 |
|
|
|
| 9/20/2007 9:40:00 PM | Email this article • Print this article | Fairplay Sanitation District eyes choices
By Linda Bjorklund - Correspondent
A special meeting was held on Sept. 13 to consider alternatives to the proposed new wastewater treatment plant to be presented by an engineer for the local citizens' committee.
Peter Gross, owner of Fairplay bowling alley South Park Bowl, said that engineers contacted by a citizens committee of business owners had located two vendors, one from Canada and one from Minnesota, and their representatives assured him that a lagoon system would work in Fairplay's climate since it works in much colder environs in their respective regions.
The cost of the proposed lagoon system would be in the neighborhood of $2 million, plus the cost of a headworks facility, according to Gross. He asked that the District provide the vendors the information needed to design a plan that fits the needs of the Fairplay facility.
Board President Trevor Messa agreed to provide the information, but he insisted that an engineer appear before the board to present any plans that are proposed.
"I won't consider it if they don't show up," he said.
Gross said the engineers had asked for a one-on-one presentation to the board members, and did not want to appear once they found that the meeting was also to include engineers from Burns & McDonnell, the firm currently working on plans for the new plant; wastewater contractor Dave Stanford; and attorney Robert Tibbals.
A page-long list of questions had been prepared for them by Stanford.
The engineers contacted by the committee felt that, since they had not been retained by the sanitation district, their code of ethics might be compromised if the meeting resulted in confrontation or argument.
Only three board members were present - Trevor Messa, Marie Chisolm and Don Stevenson. Stevenson strongly objected to the failure of the engineers to appear. "Give us something to vote on," he said.
Messa said that a cost estimate will be available from Burns & McDonnell within the next two or three weeks, and he thought it would be much lower than the original plan, which exceeded $6.5 million for a mechanical system.
Gross added that both the vendors he talked to would give as good a process guarantee for their systems as any other vendor; Messa has indicated that one of the issues is that a 20-year process guarantee is required for any plant design proposed. However, Dennis Pontius, a state health department engineer who has been working with the district told The Flume Tuesday that there is no requirement for a "process guarantee" and that he does not use that terminology. If a new plant is built and after three years it becomes apparent that the engineer messed up, then it would be up to the district to file a lawsuit, he said.
In addition, Pontius said that there is no requirement that a facility be built with a 20-year time horizon. While it is preferable that a district make plans that will cover that period, it is possible that the health department would approve a plan based on a 10-year time horizon, he said. (See article, page 3.)
Karen Sears, a member of the citizens committee and part owner of The Second Home antique store in Fairplay, said that the main goal should be to find a process that will satisfy the state and also be affordable to the community.
The wastewater treatment plant designs are expected to be discussed at the next regular meeting of the district on Tuesday, Oct. 2, at 7 p.m. at the sanitation district office.
- Tom Locke
contributed to this article.
Operator contracts, expenses continue to be questioned
Operator Stanford says Chisholm in minority in her views
By Linda Borklund- Correspondent
While the Fairplay Sanitation District comes to grips with improving its wastewater system, board member and secretary-treasurer Marie Chisholm continues to butt heads with operator Dave Stanford over his contract and some of his bills.
At its regular meeting in September, the board was asked by its attorney, Robert Tibbals, to assign the district's contract with AquaTest Inc., Stanford's old company, to H20 Consultants Ltd., His new company.
Tibbals explained that invoices received from H2O Consultants should then be paid under the terms of the former AquaTest contract.
Other terms of the contract weren't considered or examined before the board approved the assignment and payment of the invoices.
Yet Chisholm has questioned the language of the contract between the district and AquaTest for the operation and maintenance of the wastewater treatment plant, which began Sept. 1, 2005, and states that it is of one-year duration and is "automatically renewed each year."
According to Chisholm, such a contract is not legal.
"The district cannot give an open contract. The Sanitation District needs to abide by the law," she said.
