Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Flood Control topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Supervisors preview new flood control concepts including private‑land projects and gabions
Summary
Cochise County staff and supervisors discussed shifting from concrete channel work to projects aimed at aquifer recharge, including gabion structures, potential work on private land and collaboration with federal land managers.
County supervisors and staff discussed proposed changes to flood control work that officials said would emphasize natural recharge and smaller‑scale infrastructure rather than large concrete monuments.
Chairman Antonori and county staff described concepts staff member Joe and others have been developing, including gabion structures and other measures intended to increase aquifer recharge. Antonori said the county had talked with ranch owners willing to allow county crews on private property or to provide materials, and that the county engineer would provide design specifications so landowners do not build structures that fail to meet county criteria.
Staff noted that some work would be on Bureau of Land Management and U.S. Forest Service lands and that the county has had preliminary contact with Forest Service staff; staff said Siskamani would “hook us up with the Forest Service guys to have that discussion.” The county and supervisors discussed public‑private partnerships and the need to resolve legal, permitting and funding issues before construction.
Supervisors said some local flooding concerns — including a site on 23rd Street that a supervisor said “the problem was created by the county” — will require a separate, longer discussion in a future work or executive session. No contracts or formal approvals were decided at the work session; staff said the concepts are proceeding toward review, potential design work and later project approvals.
Staff also noted constraints on funding sources: federal COVID‑era HEERF money had restrictions that prevented certain work on private land, and the county would explore other budget lines and grant funding to support projects on non‑county land.
The board asked staff to continue discussions with private landowners, Forest Service and BLM, and to bring refined proposals and criteria for any private‑land work back to the board for review.
