Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Sewer Mitigation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Aurora staff ask committee to dissolve long-standing sewer-backup mitigation resolution
Summary
Aurora Water staff asked the Water Policy Committee to dissolve a 1996 sewer-backup mitigation resolution and instead handle claims through the city risk process, proposing owner-occupied limits, increased public education and a capped deductible-assistance program of roughly $500–$2,000.
Marina Lurch, deputy director of field services for Aurora Water, told the Water Policy Committee on Feb. 18 that staff is asking the committee to dissolve a sewer-backup mitigation resolution adopted in 1996 and transition claim handling to the city’s existing risk and potable-water damage processes. "Talking today a little bit about the request to dissolve a sewer mitigation resolution," Lurch said.
The resolution originally set a $10,000 cap and relied on utility crews to perform many restorations; staff said housing and cost changes have made that approach unsustainable. Lurch cited American Water Works Association benchmarking showing utilities of Aurora’s size should expect under 10 sewer-impact events per year and said Aurora historically averages about seven or fewer. "We are usually within 7 and under," she said.
Staff proposed phasing the mitigation resolution out and treating sewer-backup claims like other risk claims: risk staff would review whether the utility had liability and determine any assistance. As part of a phased approach, staff recommended limiting future city assistance to owner-occupied residences rather than rental or commercial properties and developing an education campaign to help homeowners understand insurance coverage and responsibility.
Lurch also described a potential deductible-assistance program to reduce immediate out-of-pocket costs for impacted homeowners, citing a staff range of about $500–$2,000 as a capped city contribution for eligible claims. That figure was presented as an approximate, phased approach rather than a finalized program.
Council members asked questions about large-scale failures elsewhere and city liability. Lurch said the city would review maintenance records and the cause of an event when determining liability and noted that many stoppages are tied to resident-caused items such as grease, wipes or roots. "If we can look back at our records and show that we've recently maintained those areas ... then those are all man-made hazards ... that wouldn't be something that the city would have to manage," she said.
Kirk Scogin, superintendent over sewer maintenance, described routine operations to prevent backups: CCTV inspections, jetting trucks, root saws and cured-in-place lining work. "We primarily use jetting trucks to clean on a regular basis," Scogin said, and staff said the system’s roughly 1,200 miles of pipe are cleaned on an average three-year cadence, with higher-frequency cleaning in older or trouble-prone neighborhoods.
Members expressed concern about fairness when a homeowner is hit by damage caused upstream and questioned the insurance implications for residents who must file claims. Staff emphasized education and outreach—targeting schools and community partners such as Aurora Public Schools and Cherry Creek—to improve homeowner understanding of coverage and responsibilities.
No formal council action was recorded on dissolving the resolution during the meeting; staff presented the request for committee consideration and feedback. Lurch said CWAC had provided initial feedback and that staff would return with further details and recommended language for any policy change.