Colorado Statute 29-1-110 indicates that local government agencies (such as a sanitation or sewer district) may not contract or incur liability for money in excess of amounts appropriated for one fiscal year at a time unless such provisions are specifically made subject to an annual appropriation." The statute also indicates that such a contract is void and no monies shall be paid on it. The contract with AquaTest has extended beyond the 2005 and 2006 fiscal years without any further examination or official approval by the district board, except for the recent assignment to H2O Consultants.
But Stanford stands behind the contract. He said he and Tibbals agreed to the contract language and he has arranged the same kind of contract in a number of counties in Colorado since 1980. It's a one-year contract with a stipulation of a 30-day notice before it is automatically renewed, he stressed.
Indeed, although it's not stated in the contract, said Stanford, he is ready to leave on 30 days notice at any time during the contract period. "It isn't worded that way, but that is the way that I work," he said.
The basic agreement within the contract between the district and Stanford's firm provides for an annual sum of $36,000 to be paid to the contractor in semi-monthly $1500 increments. However, a number of additional provisions allow the contractor to charge the district at the rate of $65 an hour for various services in addition to the basic fees. There is no stated limit on any of these separate provisions. They include such contingencies as "any additional manpower provided by the contractor," "wastewater collection system inspections for wastewater service line installation and wastewater collection main installation," "Additional services requested and approved by the District from the Contractor," and "Construction management services to the District."
It was stated in the written wastewater report submitted to the board by Stanford at the September meeting that "to save expenses the plant operations and collection system operations were broken out" in the contract.
Stanford said he was being paid $5,000 a month for managing both the plant and the collections system, and the district said it wanted to save some money. Stanford said he suggested an hourly rate for the collection system management, which wasn't taking up much of his time back then.
So there is a provision in the treatment plant contract for Stanford to be paid $65 an hour "to operate and maintain the wastewater collection system as needed or as directed by the District."
However, later the collection system developed all sorts of problems and his costs rose to more than what he was paid before. "Stanford is costing approximately $77,000 a year, besides thousands in equipment, that hasn't improved operations," said Chisholm in an e-mail.
And the job is only part-time, she said, while some operators get $2,700 to $3,000 a month for a 40-hour week.
Chisholm has also complained that she doesn't think Stanford is operating the system correctly, but Dennis Pontius, an engineer with the Colorado Department of Health and Environment, said the problem is with the Fairplay sanitation system, not the operator.
Messa said in an e-mail that Chisholm was told that if she could find an operator who would guarantee operation of the plant within state limits, Stanford would be discharged. "To date she has not presented anyone, nor has anyone applied," he said.
There is a separate "Project Management Agreement" that covers exclusively three items referred to as "The Project." Those three items are: "completion of the new head works facility," "new wastewater treatment facility" and "new septage dumping system." That agreement began on May 2, 2006, has a duration of eighteen months and fees are to be charged at the rate of $65 per hour. The head works facility is no longer applicable as the wastewater treatment facility will contain the head works operation. The septage dumping system project has been discarded as well. That leaves the new wastewater treatment facility as the only project for which project management expenses can be charged. Although there is a stated duration on the agreement, there is no limit to the amount that can be charged.
Chisholm cited some invoices in particular that she felt were inappropriate.
One, dated March 14, 2007, contains a number of items regarding the "chlorine room project," in addition to 8.5 hours charged for making CD's and 1.5 hours of office work for annexation. The total for the invoice was $6,818.76.
With respect to copying CDs, at $65 an hour, Stanford said that the board authorized him to get the information for bids out on video about the condition of the sewer lines, and he was not authorized to farm the work out. With respect to the office work, he said Jeff Goble, then his employee, was authorized in advance to do the paperwork to get the sanitation district facilities annexed into the town of Fairplay, thus avoiding about $100,000 in approval costs for a 1041 water permit that would have been required had the facilities stayed in unincorporated Park County.
