Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Flood Recovery topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Gila County updates NRCS flood projects as staff explain $18 million recovery bond and regional mitigation offer
Summary
Acting public works director Matt reported NRCS emergency watershed projects are progressing (Russell Gulch ~20% complete, Shooter Canyon ~10%) and finance staff said the county closed on an ~ $18,000,000 bond to fund recovery; Freeport has offered to fund a consultant for a regional flood-mitigation plan with Globe and Miami.
Acting public works director Matt updated the board on emergency watershed projects funded under NRCS emergency declarations and said contractors are progressing on the county's highest-priority sites. "Right now, they're about 20% done with Russell Gulch" and Tiffany Construction is "coming in at a cost of less than" the guaranteed maximum price, he said; Russell Gulch is scheduled for completion July 3 and 6 Shooter Canyon is about 10% complete.
Finance staff then briefed the board on flood-recovery financing. Marin reported the county entered the marketplace on May 14 for a bond "for 18,000,000 and and change" so the county can pay recovery costs without depleting reserves; Marin said the bond structure allows reimbursements from the Department of Emergency and Military Affairs and NRCS to repay the bond sooner than a 10-year amortization and that "the annual debt service on this... are expected to be $2,270,799 in the 1st year post issuance." Supervisors asked for status of borrowing and Marin said the county is currently committed to about $9,000,000 of costs (the 25% local share) and has not yet submitted reimbursement requests.
A separate, related proposal came from Freeport: staff said Freeport offered to fund a consultant and an intergovernmental approach with the Town of Miami and the City of Globe to develop long-term flood-mitigation planning; staff circulated a draft intergovernmental agreement and sought board input before returning with a recommended next step. Several supervisors supported pursuing the collaborative planning because it could improve grant competitiveness.
The board recessed as the Gila County Flood Control District board to discuss whether monetizing the flood control district (levying a secondary property tax) would be appropriate. Staff summarized statutory options and taxable values and noted that a county flood control district may levy a secondary property tax up to $0.50 (50 cents) per $100 of assessed value; supervisors discussed public outreach, rate scenarios and the fact that monetized district revenues could not be used to repay the already-issued bond. No levy or final action was adopted; staff will prepare follow-up materials and potential worksheets for public meetings.
Procedural motions during this item: the board moved to recess as the Board of Supervisors and convene as the Flood Control District Board of Directors and later reconvened as the Board of Supervisors; both motions were approved by voice vote (ayes recorded).
