Jerry Forte

Former Mayor Lionel Rivera took a swipe at Colorado Springs Utilities CEO Jerry Forte in an email to the City Council.

Rivera advised the council, which doubles as the Utilities Board, to hold Forte accountable if he wasn’t giving them the information they needed or in the detail they required.

During a phone interview, I asked Rivera to elaborate.

“When I chaired the board … we didn’t always get the information as timely as we would have liked nor in as much detail or the question answered directly as we wanted. On occasion, we would just have to say, ‘Nope, you’re not getting us what we need. Go back. Do it again. We’ll talk about this next month.’

“Maybe (Forte) misunderstood what we were asking.”

Lionel Rivera

Things are heating up over a decision to move full steam ahead with plans to install scrubber technology at the Martin Drake Power Plant downtown.

On Sunday night, former Mayor Lionel Rivera sent the City Council an email disputing statements made by City Councilman Tim Leigh about the history of the Neumann Systems Group emissions control technology.

Here is the full, unedited text of Rivera’s email to council:

Esteemed Council Members,

I write you today to give you the facts regarding the previous City Council’s decision to move forward on the Neumann Systems Group scrubber technology for the reduction of SOx and the decision not to provide funding for vigorous testing of NOx and CO2 reduction. I will also address directly Council Member Leigh’s contrived information from an unnamed source. I was there at the time and have a clear recollection of what occurred.

Council Member Leigh states the following in a newsletter he publishes;

• I was told Drew Rankin brought Neumann forward “as someone with new technology that could save CSU millions in compliance costs by solving the 3-fold emissions problem generated by Nitrogen Dioxide, Sulfur Dioxide and Carbon Dioxide (SOX, NOX, CO2).”

The Neumann scrubber technology was brought to the previous board as a possible alternative to conventional scrubber technology that would need to be installed at Drake to lower emissions of SOx  and possibly NOx in order to comply with new EPA regional haze standards in the Rocky Mountain region of the United States. While the technology may also have had the potential to scrub CO2, it was not a consideration for full testing and evaluation unless Congress changed the law or the EPA promulgated a rule to limit CO2 emissions. Congress could never get a simple majority in the Senate to change the law and the EPA did not promulgate rules requiring our power plants to reduce CO2.

As briefed by CSU staff, the technology had the potential to accomplish the scrubbing with lower upfront capital cost, lower ongoing operational cost, and a much smaller footprint. Both Drew Rankin and Tom Black were excited about the potential for this technology.

A second quote from Council Member Leigh;

• Neumann’s scrubber’s original intent was grande and its promise bold.  Imagine a 3-fold solution to environmental regulation compliance at a discount.  Unfortunately, something happened on the way to the Forum.

As I stated in the previous paragraph, the board was not looking for a three fold solution, but a solution to meet the future regional haze standard with the best value, reliable technology in order to save rate payers the sizeable rate increases needed to pay for conventional scrubber technology.

A third quote from Council Member Leigh;

• I was told that while the idea worked in the lab, it failed in field testing.  Yes, it solved the SOX problem but it did not solve the other 2 problems.  Based on those tests Rankin (the father of the original conversation) recommended killing-the-baby.  Apparently, at the time there were 48 other existing technologies that solved the SOX problem with less capital cost.

As briefed to us by CSU staff, the Neumann scrubber technology met our testing requirements in all phases of testing. Funding of full scale commercial testing of NOx and CO2 emission reduction was never a proposed by staff nor would it have been approved by the board since Nixon and Drake met the proposed NOx regional haze standard with their current technology and there was no CO2 standard to mitigate.

