Here we go again: another $9.9 million water project hits the capital-project pipeline and the city commission asks nary a question

At the Sept. 13 Truth or Consequences City Commission meeting, right after commissioners peppered representatives from the Office of the State Engineer with astute questions for evidence-based information on the closure of the hot springs basin, commissioners reverted to type—cheerleaders on the sidelines.

After holding a public hearing in which nobody spoke, city commissioners praised Assistant City Manager Traci Alvarez for applying for a $9.9-million grant for a water project and then rubber-stamped the application’s submission unanimously, even though no such application was in the city packet.

I fear for city tax- and utility-rate payers. Millions of dollars in public money is being spent without much explanation or accountability.

Because I forced my way into the meeting state legislators had with local officials last January, I learned the City of T or C needs $20 million for “emergency” water repairs and $1.5 million in “emergency” wastewater repairs, as stated by then-City Manager Bruce Swingle. These emergency repairs have never been brought up or explained in city meetings.

I did an Inspection of Public Records Act request for engineering studies or documents bearing out the need for such repairs. For the water emergency I was referred to a sprawling 2021 Wilson & Company engineering report authored by Mark Nasi that had about 12 “alternatives,” or projects, each with a different price tag, none of them $20 million and none described as an emergency. The study used information from a 2014 engineering report by Smith & Company, 2018 census data, and other out-of-date information. For the wastewater emergency, I was told no such documents existed to qualify the $1.5-million legislative request.

I think, but I am not sure, that the $9.9-million grant application is supposed to address part of the $20-million emergency, because it is based on engineering by Nasi.

To give rate- and tax-payers some context, water rates have gone up 70 percent in four years. Wastewater and trash rates have gone up about 25 percent. The city commission is eyeing a major increase in electric rates too. Property tax rates have more than doubled to finance general obligation bonds. Why trash rates keep going up, no one will say, although I have asked repeatedly over the last four years, but the other increases are to pay for capital projects. Capital projects have ballooned from about $11 million a year four years ago to $31 million and counting in this year’s budget, while the city’s operating budget has shrunk from $24 million to about $21 million over the same time period.

Poor city management has wrought critically failing water, wastewater and electric infrastructures that must be fixed in a hurry. But who is at the wheel during these dire times?

It’s not the city commission. They have not discussed capital projects for the last five budgets and have rubberstamped the yearly update of the five-year Infrastructure Capital Improvements Plan.

The $9.9 million grant application is typical of how the public becomes burdened with multi-million-dollar projects.

A public hearing on the grant application was put on the agenda, but the public never shows up because there is too little in the city packet for them to figure out what is going on. In this case, there was no grant application and no engineering report explaining the project, let alone a live engineer explaining it to the public in layman’s terms or why he was hired to do a study and who defined the scope of work. Who is defining what infrastructure problems need to be addressed and in what order?

The packet included a brief memo from Alvarez that says the $9.9 million grant application is to be submitted to the “USDA/RUS,” and it will request that 75 percent be grant and 25 percent be city match. Alvarez wrote that the project will address “extensive leaks and pipe breaks” in the “East and Williamsburg areas,” as well as addressing pressure problems.

One mile of “open trench” will be dug along East Riverside Drive to replace six-inch with eight-inch pipe, Alvarez states. In addition, an 8,726-foot loop will be created under Iron Street, Veater Street, Platinum Street and South Broadway.

The city packet also included an August 16 “letter” from Nasi to “U.S. Department of Agriculture—Rural Development Community Programs Loan Specialist Elizabeth YBarra.” The letter “will constitute as an amendment” Nasi wrote, to his November 2021 engineering report titled, “Water System Performance Improvements 2.”

Alvarez’ memo informs us “WSPI2” is on the city’s website.

I studied Nasi’s amending letter and then went to the “WSPI2” study and tried to figure out what was being amended and why and why this is the next priority in our current water crisis.

The letter states the amendments are recommended “by the engineer,” Nasi wrote, (referring to himself!) “and approved by the city.” I sure would like to know who at the city is hiring Nasi and approving his work and how much the people pay for such work.

Nasi’s letter/amendment removes 618 feet of pipe replacement along South Pershing that was to replace four-inch with eight-inch pipe, 649 feet of pipe replacement along East Riverside Drive from Cherry to Arrowhead and five service connections and putting in a new well at the top of a mesa next to a water tank on Cemetery Road.

Nasi adds to the project the replacement of 675 feet of six-inch pipe with eight-inch pipe on East Riverside Drive from Ash to Cedar Street.

There is no explanation about why certain repairs are dropped or added.

I am concerned that this new project does not include repairs to the Cook Street Station that were cut out of the $9.7-million downtown water project.

Wilson & Company also engineered that project. Covid hit and it was wildly under-estimated, but still, it was repriced and cut down at least four times, which was only vaguely alluded to during city meetings, verbally and never in written reports.

Swingle said Nasi’s September 2021 “City-wide Water System Improvements Preliminary Engineering Report,” would be “the city’s bible” in attacking water system repairs, so I paid attention when it came out. This study has a lot of overlap, direct copy-and-paste repetition with two other Nasi studies. The February 2021 “Water System Performance Improvements I” study predates the September 2021 study. The November 2021 “Water System Performance Improvements II” study was written a month later. I didn’t do a word-by-word comparison, but the three studies don’t differ much and the need to label them as distinct studies is not explained.

What is clear is that Nasi thinks the city’s biggest priority should be to address pressure problems first. Making the pipes bigger will alleviate some of the pressure problems, but Nasi emphasized that the Williamsburg area has a lot of breaks because the water tank at Cook Street is too small, so the pumps have to be started and stopped while the water is chlorinated in that tank and then moved on down the line. Previous-Water and Wastewater Director Jesse Coleman said massive increases in pressure from this starting and stopping of the pumps at Cook Street caused even newly replaced pipes to break. So why are pipes being replaced in the Williamsburg area first?

This is, of course, my pin-headed view, that can only be superficial since nothing is discussed or explained.

I emailed City Manager Angela Gonzales and Mayor Amanda Forrister, Mayor Pro Tem Rolf Hechler, City Commissioner Merry Jo Fahl, City Commissioner Shelly Harrelson and City Commissioner Destiny Mitchell early yesterday morning and asked who ordered the engineering studies from Nasi, who set their scope of work, who ordered the amendments, who sets priorities, why nothing is explained and why the Cook Street tank and pumps aren’t being fixed as a priority. I received no response by press time and I won’t hold my breath.