Charges were also made and paid for office work, for deliveries, for attending meetings, for preparing the Quarterly Report, and one for purchasing a 'New office chair for Cathy.'
"Four members of the board don't have a problem with it [the billing]," Stanford said. "But one member of the board [Chisholm] does."
Chisholm has maintained on a number of occasions that the rest of the board has given Stanford a 'blank check.'
"The district was very remiss in giving Stanford a contract to charge $65 an hour for everything except the wastewater treatment plant," she said.
Board President Messa did not respond to a recent e-mailed question about whether the district should reexamine the contract in light of the fact that the adjusted contract with the hourly rate has ended up costing the district more.
Stanford said that he anticipates the hours devoted to the collections system will drop dramatically because it's about 95 percent repaired through work done by Insituform.
- Tom Locke
contributed to this article.
Operator says all three options are $3 million to $3.8 million
By Tom Locke
Editor
The Burns & McDonnell engineering firm hired by the Fairplay Sanitation District to design a new wastewater treatment plant is evaluating three options, each of which is likely to cost somewhere between $3 million and $3.8 million, wastewater plant operator Dave Stanford told The Flume Tuesday.
"There are three alternatives to treatment being considered," said Stanford. They are as follows:
•Discharge the wastewater into a leach field instead of into the Middle Fork of the South Platte River. Lagoons of the current system would still be used, but they are leaking and would need to be relined, as mandated by the state health department, he said. He estimates that would cost $250,000 per lagoon, and two or three lagoons of the current three-lagoon system would be used. Discharging into a leach field has been proposed by board member and secretary-treasurer Marie Chishom, and, said Stanford. A wastewater operator in Breckenridge has also suggested it should be examined, he said.
• Cover the lagoons with an insulated covering, increase the amount of air being pumped into the lagoons, and provide plastic sheets in the lagoons where the bacteria would collect. The lagoons would be relined and there would be added costs for pumping more air into the system. A Canadian company located by a citizens committee, has shown that such a system will work in cold climates, he said.
•Provide an activated sludge mechanical system. A mechanical system is what the engineers have been focusing on. In an activated sludge system, wastewater is routed through an aerated basin with high concentrations of bacteria, which convert ammonia to nitrates, and then it is routed to a settling pond and then the river.
"The district is going to spend somewhere between $3 [million] and $3.8 million," Stanford said of the alternatives.
Burns & McDonnell will evaluate all three, a cost-benefit analysis will be done, and the board members will make a decision, he said.
A district board meeting on Sept. 13 was "extremely positive," said Stanford, with good communication between board members and a citizens committee.
Stanford said he is hopeful that the system chosen can be funded without any additional property tax. The district raised $3.5 million through selling revenue bonds in December and after attorney fees and issuance costs it was left with $3.4 million, said Board President Trevor Messa in an e-mail.
Acccording to Stanford, the district will end up spending between $800,000 and $850,000 of that $3.4 million repairing its collection system, which was riddled with leaks in sewer pipes. The original contract with Insituform was for $500,000, but it turned out more expensive than that because the district had 50,000 feet of pipe instead of 37,000 feet, and there were more repairs to be done than expected.
Subtract the $850,000 from the $3.4 million, and that leaves about $2.55 million to be used for a new or modified treatment facility.
That would still leave the district short of the $3 million to $3.8 million that Stanford is talking about.
Wrestling with problem
The Fairplay Sanitation District continues to wrestle with the question of how it will meet state standards for ammonia at a cost that will be acceptable to its users.
On the one hand, board member and secretary-treasurer Marie Chisholm and members of the citizens committee believe the standards might be met with some operational and design changes to the current lagoon system that will enable it to meet state standards.
Those pushing for a lagoon system modification stress that the capital costs would be cheaper than building a brand new operating plant. The operating costs might also be cheaper, since more electricity and labor would probably be needed to operate a mechanical plant.