Niether Drew Rankin nor other members of CSU staff never recommended to kill the Neumann SOx scrubber nor are there 48 other existing technologies that solved the SOx problem with less capital costs. To the contrary, CSU staff worked with the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment to allow them to complete the 20MW test of the Neumann scrubber system so it could be used on Drake and Nixon if successful. Below is an excerpt from the Colorado Regional Haze State Implementation Plan dated January 2011 http://www.cdphe.state.co.us/ap/regionalhaze.html Appendix C, Drake Power Plant

Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment – Air Pollution Control Division

The Division conducted site visits and determined:

• Unit 5

o CSU determined dry FGD controls are technically feasible although available

physical space was severely constrained and some demolition and site reconfiguration

would be required; the Division conducted a site visit and determined that dry FGD

controls were not appropriate considering the space constraints, shown in Figure 1

and Figure 2. Therefore control effectiveness and impacts for dry FGD are not

evaluated in this analysis.

o Traditional wet FGD controls are possible considering that there is adequate space

near the baghouse to allow for the installation of controls, but is being eliminated

based on other considerations within the five factors (i.e. energy and non-air quality

impacts). Refer to the energy and non-air quality impact section for the Division

review regarding wet FGD controls for Unit 5.

 • Units 6 and 7

o Dry FGD controls are technically feasible for Units 6 and 7.

o Traditional wet FGD controls are possible considering that there is adequate space

near the baghouse to allow for the installation of controls, but is being eliminated

based on other considerations within the five factors (i.e. energy and non-air quality

impacts). Refer to the energy and non-air quality impact section for the Division

review regarding wet FGD controls for Units 6 and 7.

It is worth noting that CSU-Drake is currently testing a new, innovative non-traditional wet scrubber control system that appears to be as effective, if not more effective, at controlling SO2 emissions with much less pressure drop (less parasitic load from increased fan demands) and requires a much smaller operational foot print area in comparison to traditional wet scrubbing. The pilot-scale wet scrubber control system, called the NeuStream-S FGD process, is presently being tested on a 20 MW flue gas stream. CSU anticipates scaling the non-traditional wet scrubber control to full scale pending successful outcome of the current testing. This new wet scrubber technology uses a unique contacting vessel that makes it different from traditional wet scrubbers. It affords a higher liquid to gas contact ratio and so uses much less water / has lower

pressure drop. It also uses a dual alkali system that is somewhat unique when compared to most traditional wet scrubbers. In comparison to traditional wet and LSD scrubbers, this new technology will have smaller water and energy requirements. There are several non-air quality aspects of the NeuStream-S process that compare favorably to traditional scrubbers, described in Step 4. Regarding the applicability of the NeuStream process to Drake Unit 5, the Division notes that this technology is not commercially available at this time. CSU has not determined if this technology is feasible for this smaller unit. However, the Division will re-assess this technology in the next Regional Haze planning period.

Although the technology being tested by CSU does not technically meet the definition of

“available” as set forth in the BART rules, the Division is willing to allow CSU the opportunity to prove the technology and if successful, the opportunity to install the NeuStream-S FGD scrubber. This process will be required to meet the emission limits established for the LSD technology established in this BART determination. Regardless of the technology utilized, Drake has to meet the LSD-based BART limits within 5 years of EPA approval of the BART SIP. CSU will test the NeuStream system until December 2011, and at that time, determine the control technology that will be used to comply with the specified SO2 BART limits for Units 6 and 7.

You will also find this language in the Nixon power plant appendix.

And finally from Mr. Leigh;

Then politics entered the arena when Lionel Rivera pushed for a continuation of the project, expressing emotion over empiricism and reason, on the high notion that if the scrubbers worked, (even, if only at the SOX level), CSU should continue making an investment (venture capital funding), “go into business” with Neumann, sell the work-product, create jobs and experience a windfall.  And while that sounds just great, there is seems to be a problem.  .  . we don’t have any customers.  So the story morphed from “being a job generation machine” to being a “mere compliance mechanism.”

As I stated before, the goal of the Board and CSU staff was to meet the new regional haze standard with the most cost efficient reliable technology. The NeuStream process met that criteria empirically as briefed to us by CSU staff. I was and still am a supporter of the NeuStream system. I spoke highly of what we were doing at CSU with my fellow Mayors at the US Conference of Mayors Energy Committee meetings.

