Waterline disaster declaration didn’t quite work out for Truth or Consequences

When the city commission declared Truth or Consequences was in a state of disaster at the Nov. 15 meeting, then-Mayor Amanda Forrister and then-Mayor Pro Tem Rolf Hechler said state legislators urged them to declare a disaster. These unnamed legislators also said “it would have to be federal money,” Forrister said, that would fix the city’s disastrous water system.

I emailed state Senator Crystal Diamond-Brandt, state Representative Tara Jaramillo, state Representative Gail Armstrong and U.S. Senator Gabe Vasquez to confirm this information and why they thought this was a viable means for T or C to get state and local money to fix the failing water infrastructure. No response.

The city commission’s Nov. 15 statements implied that the city was going to first get the state to recognize the disaster and then get Governor Lujan Grisham to ask President Biden to sign off on a federal-level disaster declaration, supposedly tapping into many millions of dollars.

I wondered if it would work.

I remembered the Flint, Michigan, lead-in-the-water disaster and the more recent Jackson, Mississippi, main-water-plant failure. My research showed it took two years for FEMA to step in, mostly because the governor held back due to his part in precipitating the disaster.

In both cities the FEMA money was a stop-gap. Other federal agencies later awarded grants to fix their water infrastructure because the media pounded on the fact that majority-Black communities had not gotten their share of state or federal funding in the past.

The lessons of Flint and Jackson: get state and federal attention by declaring a disaster. After media attention demonstrates injustice, get state and federal money to fix the infrastructure.

T or C’s majority population is white, but it is one of the poorest, least educated, least healthy communities in the United States. But the city has applied for and received multi-million-dollar grants from the state and federal government for water and sewer infrastructure projects. It would be hard to demonstrate state and federal neglect.

And before national-media attention, the city had to qualify for state and then federal disaster funding.

Getting disaster funds is hard. The first hoop was getting state emergency funding, which maxes out at $750,000 and requires that the city spent $54,000 or so during the disaster. According to Ryan Williams, Sierra County Emergency Administrator, any city must file within two weeks of the event and then the NMDHSEM will consider costs that contributed to the disaster that occurred 30 days prior to the event. Sometimes money flows forward too, to “mitigate” impending disaster. Williams said a disaster declaration was in place for possible fire damage for the Black Fire.

The second hoop, if the Governor agreed to carry the disaster declaration to the federal level, would require the city to demonstrate it had spent at least $1 million or more during the disaster. There appears to be no FEMA cap to public relief funds, at least no cap was revealed by my research.

The disaster declaration the city commission passed on Nov. 15 was titled “waterline infrastructure failure” and it was extremely broad, perhaps in an effort to maximize disaster relief funds. No start date and no specific event were given.

Among the “whereas” statements were:

–the pipes are over 60 years old and beyond their life expectancy

–2022 stats for waterline breakages (over 400),

–the city is losing revenue because “20 percent” of the water pumped is being lost

–the water in the streets is damaging the streets, telephone poles and private property

–water flooding in the streets was causing “hardship” that threatens the “health, safety, wellbeing and welfare of the citizens and local economy”

–the “local and private resources” available to “mitigate” the “effects of the disaster” have been “insufficient” to make the “needed repairs and protect the public health for water needs”

The New Mexico Department of Homeland Security and Emergency Management team came to assess the damage the week before, City Manager Angela Gonzales said at the Dec. 13 city commission meeting. The NMDHSEM team said the disaster declaration had to specify a date and an event, Gonzales said. She added two whereas paragraphs and asked the city commission to pass the amended disaster resolution. The city commission did pass it. Those paragraphs were:

“Whereas, the Cook Street Booster Station electronic control panel has been problematic for a few weeks prior to the following incident. The water wells had to be shut down to make the necessary repairs. The main electronic motor would not start, and when it finally started to run, a breaker was tripped and the motor caught fire. The motor was replaced with the spare motor, but it also would not start. The problem was in the electric panel, it took extra time to troubleshoot and repair; meanwhile the water levels in the storage tanks went to critical levels.”