On the other hand, Board President Trevor Messa and the majority of the board have been mainly leaning toward a new mechanical system to meet state requirements.
Messa has argued that the lagoon system cannot be modified to meet state standards. He also said the district cannot get a 20-year process guarantee that is being mandated by the state. However, state health department engineer Dennis Pontius said the state doesn't use the term "process guarantee" and does not absolutely require 20-year planning. He agrees with Messa about Fairplay needing a mechanical plant.
He said the state and two engineering firms have discounted the lagoon system.
"I can tell you that they basically get no treatment for ammonia in the wintertime," said Pontius. "From our perspective, they need to have a mechanical plant. They've needed one for years." Indeed, it's been since the mid-1990s that Fairplay has been violating discharge permit limits on ammonia.
Would it be possible to modify the lagoons to make them meet state requirements on ammonia?
First, said Pontius, the lagoons would have to be relined to stop the leaking, and that would cost a lot of money. "I'm not saying it couldn't be done. At least we don't think it's cost-effective."
In general, a mechanical system holds the water in a much smaller area then a lagoon, the concentration of bacteria - which are used to convert ammonia to nitrates - is much higher, pumps and aeration devices are used, the water is treated more quickly and efficiently and there is generally more flexibility to meet new standards.
Chisholm cites other lagoon systems that work, including those in Penrose and Alma, but those systems are considerably smaller than what Fairplay needs. The bigger the size and the higher the altitude and colder the weather, the tougher it is for a lagoon system to have enough active bacteria to nitrify the ammonia.
Bacteria and the cold
Bacteria that convert ammonia to nitrates slow down as the water gets colder. "For every 10 degrees drop in temperature (of water) you lose 50 percent of your biological activity," said Paul Shreve, training specialist for the Pueblo West-based Colorado Rural Water Association. "Once you get below 45 degrees water temperature, it becomes very difficult to treat it without having a mechanical process to retain it," he said.
A mechanical process keeps the water mixed, whereas a lagoon system tends to have the colder water at the top, with less biological activity, and the warmer water at the bottom, with more activity, he said.
The state health department wants to keep ammonia levels down to protect the fish in the Middle Fork of the South Platte River, where Fairplay discharges the water after it is treated. Ammonia can be toxic to fish and it also can provide nutrients for algae that can rob fish of oxygen at night.
Dale Colerick, the wastewater foreman for the city of Brush, said that any municipality looking at a new facility needs to consider not only its current standards for ammonia but also possible standards in the future. He cited more stringent ammonia standards by the EPA and tougher nitrate standards.
But Andrew Ross, domestic permits unit manager for the state health department, and Eric Oppelt, professional engineer for domestic permits, said standards that went into effect Sept. 1 of this year have toughened for ammonia in Brush, which discharges into a warm-water stream, but they've actually loosened for Fairplay, which discharges into a cold-water stream. Not only that, but Fairplay's repair of its collection system has given it a better idea of actual flows, which were sometimes artificially high because of rainwater flowing into the leaking sewer pipes. With a more accurate flow measurement, Fairplay has applied for a 300,000 gallon-per-day plant, which has less stringent standards than the 400,000 gallons-per-day facility currently permitted.
In the mid-1990s, the chronic total ammonia limits, based on a 30-day average, ranged from a low of 16 milligrams per liter to 34 milligrams per liter. In its current permit, issued in 2005 after some drought conditions made the standards tougher, Fairplay has a chronic ammonia limit for the 400,000 gallons of capacity in its current system that ranges as low as 5.4 milligrams per liter to 30 milligrams per liter.
But in a new model prepared by Oppelt, based on 300,000 gallons per day and the new, less-stringent EPA guidelines for coldwater discharges, the limits range from a low of 21 milligrams per liter to a high of 45 mg/l.
Oppelt explained that that's largely because the 300,000 gallon-per-day plant would have a capacity of discharging 75 percent as many pollutants, so standards are more lenient.
