|
<br />States was agreed upon. The final
<br />Conlracl provides Ihal the District will
<br />rep.lY $127 million of the eslimated
<br />o $485 million required 10 build the
<br />total Project, with the difference being
<br />... assigned to repayment from the power
<br />~ features, and non-reimbursable items
<br />W such as flood control, r~reation, fish
<br />Co;: and wildlife propagation and
<br />environmental enhancement. The
<br />repayment period is for 40 years with
<br />an e..tension of ten years if necessary.
<br />Revenue for annual payments from the
<br />District will be obtained from the
<br />annual assessment of a levy on all ta..-
<br />able property in the District, sale of
<br />Project water at $8.00 per acre-fool.
<br />rental of storage space for winter
<br />slored water at $3.20 per acre-foot.
<br />and r~nue from storage contracts
<br />with other entities. A major provision
<br />also prCNides that the Contract will be
<br />reviewed by both agencies each four
<br />years to assure that payments are
<br />adequate to meet terms of Ihe
<br />Contract, bUI can be adjusted to meet
<br />el(isting State Laws.
<br />
<br />In 1986, members of the Board of
<br />Directors, legal Counsel and st.:lft
<br />held (our meetings with representa-
<br />tives from the US Bureau of Reclama.
<br />tion to negotiate amendment 14 to the
<br />1965 and 1981 Repayment Contract.
<br />The amendment was necessitated to
<br />update provisions relative to the lime
<br />of the year when the Bureau estimates
<br />the amount of Proiect water available
<br />to the District, and also fa incorporate
<br />spilling criteria which was developed
<br />between the District and water entities
<br />the previous year. Members of the
<br />Board of Directors apprCM'd amend-
<br />ment M4 at their December 21, 1985
<br />meeting. and Ihe Bureau ratified the
<br />amendment on lanuary 23, 1986.
<br />
<br />In 1984, the members of the Colorado
<br />General Assembly passed legislation
<br />requiring individual counties to
<br />reassess all property commencing in
<br />1987, and limiling Ihe amounttal(ing
<br />enhties, such as the District, could
<br />assess at 5.5% more than the previous
<br />year. Historically the District was able
<br />10 increase its annual income b-r' 7'\.,
<br />based upon increased assessed valua--
<br />tion. As a result of the 1984 legislatiw-
<br />action, the assessed valuation of the
<br />District far e..ceeded the 5.5'%., and
<br />the members of the Board of Directors
<br />of the District determined it in the
<br />best interest oi our taxpayers !O not
<br />request permission to e,ceed that
<br />
<br />8
<br />
<br />amount, and agreed on the assessme-nt
<br />of a mill levy of .719 mills. This action
<br />was contrary to the Re-payment
<br />Contract with the U.s. Bureau of
<br />Reclamation, which requires the-
<br />District to assess one full mill each
<br />~ar, and transmit 9/10ths of that
<br />income directly to the U.s. Treasury.
<br />Representatives from the District and
<br />the Bureau began negotiations to
<br />Amend the Repayment Contract and,
<br />in December, Re-gional Director Bill E.
<br />Martin app~ Amendmenl MS,
<br />which permitte-d the District to assess
<br />the reduced amount, but still pr<Nide
<br />required income needed (or the
<br />Repayment Obligations.
<br />
<br />During the ~ar members of the staff
<br />of the District. and the Pueblo office
<br />of the Bureau, devoted a great de-al of
<br />time sending forms require-d under the-
<br />1982 Reclamation Reform Act to
<br />property owners within Ihe District.
<br />This was necessitated by virtue of the
<br />fact the Board of Directors amended
<br />their Repayment Contract in 1984 to
<br />conform with the Reclamation Reform
<br />Act, which requires that each property
<br />owner in el(cess of 40 acres fite with
<br />the District appropriale documents
<br />identifying land served with Project
<br />water. The response 10 the request
<br />from Ihe District was el(cellent, and
<br />a majority of the forms had been
<br />retume-d by the end of December
<br />1990.
<br />
<br />Representatives from four U.S. Bureau
<br />of Reclamation offices spent the week
<br />of June 25-29, performing an audil
<br />requirf'd under the Reclamation Reform
<br />Act. During the week, members of the
<br />staff, devoted considerable time in
<br />meetings with the auditors, and results
<br />of the audil are expt'cted early in
<br />1991. Chief Engineer Robert Jesse
<br />spent a great deal of his time meeling
<br />with superintendents and representa-
<br />tives from various ditch, canal, and
<br />irrigation company Board of Directors
<br />reviewing plans of operations to assure
<br />compliance with sections of the Act
<br />prohibiting the deliw-ry of Project
<br />water on ineligible lands. Mr. Tom
<br />Simpson, who replaced Mr. Jesse on
<br />August 20, 1990, and Mrs. Kelly Brace,
<br />who assumed her clerical duties on
<br />September 11, spent most of the
<br />remaining months of the ~ar carefully
<br />re-.'iewing el(isting records in the
<br />computer system, and meeting with
<br />individual irrigators to assure total
<br />accuracy of records.
<br />
<br />COOPERATIVE STUDIES
<br />
<br />The District. as sponsor for the
<br />Fryingpan-Arkansas ProJect, has the
<br />responsibility each year of being sure
<br />that waters produced and sold by the
<br />District are delivered to customers as
<br />far as 350 miles away from the source.
<br />This requires accurate documentation
<br />as to the tTyCrologic syslem throughout
<br />the entire valley.
<br />
<br />As a result of this responsibility, the
<br />District has continued a Cooperative
<br />Program with Ihe U.s. Geological
<br />SuM?y which began in 1965. Each
<br />year the Survey has conducted
<br />detailed studies as 10 the relationship
<br />of surface and ground water, transit
<br />time and transil loss, ground water
<br />studies identifying Ihe rale of flow and
<br />location. In 1981 the District and the
<br />Pueblo Office of the US Geological
<br />Survey entered info a special agree-
<br />ment to d~lop the special program
<br />tilled "Computer - Program Documen-
<br />tation of a Comprehensiw- H~rologic
<br />Quantity and Quality River.Basin
<br />Model". The project was to require
<br />four years of intensiw- research of
<br />e..isting data, including precipitation,
<br />historic flows along the mainstream of
<br />the Arkansas River and its major tribu-
<br />taries, diversions to municipalilies and
<br />irrigation and canal companies, ground
<br />water characteristics, and other elements
<br />which would identify the complete
<br />h).drologic system in the Arkansas
<br />River Basin in Colorado. Those dat.:l
<br />were then put into a complex scientific
<br />digital model which would enable the
<br />USGS and the District to de\elop
<br />Management Programs, Representatives
<br />from the USGS office in Lakewood
<br />and Pueblo made regular reports to
<br />the members of the Board as to the
<br />progress, and the program was com-
<br />pleted on schedule in December
<br />1985, when a preliminary report was
<br />presented to the District.
<br />
<br />This Model recei\~ final approval
<br />from the U.S. Geological Survey in
<br />December. and will be used by the
<br />District and USGS, along with other
<br />water agencies, in the development of
<br />impr~ water delivery and manage-
<br />me-nt programs.
<br />
<br />In 1986, the District joined with the
<br />Utilities Department of the City of
<br />Colorado Springs, Pueblo Board of
<br />\Vater V\brks, Metropolitan Water
<br />DiSlrict oi Pueblo \Vesl and 51,
<br />
|