Gila County outlines $19 million NRCS restoration package, warns of multi‑million dollar county share and urgent testing deadlines

Gila County supervisors spent most of their Dec. 16 meeting reviewing storm damage from September and October and the county’s fast‑moving recovery plan.

Public Works Director Christine Smith and Emergency Manager Carl Medford told the board the initial response prioritized search‑and‑rescue, damage assessment and documentation to preserve reimbursement eligibility. "If we didn't document it, it didn't happen," Medford said, describing mutual‑aid teams and Disaster Assistance Centers set up to coordinate volunteers and resources.

Staff outlined a two‑track recovery strategy: accelerate projects eligible for the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s NRCS Emergency Watershed Protection (EWP) program and pursue DEMA/FEMA funding for debris removal and emergency protective measures. JE Fuller was awarded an engineering contract to finalize conceptual designs and cost estimates the county must submit to NRCS by Jan. 8, staff said.

The county presented preliminary figures that staff characterized as a "sanity check": about $19 million in green‑priority NRCS projects, with a county 25% share estimated at $4.7 million and an NRCS reimbursement portion near $14.2 million. A separate DEMA/FEMA category was shown at roughly $5.5 million; if that portion were funded under a full federal declaration the county’s legally required share would fall to 10 percent. Staff warned that county cash outlays while awaiting reimbursements could reach multimillion‑dollar levels and described differing payment timelines: NRCS pays on an expedited, invoice basis, while DEMA/FEMA reimbursements can lag.

Sediment handling and testing remain critical bottlenecks. Staff reported multiple sediment and household‑debris piles: about 14,000 cubic yards at one landfill‑adjacent stockpile and an estimated 600 tons of household debris. Before material can move to Forest Service pits or landfills, sampling is required for heavy metals, hydrocarbons, volatiles, asbestos and E. coli. Staff presented a scope of work from Safeware Inc. to perform sampling, testing, chain‑of‑custody documentation and monitoring; testing turnaround is estimated at two to three weeks, and county staff said they have set a vendor target to complete enablement work by March 28.

"We are sediment rich," one staff member said, noting both an immediate need to move existing piles out of high‑risk areas and a longer‑term requirement to identify permanent deposition sites to avoid repeat handling and contamination that would threaten reimbursement eligibility.

Board members pressed for options to limit the county’s exposure: scale projects, pursue financing, use flood‑district mechanisms, or seek state legislative appropriations. County staff confirmed Representative Marshall has introduced a bill requesting up to $25 million in direct assistance for Gila County and municipalities; supervisors asked staff to pursue financing scenarios and to develop a work session focused on longer‑term regional drainage solutions and sediment retention measures.

Procurement and schedule constraints were also prominent. Staff recommended a construction manager‑at‑risk (CMAR) approach and an abbreviated RFQ to have a contractor engaged early so work can start as designs are finalized. The county plans to advertise the RFQ in late December with statements of qualifications due in January and to hold weekly coordination meetings with JE Fuller and partners so projects can meet NRCS/DEMA deadlines.

Next steps: staff will submit NRCS conceptual designs and cost estimates by Jan. 8, finalize Safeware’s scope for sampling and testing, pursue Forest Service agreements for Kelner and Castle Dome pits where feasible, and return to the board with financing options and legal guidance about federal/deed restrictions where applicable.