While Ross and Opelt stress that the 300,000 gallon system has not yet been approved by the state as providing sufficient capacity, Stanford said he believes Fairplay will be allowed. There are about 680 people in the district, he said. Plus, the district has the Fairplay jail, which has a capacity for 250 beds.
With a repaired collection system, it looks like the true flows for Fairplay are 170,000 gallons per day, according to Messa.
Plus, Stanford points out that Water Quality Managment Committee of the Pikes Peak Area Council of Governments said a 400,000 gallon per day system was more than Fairplay needed.
Park County Undersheriff Monte Gore, who obtained minutes from the Jan. 23 meeting of the committee, quoted from the minutes as follows: "Concern was expressed regarding the enormous cost of the plant - how it would be financed and the potential impact [on] the ratepayers. ... The facility appears to be over-designed - twice as large as necessary."
If the 300,000 gallon size is approved, that means the discharge limits will range from 21 mg/l to 45 mg/l, depending on the month. That's considerably looser than the range of 5.4 mg/l to 30 mg/l Fairplay faces under its current permit.
Still, even with the looser standards, its current lagoon system would might be in violation or close to violation in the winter months. Stanford said the discharges go up to 35 to 40 mg/l in the winter, and the January limit would be 32 mg/l under the new standards assuming a 300,000 gallon system.
Activated sludge
An activated sludge mechanical system, which Brush is converting to and which Burns & McDonnell are evaluating for Fairplay, gets high marks from Colerick, who trains wastewater operators for the Colorado Rural Water Association and holds two one-week courses per year at the University of Colorado at Boulder.
With that system, wastewater goes into an aeration tank filled with a suspension of microorganisms and then goes to a settling tank where the microorganisms are settled out and then sent back to the aeration tank.
Colerick is less enthusiastic about lagoon systems. "I don't see lagoon systems very much longer being able to meet the effluent limits," he said.
He noted that a lagoon system might have micoorganisms concentrated at 90 to 120 milligrams per liter at the front end and 30 milligrams per liter at the end of the lagoon, while a mechanical system might have the microorganisms concentrated at 2,200 to 3,500 milligrams per liter. That's up to 117 times greater concentration.
Chisholm, who was the operator of the Fairplay lagoon system from 1982 to 1992, said that it was only occasionally out of compliance under her supervision. Stanford responded that standards for ammonia have continued to get increasingly strict since she was the operator, making the lagoon system, at least as it is configured now, no longer able to comply.
Others in the industry are also skeptical about lagoon compliance in the long term. One operator of a system in Summit County said that it would be "tough beyond description" to consistently meet wastewater standards with the lagoon system Fairplay has.
In a Sept. 4 letter to the Fairplay district board, Stanford said the district was consistently discharging 25 milligrams per liter of ammonia and continued to be out of compliance with the current discharge permit. That 25 would also be out of compliance with the 21 mg/l limit under a 300,000 gallon system and the new EPA standards effective Sept. 1.
Could the lagoon be modified to meet the new standards?
"Possibly, but I would imagine over the long haul you'd have as much expense," said Shreve, echoing Pontius' opinion.
Would a lagoon cover work?
A sheet of plastic over the lagoon might help hold the heat in, he said, but it would cause a problem with oxygen transfer, which is crucial for the bacteria in the lagoon. And trying to heat the lagoon would be tremendously expensive because of the huge area involved.
Stanford said the Canadian firm would address the oxygen problem posed by a cover by pumping more air into the lagoon from the bottom.
Large leach field
Board member Chisholm said in a recent e-mail that she has proposed to the board "that we change the diversion from surface to subsurface, given the fact that we have a 20-foot deep glacial moraine on 30 acres owned by the district, and water percolates at the rate of 1 gallon in 10 seconds. A large leach field could be constructed, using our upgraded, lined lagoons and we would no longer have an ammonia problem," she said.
