Lower Ark Swears in Directors & Elects Officers
- Anne Boswell Taylor
- 2 minutes ago
- 5 min read
By Norman Kincaide
Lower Arkansas Water Conservancy District came to order a little past 10:30 A.M. for its first board meeting of the year, January 21, 2026. A quorum was established. The first order of business was to have a new director, Nick Rusler, as well as Lyden Gill, sworn in with the oath of office. Upon swearing in, the board of directors elected officers: LeRoy Mauch, President, Lyden Gill, Vice President, Melissa Esquibel, Secretary, and Jared Gardner, Treasurer. The board recessed to the Enterprise meeting to approve routine items, which were moved, seconded and passed. The Enterprise meeting adjourned and the regular board meeting reconvened. Visitors were introduced and routine items moved, seconded and approved. There were no committee or legal reports.
Under General Manager’s Reports the first was a presentation on Population Estimates and Forecasts by Nancy Gedeon, Estimates Demographer, via zoom, American Institute of Certified Planners (AICP) Demographer, Colorado State Demography Office, titled: Demographic Trends for Lower Arkansas Valley. Three major trends emerged from this study: lower fertility rates (fewer births), aging=more deaths, leading to slower population growth, with net migration being a key to population growth. A series of slides illustrated changes in population growth. From 2010 to 2020, 95% of growth was in the front range. From 2020 to 2024, 89% of growth was in the same region. Population change from 1970 to 2020 illustrated moderate growth and fluctuation of natural growth (births), with births peaking in 2007. Net migration showed a more volatile fluctuation, with negative migration from 1985 through 1990. Net migration peaked around 2000, then fluctuated downward to a low in 2021, then rose again.
The five county Lower Arkansas District population change from 1970 to 2024 illustrated a much more volatile change in both natural and migration population increase or decline. Natural (birth) growth gradually declined, reaching very low births between 2010 and 2015. From 2016 on, deaths out numbered births, in particular during the Covid 19 Pandemic. Net migration fluctuated wildly. Major negative migration occurred from 1970 until 1993. From 1994 to 2010, all but one year illustrated positive migration into the region. Negative migration occurred from 2011 to 2014, when positive migration has been the trend. The fastest growing segment of the five-county district and across Colorado is above age 65. Deaths state wide will outpace births around 2050. In the five-county district, deaths peaked during Covid 19, with deaths exceeding births in 2020, with deaths continuing to exceed births by a wide margin up to 2060. Net migration fluctuated wildly for the five counties from 1990 to 2024, but will continue through 2060, dependent upon economic conditions.
Projections for Otero, Prowers, Bent and Crowley Counties illustrated as steady decline for Otero and Prowers out to 2060. While Bent and Crowley remained stable because of the incarcerated population in those counties. A ten-year population growth projection from 2024 to 2034 indicates that most growth will be in the front range with other counties varying from decline to increases. The eastern plains show a decline in population that illustrates a long historical trend. The 2007-2008 recession showed a decline in births because of economic uncertainty. The Covid 19 Pandemic demonstrated the same decline because of the economic dislocation that occurred. Births showed an increase and are recovering from the uncertainty of the pandemic years. The major question was how do these projections impact water usage in the future.
Cherish Deeg, Pueblo Urban Renewal Authority, Interim Executive Director, introduced a presentation for the Colorado State University, Pueblo, Urban Renewal Authority, Campus Development Renewal Plan. This plan would create a “Campus Town,” a mixed-use commercial, residential corner anchor. This would include a corner market, welcome center and book store, restaurant pad site, fast food pad site, hotel, apartments, town homes and single-family homes. This would involve a new round about, cul-de-sac at campus entry, Desert Flower Blvd. extension, Central Green Beer Garden and single-family lots. The property involved in this project is already owned by the university. This project envisions 60 single family homes, 60 townhomes, 224 apartments, 115 room hotel, 57,000 square feet of commercial space. The total estimated value of these improvements by the Pueblo County Assessors office would be $7,487,000. The total infrastructure cost would be $8 million. A finance strategy included: Metro District Property Tax, Urban Renewal Authority, Property Tax Increment Financing and Sales Tax and Lodging Tax Public Improvement Fees, and Bonds. This plan would generate 818 new residents, this forecast was considered a low impact on the Lower Arkansas Valley Water Conservancy District. One issue that was not raised by this plan was the presence of bentonite clay in the soil, which caused construction and foundation problems in Belmont section of Pueblo as well as the original structures of then, Southern Colorado State College.
Mike Holmberg, United States Bureau of Reclamation, gave a presentation on sedimentation in the Pueblo Reservoir: Arkansas River Compact Administration 2025 Bureau of Reclamation Engineering Committee Update. Pueblo Reservoir Joint Use Pool and Spill Priorities are as follows, Pueblo Reservoir was constructed to hold Frying Pan-Arkansas Project Water, if Pueblo Reservoir is above top of active conservation on April 15, excess capacity water must be released as per spill priorities until the reservoir is below that level. Water is released on pro rata based on water stored the reservoir at the time, not on excess capacity space purchased. Spill priorities under Article 13 of Southeast Colorado Water Conservancy District (SECWCD): “Whenever water is evacuated from Pueblo, Twin Lakes, and Turquoise Reservoirs to meet the necessities of Project flood control, generation purposes, storage of trans-mountain Project water, or native Project water, and operational requirements; except as provided in Subarticle 13(b) below, the water evacuated shall be charged in the following manner.”
Against water stored under contracts for if-and-when available storage space for entities which will use the water outside the District boundaries; for entities using the water within the District boundaries; any winter storage water above 70,000 acre feet; water stored under contracts with municipal entities within the boundaries of the District, which water is neither project water nor return flow water from Project water, which is limited to 163,100 acre feet, less any water purchased and stored by municipal users. This evacuation shall be charged pro rata against all water stored such like contracts at the time of evacuation. And last, against winter storage water not in excess of 70,000 acre feet.
A slide illustrated the Pueblo Reservoir capacity at the beginning of storage, which was January 9, 1974, at capacity then was 489,628 acre feet, at the top of Surcharge. Surveys following in 1993 showed capacity at 481,444 acre feet, 2012, 469,87 acre feet, 2023, 464,164 acre feet. This represents a total loss of 25,464 acre feet or 5.2% of total capacity of storage at top of surcharge. The Water Year 2026 outlook, currently the Pueblo Reservoir is at 106% of average; 91% of storage at this time in 2025. At this time, an account spill from the reservoir is possible, but not likely. A plan is in place to new area, capacity and elevation tables and allocation pool volumes will start as Water Year 2027. Sedimentation will not affect contracted storage capacity.
One resolution was passed, Resolution 2026-01, to amend the Jordan Conservation Easement to exclude a parcel that was never under irrigation. Meeting was adjourned following the resolution vote.
###