Stormwater in the Fountain Creek watershed

1. Stormwater in the Fountain Creek watershed

3. Current stormwater system - ASCE 2012 report card Capacity D- Operations & MaintenanceD+ Condition F Drainage Basin Planning F Program & Funding Public Safety D- ResilienceD Overall D-

4. How we got here • Decades of neglect • 2009: Stormwater Enterprise dissolved • 2011-2012: Summit Economics study • 2012 – present: Pikes Peak Regional Stormwater Task Force

5. Stormwater Task Force • Formed in 2012 by Co. Springs City Council, El Paso County Commissioners, Springs Utilities • Comprised of engineers, business people, citizens • Goal: assess the community’s stormwater needs and propose a solution • Methodical approach • Professional engineering firm study of project list • Statistically-valid, scientific public opinion polls

6. Research results: public input • 95% believe stormwater is a significant problem for our region • 90% prefer continuous funding • 81% prefer dedicated funding • 73% want a regional approach • 78% want a specific project list/master plan • 78% say a solution should receive voter approval WPA Survey, November, 2013

7. Research results: public input • 63% support a fee-based authority with key features: • 75% want a 1% cap on administrative costs • 77% want current city stormwater funding to continue • 78% favor a sunset on the authority’s capital program • 77% prefer a project list and master plan • 78% want to see the highest-priority projects completed in five years WPA Survey, March, 2014

8. The price of deferral (capital only) Current estimate of necessary capital improvements: $706.679 Million An equivalent annuity over 25 years at 4.5 % $15.85 million per year for 25 years -25 -20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 Years from today $47.66 million per year for 25 years An equivalent annuity over 25 years at 4.5 % Zwirlein & Crowley, 2014

9. High Medium Low TOTAL • $186,955,000 • $372,912,000 • $63,565,000 • $623,432,000 Funding needs (2013 dollars) $13.9M/year Capital - El Paso County within Fountain Creek Watershed, does not include post-fire or flooding needs: Non-Capital - annual drainage operations and maintenance, permit (MS4), water quality, planning studies and corrugated metal pipe replacement needs:

10. Community benefits • Public safety • Protection of public and private property • Protection of water quality • Enhanced neighborhoods • Waterways as community amenities • Economic development • Higher property values • Lower insurance rates Zwirlein & Crowley, 2014

11. Research results: Economic impact of a solution • Increase in jobs, income, GMP, output and sales taxes • 360 new, well-paying local jobs per year • $50 million increase in gross metropolitan product • Lower insurance rates • Improved critical community infrastructure • Stable funding and well-maintained infrastructure to attract new businesses Zwirlein & Crowley, 2014

12. Research results: best practices • Colorado Springs is the only major Front Range city without a stormwater management program • Most communities use an authority structure that charges a fee based on impervious surface • Fee for average residence ranges from $2-14 per month • Many programs in place for decades • Two highly-successful regional collaborations studied: • Denver Urban Drainage • Southeast Metropolitan Stormwater Authority Zwirlein & Crowley, 2014

13. Draft proposal Structure: • Regional authority • Governed by a board of elected representatives from each participant • Colorado Springs majority • Super-majority vote required for budget decisions • Intergovernmental agreements will form the authority and guide its operations • Funds to be spent within area collected based on a 5-year rolling average • Exceptions: Regional projects and emergency allocations

14. Draft proposal Funding: • Fee based on impervious surface • Taxable and non-taxable organizations included • Commercial, nonprofit and government caps • Funds dedicated to stormwater in 5 categories: capital, O&M, emergency, planning and administration • Funds collected on county property tax bill • Fee for average single-family residence: less than $10/month • Continue authority members’ current stormwater funding

15. Draft proposal Scope: • Fountain Creek Watershed within El Paso County • Project list will include high-priority projects; criteria for determining future projects • Master planning process • Minimal staff and overhead; admin capped at 1% • Use private, local contractors to maximize economic impacts • Hybrid governance structure (see graphic)

16. V o t e r s Co. Springs El Paso County Manitou Springs Fountain Green Mtn. Falls Monument Palmer Lake Technical committee Board Citizens committee Administrator • Billing • Administration (1%) • Planning/studies • Contract services Funding Emergency O&M Admin (1%) Capital projects Planning COS Manitou GrnMtn Falls Monument EPC Ftn P.Lake City County

17. Next steps • Negotiate intergovernmental agreement • Ballot language • Project list • Continue to engage public • Formalize business community support • Measure on November ballot

18. Questions and commentsPikesPeakStormwater.orgPikesPeakStormwater@gmail.com