“Whereas, if a Fire incident or emergency had occurred, the City did not have the resources necessary to adequately protect the population due to the lack of water in the water tanks.”

Please note that no date is given for the event that precipitated the disaster. During the Nov. 15 city meeting, Water and Wastewater Department Director Arnie Castaneda said the motor failed Nov. 6 and it took four days to fix the electric panel and start the motor to run the water pumps.

Since the Dec. 13 meeting,  I have submitted two Inspection-of-Public-Records-Act requests seeking the NMDHSEM team’s assessment of the city’s disaster damage. “No such documents exist,” was the city’s reply. I have called and emailed an IPRA to NMDHSEM, with no word or acknowledgement.

I emailed City Manager Angela Gonzales and she responded:

Dear Ms. Gonzales, 

Can you tell me what is going on with the city’s disaster declaration? 

Do you know if the city qualified, or is the NMDHSEM still making up its mind? I heard the NMDHSEM team informed the city it did not qualify even before the Dec. 13 meeting when they came to town about a week prior. Is this so? And they just didn’t put this “assessment” in a letter or email?  

Kathleen Sloan

Sierra County Citizen

Ms. Sloan,

The motor has been working since the incident in November so there has been no need for the disaster declaration to be put into effect.  The Board of Commissioners passed in preparation of the motor not working so that we could call in water trucks and other resources needed for the citizens.  Because the declaration was already in place the response should be quicker.  The motor in question is part of the USDA waterline replacement and has been back ordered in the supply chain mess until July.  Due to it being part of the grant program it doesn’t qualify for reimbursement, but a second motor could as mitigation planning purposes.

The NMDHSEM team was interested in coming to our community, observing and educating all of us in what we have been working with over the last few years.  Ryan Williams Sierra County EM and I thought it would be a great opportunity to meet and discuss the potential impact of a water emergency so that our community is prepared in case of a water supply emergency.  It was for my education purposes.  I am just trying to get ideas and my plans in place so if/when something happens, we can have an organized prepared response and, in my opinion, if the State personnel and the FEMA personnel wanted to come see us, they are and will always be welcome.

Sincerely 

Angie 

Ms. Gonzales, 

But when a city declares an emergency or disaster, it kicks off a prescribed response. NMDHSEM sends a team to assess the damage of the event and to determine if the city meets the $54,000 (or thereabouts) threshold (city must have spent that much to qualify for up to $750,000 from the state.) 

The city either qualifies, or it doesn’t. It’s not a training experience. 

And one cannot leave a disaster declaration in place or in abeyance. It must be filed within 15 days of the event and damage done 30 days prior to the event may qualify. 

 Did they look at anything besides the pump? What about the electric panel? Did the costs to repair it qualify for possible funding? 

I am glad my question of whether the pump was part of the downtown water project has been answered. Can you explain why a different supplier has not been sought? Why are we waiting a year? 

Kathleen

Ms. Sloan,

Justin Armijo and Jamie Foreman led the team to the pump station, and they were able to look at whatever they wanted.  The electric panel is part of the same grant funding as the pump replacement.  

Other suppliers have been inquired about the needed parts and everything falls under the same supply chain problems being felt across the country.

Sincerely 

Angie 

Given that NMDHSEM made the city change its original declaration to nail a specific event, and considering that the NMDHSEM team knew the city had received a federal grant (USDA) for the downtown water project and that included electric and pump and motor upgrades to Cook Street Station, it is unlikely the state will recognize T or C is in a state of disaster.

County Emergency Services Administrator Ryan Williams said that it is a very good thing that NMDHSEM came to town and were informed of the city’s water-system failures and problems. If the city seeks emergency funding in the future, Williams said, it will go more smoothly because the department now knows of the very poor condition of the city’s water infrastructure.

Mayor Rolf Hechler said, at the Jan. 3 city commission meeting, that when city commissioners go to Santa Fe during this legislative session to speak with our legislators, “we still have the disaster declaration,” implying it will be used as a lobbying talking point for more funds.

Maybe the next disaster declaration will result in state and then federal disaster recognition and then media attention and then more state and federal grants to fix the city’s water infrastructure. It appears this first attempt was stymied at the first hoop.