That is one of the three alternatives being examined, said Stanford.
But Colerick said there are state-imposed standards for water discharged into the ground, and "that particular statement is really not going to hold very well."
He said there are towns discharging into the ground, such as Yuma and Wiggins, but they treat the wastewater with a mechanical system before it goes into the ground. He doesn't know of a case where discharging to the ground enables a a district to avoid a mechanical system.
Fines
Meanwhile, the clock is ticking for coming up with a solution. If Fairplay is not in compliance with ammonia standards for its discharge permit by August 2008, it could be fined up to $25,000 a day, according to Messa. Plus, the district could be sued after that time for non-compliance by a group like the Sierra Club or someone else, he said.
"If they're getting threatened to be fined, they'd better get it done, because they will be fined," said Frank Main, district manager of the Colorado City Metropolitan District. He speaks from experience. Colorado City was fined $57,000 for not complying with its discharge permit, and Main negotiated that down to $20,000.
Costs
Several numbers have been tossed around about the cost of a new wastewater treatment plant using some sort of "mechanical" process.
In January, the district was talking about a cost of $6.5 million. Messa said at the time that $3.5 million would come from bonds approved by voters in May 2006, backed by a property tax increase of 20 mills.
The increase of 20 mills represented a 28 percent increase in total property taxes within the city of Fairplay, from 72 mills to 92 mills, and looking at only the sanitation district's portion of that, the 20-mills increase represented more than a tripling of the sanitation district property taxes, to about 28 mills from about 8 mills.
The following month, The Flume reported that projected costs were $7.7 million for a new plant, including a contingency fee of $600,000.
But since then the estimate has been reduced.
On April 3, the district passed a resolution reducing the additional mill levy down to 8 mills from 20.399 mills, for a total mill levy from the district of 15.8 mills.
The 20 mill increase would have raised about $300,000 a year to pay for debt service for the bonds; the 8 mills increase would raise about $118,000 a year for debt service.
The district's resolution said that the lowering of the increase to eight mills from 20 mills was due to a change in development projections for the community (justifying a smaller plant that would process up to 300,000 gallons a day rather than 400,000 gallons per day) and less stringent standards from the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment.
In a recent e-mail, Stanford said that "the engineers are looking at wastewater treatment alternatives that will cost the District from $2.5 million to $5.5 million. Of course, the vast majority of the community would really like to stay within the lower end of this scale."
Will that be possible? If Colorado City is any indication, it might be.
Main said that Colorado City completed a sequencing batch reactor mechanical system in 2005, with a capacity of 600,000 gallons a day, for $2.8 million. That's twice the capacity that Fairplay is looking at.
However, Colerick warned that construction costs have skyrocketed lately. The 1.66 million gallons per day facility that was going to cost Brush $8.3 million in 2005 is now estimated to cost $17 million, more than twice as much, he said.
However, the ammonia restrictions for Colorado City are far more severe than what Fairplay is looking at. It had to meet ammonia limits of 7.9 to 16 milligrams per liter before, which it could not meet under its old lagoon system, and with the new plant it must meet a limit of 1 milligram per liter, he said.
Colorado City had been using a lagoon system not unlike that used in Fairplay. While Fairplay has used blowers to aerate at the bottom of lagoons, Colorado City's laggons used a paddleboard to lift the water and aerate it so the bacteria would have the oxygen to do their job, converting ammonia to nitrates. "Our old system could not meet the new standards that they were gong to give us," Main said.
So it went to a new system, and financed a chunk of it with a $1.87 million low-interest loan from the Water Power Authority. "I do believe it was below 4 percent," said Main. It also received a $200,000 grant through the Department of Minerals and Energy and a loan for $200,000.
Salida-based Moltz Construction was the builder and "did a good job," he said.
