RBC I The commissioners’ meeting room was packed Tuesday with citizens concerned primarily about two items on the regular agenda: the proposed disbursement of $4 million from a county trust fund to the Rio Blanco County Water Conservancy District (RBCWCD) to move forward with a water storage project, and a resolution to authorize defunding the county’s agreement with the Dominion voting system (see additional story at https://www.theheraldtimes.com/bocc-bows-to-unproven-claims-about-dominion-system/rio-blanco-county/.)
As oil shale exploration and development expanded in the late 1970s, the state of Colorado established the Oil Shale Trust Fund to receive federal leasing bonus payments. In 1982, the County Capital Improvement Trust Fund (CCITF) was created for the distribution of funding to Rio Blanco, Garfield, Moffat and Mesa counties by percentages. RBC received $20 million in CCITF funding.
While other counties ran through their CCITF funding quickly, RBC invested and established a plan to only use interest on the balance to fund requests from local taxing districts. Since 1982, the principle balance has only been dipped into rarely, most recently for the broadband project. A $6 million payout from the Anvil Points settlement a few years ago helped rebuild the balance, and the total fund balance in 2020 was $24.5 million.
According to a press release on the county’s website, More than $40 million in funding has been disbursed since the trust’s inception to taxing districts on both sides of the county.
Citizens in attendance Tuesday voiced concerns about changes in processes and procedures in the way the funds are disbursed, the “one-time exemption” proposed for the “Rio Blanco Water Storage Project,” (AKA Wolf Creek Reservoir project) and how the fund balance will be rebuilt this time.
The three-step process in place in the 1980s including the completion of a fairly extensive application, review by advisory groups, public hearings, recommendations from a Core Group made up of the largest taxing districts, followed by a final determination of awards made by the Board of County Commissioners.
Meeker resident Sharon Day questioned whether funding a study would comply with the state statute that governs CCITF funds, which states funding must be used for tangible projects, not studies. Resident Toby Leavitt said there are also concerns because the statute indicates applications for CCITF funding are to be shared with all the taxing entities for comment, and that has not occurred. Leavitt also said there were concerns about the change of the project name of in the last few weeks.
“Talking to former commissioners, there’s always been a process,” Day said. “When we start going around processes, we get in trouble.” Day added, “This fund has served the community well. I have some concerns, but I don’t want it to be adversarial.”
RBCWCD Director Alden VandenBrink said the name of the project has been changed is because it is a regional water supply project, “not necessarily Wolf Creek.” The Wolf Creek site has been identified as a preferred site based on the purpose of need. The name has been changed at the recommendation of a third-party review to move forward with permitting process.
County Attorney Don Steerman said he does not believe the criteria set in the 1980s is not required by statute, and has not been adopted.
“The bottom line is that the commissioners have the authority to decide how to use these funds.”
In order to move forward with permitting and NEPA (National Environmental Policy Act), studies must be done, and he believes funding those studies does comply with the statute for use of the CCITF funds, saying the studies are part of the overall project process.
Day listed three specific points of concern: going around processes, giving a lump sum for the project, and not having the application made available to the public to identify the scope of work.
VandenBrink said the lump sum is necessary because they are required to prove they have the funding before permitting can move forward. “We have to be able to demonstrate that we can pay for this.”
“We need an agreement in place that obligates the county to this project,” said Commissioner Gary Moyer, noting that one board cannot commit a future board to funding.
“NEPA is not something you want to start and stop,” VandenBrink said. “Without that commitment my recommendation to my board would be to not proceed.”
Discussion of the project occurred during the budget workshops, and has agreements from the Yellow Jacket Water Conservancy District, the Colorado River District, the Town of Rangely, and Rio Blanco County.
“The water situation is not getting better,” VandenBrink said, emphasizing the need for a water storage project somewhere in the White River Basin, whether it’s at Wolf Creek or elsewhere, to ensure water availability for the county’s citizens in the future.
Former RBC Commissioner Forrest Nelson said his concern is that CCITF funds have lasted because of responsible, conservative spending practices in the past. “I have concerns for our future, and I think maybe this money needs to be conserved.”
Rangely Town Manager Lisa Piering said the project is a long-term investment and the Town is in support.
Resident Sheryl Myers asked why other reservoirs are not being repaired, expanded and maintained. VandenBrink said the other reservoirs in the county do not meet the needs that have been identified. Lake Avery is under the authority of Colorado Parks and Wildlife, Rio Blanco Lake is empty, and Kenney Reservoir is silted in. Dredging Kenney would be “cost-prohibitive” and would have to be repeated every 25 years or so, according to information RBWCD has received.
Deirdre Macnab, who owns property adjoining the Wolf Creek site, echoed concerns about process and procedures. “Wise leaders years ago put protocols in place to ensure public input and transparency,” she said.
Moyer pushed back against what he called an “innuendo” that the board has failed to comply with procedures and legal requirements, noting the $4 million expenditure was thoroughly discussed during public budget workshops last fall.
Meeker resident Hal Pearce, urged caution, as the NEPA process — estimated to cost $1.8 to $2 million a year for three years — could come back as a negative.
$2.5 million in analysis of the project has been spent, since 2013, to identify the Wolf Creek site as the preferred site. All told, it’s a $150 million project.
There was a general consensus expressed that water is the “lifeblood of Western Colorado,” and that there are concerns to be addressed. How to respond to those needs remains open for debate.
Multiple additional comments were made during the work session and the regular meeting, which extended into the afternoon. The full work session video can be viewed at https://youtu.be/kMp-g2S42qQ the regular meeting video is available at https://youtu.be/K8CXwpR1tMU.
The one-time exemption allowing the $4 million disbursement to the RBCWCD was unanimously approved by the board during the regular meeting Tuesday.
By NIKI TURNER – editor@editorht1885.com