CSU staff had already developed a revenue sharing concept with Dr. Neumann when the technology was introduced to us and the board supported the concept. If the technology becomes commercially viable outside of CSU there will be some revenue sharing with CSU and it should help mitigate future electric rate increases and create a primary manufacturing employer in Colorado Springs.

At the time we made the decision to move forward with the NeuStream process the idea of decommissioning Drake was never on the table. The cost to decommission, reclaim the site, and acquire more electric power from Front Range and/or the spot market or longer term contracts made that decision extremely expensive and would have required much larger rate increases than investing in new scrubber technology. I would imagine that from a cost standpoint it is still better for rate payers to keep Drake. From what I read in the Gazette it appears the conversation has turned more political and aesthetic and is less about what the cost is to rate payers. I support your last decision to move forward with the NeuStream System. If you choose to study it more, CSU has the capabilities to give you the estimates you need for decommissioning cost and reclamation of the site, and they are the experts for projecting future electric costs without a Drake power plant. I hope you don’t spend $500,000 for information CSU staff should be providing to you.

If you’re not getting the information you need in a timely fashion and the detail you require then hold the CEO accountable. We had the same challenge when I chaired the board. It will take more of your time to get the detail you need and dig into it, but we the rate payers need that kind of leadership to protect our interests.

Council Member Leigh please disclose who are the “folks who were present at the time” who gave you your misguided information. You owe it to your colleagues so they can verify your version of history.

Good luck in your deliberations.

Lionel Rivera

Photo by Daniel J. Chacón

Former Mayor Lionel Rivera says the city has “plenty of options” to fund stormwater, which the city has largely put off since the City Council put a bullet between the eyes of the Stormwater Enterprise.

But one of the options suggested by Rivera — a tax increase — probably won’t see the light of day.

That’s because Mayor Steve Bach signed a no-tax pledge before he was elected.

Bach has sounded the alarm on the city’s half-billion-dollar stormwater needs and wants the City Council to look for inefficiencies at Colorado Springs Utilities to help pay for them.

Stormwater is responsibility of the city government that’s placed under the authority of the mayor.

“There are plenty of options, but difficult ones if you pledged not to support a tax increase,” Rivera said in an email.

Of all the City Council members who ran for office last year, only Councilwoman Angela Dougan signed the pledge, which was issued by the Colorado chapter of Americans for Prosperity.

The previous council eliminated the Stormwater Enterprise in December 2009 following the passage of ballot Issue 300. The vote was 5-4. Rivera was among the four council members who opposed eliminating the enterprise.

Here is the full text of Rivera’s email, with a few minor edits:

The mayor, with the support of City Council, can put a stormwater department in place with a similar fee as the enterprise and accomplish it through the legislative process. It wouldn’t be an enterprise, but it would subject to TABOR.

He could ask the City Council to develop a rate structure through (Colorado Springs Utilities) to support paying  for stormwater infrastructure. Even if there are cost savings that could pay for stormwater, he would have to advocate using the cost savings verses reducing rates.

If a small mill levy is the answer, then he would have to advocate for a tax increase.

The only way to get this done without a fee or tax increase is to grow municipal revenues or create efficiencies of $16 million annually in the municipal budget. I use $16 million because that is what the SWE fee generated.

If City Council can squeeze some savings from CSU and agree to cover some of the costs, then they would need to have a rate hearing to create the tariffs to justify and use the funds. The public would probably view this as a rate increase.

There are plenty of options, but difficult ones if you pledged not to support a tax increase.

Last month, Mayor Steve Bach told reporters he had “all kinds of discussions all the time” with people who don’t want their names out in public.

He was right.

According to the mayor’s 2012 calendar, about 61 percent of Bach’s meetings are held under a shroud of secrecy.

On Feb. 10, The Gazette requested the mayor’s calendar and/or appointment book for January and February of this year.

