water as it flows. It was also suggested that some of the money could be used to remove a problematic railroad bridge from the creek bed. Part of the bridge has been dismantled by the Union Pacific Railroad. “I would stress that the use of that money is not a Fountain Creek decision, or a city of Pueblo decision, but solely a Pueblo County commission decision,” Chostner said. “My personal recommendation is to remove the bridge.”
Fountain Creek board

Chostner has spent the last year pushing the Fountain Creek district toward its ultimate task of asking voters in El Paso and Pueblo counties for a mill levy. He has met with the city councils of Pueblo and Colorado Springs, and other groups. He’ll step off the board in January. “I’ve tried to be active in the last six months, reminding people we’re still here and that we’re considering a mill levy,” Chostner said.

More Arkansas River Basin coverage here.