Moltz Construction is also the partner with Burns and McDonnell in a design-build agreement with Fairplay. "It does not matter what type of plant they (Burns) design, they will receive only $299,000," said Messa in an e-mail. So there is no financial incentive for Burns and McDonnell to design one type of plant versus another, he said.
Leadville views
Scott Marcella, the district superintendent for the Leadville Sanitation District, recommended following the advice of the engineers. "Listen to your engineers. Don't listen to opinions," he said. "The engineers know what you need. That's the people you need to be listening to."
The Leadville system is an activated sludge system that has been in operation since 1970, and it spent over $1 million in 1986 for an expansion. It has a capacity of 1.15 million gallons per day, about four times what Fairplay is planning.
He recommends a mechanical plant for the long haul. "With a mechanical plant, you have a lot more flexibility with what you can and can't do."
One interesting point he makes is that a mechanical system is more expensive to operate. The Leadville system requires three full-time employees because tests must be done seven days a week. Including benefits, he figures a the labor costs are about $150,000 a year.
However, Colerick has a different viewpoint. He figures a Fairplay 300,000 gallon-per-day system would be operated with one C-licensed operator and one maintenance person. On the plains, he said, the operator would cost $25,000 to $30,000 a year, plus benefits.
Like Leadville, Frisco uses an activated sludge mechanical plant. It was built in 1973. It averages about 600,000 gallons a day and peaks at a million gallons a day. The replacement cost might be as high as $25 million, according to one estimate.
User fees
The user fees at Colorado City are $21 per month per residence. As for Fairplay Sanitaton, to pay back its $3.5 million in revenue bonds sold in December 2006, it was told by a consulting firm that it would need to increase tap fees (for new construction) to $7,500 from $3,500 and monthly user fees from $15 to $30 to $40 to $50, and then raise them from there to keep up with inflation, according to Messa. He said user fees are now at $30 a month.
Park County Undersheriff Gore said in a Sept. 14 e-mail that the bill for the Fairplay jail rose from about $1,224 in October 2006 to about $2,367 in December 2006. The jail, which has a capacity of 250 beds, is projecting costs of $28,400 for 2007, a 73 percent increase, and without a new facility yet, he said.
"Taxpayers should ask what the increase will be after the expansion," he said.
At this stage, that's unclear, but Stanford said that under a worst-case scenario another 2 mills might be added to the property tax, bringing the increase to 10, which is still half the original 20.
Meanwhile, the citizens committee has announced its intention to put something on the May 2008 ballot to decertify the bond election of 2006. That has Messa worried that the district would not be able to issue bonds because of the cloud created by the possible decertification.
But other districts have been able to find money without using bonds. Pat Meirhaeghe, secretary and billing clerk for the Penrose Sanitation District, said that it took a year and a half to get a $450,000 grant through the Colorado Department of Local Affairs and a $150,000 low-interest loan for a $600,000 lagoon system to serve 120 customers.
"We had to have help. We couldn't do it ourselves," said Meirhaeghe.
Now Penrose is hoping to raise another $456,000 for a sewer line, including $135,000 in loan money and the rest in grants, said Meirhaeghe.
Chisholm has already proven herself as a skilled obtainer of grants since she was instrumental in landing $2.9 million for Alma's new curbs, gutters and sidewalks.
For the sanitation district, "we still have $350,000 available from the $500,000 grant I got, and we had to release the Power and Water Authority grant because we couldn't use it this year," she said. "I am into grants big time and if necessary have been told that additional funds may be available to supplement funds from DOLA that [have] been awarded."
Messa said that the district has also received a $150,000 rural development grant and a $10,000 grant for engineering.
Park County tax assessor David Wissel also makes the point that more money will be available to the district through property taxes because the preliminary valuation of the properties in the district has risen about $4 million, to $18.4 million from $14.7 million.
That means the same mill levy would raise more revenue, or there could be a drop in the mill rate and still have the same revenue raised.
|
Article Comment Submission Form
|
|
|
|
|
