• E-mail
• Print
• Comment
• Font Size
• Digg
• del.icio.us
• Discuss article

Grand Forks: Drought Costs Worry Leaders

Posted on: Thursday, 1 December 2005, 15:00 CST

By Tu-Uyen Tran, Grand Forks Herald, N.D.

Dec. 1--Grand Forks city leaders are wringing their hands over the prospect of paying what could be thought of as "drought insurance."

It could cost the city hundreds of thousands a year, or maybe even millions.

"It's a planner's dream and a politician's nightmare," said City Council member Bob Brooks after hearing a briefing at a Wednesday work session. Taxpayers are now paying for a dike project to protect them from flooding, he said, and it would be a hard sell to ask them to pay for protection from drought, too.

"I'm interested in equity for our citizens who are being taxed through the gills right now," said Council President Hal Gershman.

But no one disagrees that a drought is a very real danger.

The Red River Valley goes through wet and dry cycles, and a drought comparable to the one that hit during the Great Depression is likely to happen before 2050, according to a new report by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation.

At the same time, the Lake Agassiz Water Authority, which represents 13 North Dakota counties along the river, is asking Grand Forks to decide to participate in a multi-million dollar project - an estimated $430 million at minimum - to pipe water from the Missouri River to the valley. That's the "drought insurance" that has city leaders worried.

The question is what's the premium.

City staff will be figuring that part out over the next few months.

They'll be calculating how much water the city would need in 2050, according to consultant Steve L. Burian of Advanced Engineering and Environmental Services. Other cities in the valley, including Fargo, will do the same. This will tell the Lake Agassiz group how big a pipeline is needed, which in turn will determine its cost.

The cities then will determine how much they'd pay based on how much they need.

The state likely will be asked to foot a big chunk of the bill as well, but the Lake Agassiz group won't know how much to ask for without a more refined cost estimate.

The part that makes Grand Forks city leaders nervous is the timeframe.

By April, city staff needs to have a preliminary estimate of water needs. That would be refined by June. Then in December, the city would submit a final estimate along with some sort of agreement to participate in the project.

Construction could begin as early as 2009.

Most of the council members present Wednesday saw city participation as almost inevitable. They were troubled over how to keep costs manageable.

Gershman said he would ask the Lake Agassiz group to let Grand Forks defer payment until after taxpayers pay off dike debts.

He and others agreed with administrative coordinator Rick Duquette's advice to speak with their counterparts in Fargo. That city has the biggest population growth trend and would therefore have the biggest needs during a drought. Several council members also said they'd like to see how much the state Legislature could chip in.

Council member Doug Christensen expressed the most skepticism. "I'm a Doubting Thomas," he said. "No matter what happens, the state of North Dakota is not going to let this town drown."

The city ought to figure out the risks first, he said. "Maybe it's a want, not a need."

"Try living without water," council member Dorette Kerian replied.

That's close to what would happen in a major drought.

If a Great Depression-like drought had started this year, the Bureau of Reclamation report said the worst shortage would hit in 2011, with 16 percent of water needs unmet. The worst single month would be February 2012, with 46 percent of needs unmet.

Looking into the 2050s, with the valley population at 479,000 to 566,000, shortages could range from 41 percent to 89 percent of water needs unmet.

The area of study includes the 13 riverside counties in North Dakota and the border cities of East Grand Forks, Moorhead and Breckenridge in Minnesota.

There are seven options on the table to alleviate the future drought, with costs ranging from $430 million to $2.5 billion.

The Lake Agassiz group favors the lowest cost option. Under that option, a pipe about 125 miles long would connect the McClusky Canal, which is linked to the Missouri River via Lake Sakakawea, to Lake Ashtabula, which is linked to the Red River via the Sheyenne River.

Since the Sheyenne meets the Red north of Fargo, other pipelines would bring water to Fargo and farther south to Wahpeton, N.D.

The pipeline option would cost an estimated $3.8 million to $5 million a year to maintain and operate.

To see the Bureau of Reclamation report along with the various water options, go to www.usbr.gov/gp/dkao/. The report is called "Red River Valley Final Report on Water Needs and Options."

-----

To see more of the Grand Forks Herald, or to subscribe to the newspaper, go to http://www.grandforks.com.

Copyright (c) 2005, Grand Forks Herald, N.D.

Distributed by Knight Ridder/Tribune Business News.

For information on republishing this content, contact us at (800) 661-2511 (U.S.), (213) 237-4914 (worldwide), fax (213) 237-6515, or e-mail reprints@krtinfo.com.

Source: Grand Forks Herald (Grand Forks, N.D.)

More News in this Category