The mayor’s Communications Office complied with the open-records request and submitted a response three days later as required by Colorado law.

The office provided Bach’s calendar for January and through Feb. 13.

The calendar shows that Bach had about 132 meetings during that time period.

Of those, about 80 — or 60.6 percent — were with people whose names the Bach administration is hiding.

The analysis included both face-to-face and phone meetings.

In instances where the calendar lists the entry as “Mtgs” or “Phone Mtgs,” two meetings were counted as part of the analysis.

But it’s impossible to tell whether there were more than two meetings during a particular time slot because the calendar doesn’t specify the number.

The analysis did not include meetings of the City Council or the Mayor’s Counsel, which are both posted and open to the public.

Highlights of the mayor’s calendar during the Jan. 1-Feb.13 time period:

Bach has had eight meetings each with Chief of Staff Laura Neumann, City Attorney Chris Melcher and Steve Cox, chief of economic vitality and innovation.

Bach has had seven meetings each with Chief Communications Officer Cindy Aubrey and Donna Nelson, economic vitality and innovation specialist.

He has has two meetings with police Chief Pete Carey and one with fire Chief Rich Brown.

He has had three meetings with his assistant, Brenda Bonn.

He met with former Mayor Lionel Rivera on Jan. 9.

The mayor has had at least five meetings with a “primary employer.” However, the calendar keeps the employer’s identity a secret.

When questioned last month about his calendar,  Bach — who promised transparency when he was running for office — said the city was complying with the open-records law and that if someone saw otherwise, “engage legal counsel and come after us.”

To watch video of the mayor’s remarks, click here. The discussion starts about 6 minutes and 30 seconds into the video.

The city is providing the media “what we think is appropriate in the way of my public meetings,” Bach said last month.

“That’s just the way it is, and I’m sorry that doesn’t satisfy you,” he said.

Councilman Tim Leigh

City Councilman Tim Leigh said he stands by his belief that eleventh-hour citizen comments on the 2012 budget serve little value.

“By this time in the budget process, any changes brought by special pleading by special interests should not be seriously considered,” Leigh wrote Tuesday in a special edition of his electronic newsletter.

Leigh issued the special edition after he was criticized by former Mayor Lionel Rivera for saying that a hearing Thursday to solicit public input on the budget was a waste of time. Rivera said Leigh was making a “mockery” out of his job as a councilman.

Leigh said Rivera was speaking out of context because he didn’t know that he’s planning regular town hall meetings to solicit public input going forward.

“I would accept the former mayor’s apology,” Leigh wrote.

In a brief telephone interview, Rivera said he had already expressed his opinion.

“I made my opinion known, and I’ll leave it at that,” Rivera said.

Here’s the full text of the message that Leigh sent Tuesday morning:

Pay attention.  Be informed.  Make a difference.  Keep it real.

As the fetching Mrs. Leigh retrieved Tolstoy from the front lawn this morning, (narrowly avoiding a sever back strain (sheer volume and weight)), she noticed “looks like you’re in the paper again”.  .  .  Daniel – you little rascal.

I stand by what I said.  Here’s what I said:

The broad majority of the citizens should be insulted that a small, shrill minority can change a well-planned budget crafted by professionals who have the full complement of context to balance cause and effect.

I did not insult anyone.  That’s merely the former mayor’s inference.  The former mayor’s no longer “in office” and therefore not fully engaged in the community conversation except from the 3^rd row.  He’s not aware of the program I’ve been working on for months, where we’d host regular town hall meetings enabling every citizen to become engaged in policy conversations early enough in the game so their input would have value and impact.  I would accept the former mayor’s apology.

We need to raise the budgeting process conversation to an adult level where we actually plan our finances and live within our means.  We need to quit “doing it the way we’ve always done it”.

Once we can prove that we can live within our means, we can think about rebuilding our base with appropriate investments in infrastructure and personnel.

Here’s an idea – folks who can be so easily swayed on large issues because of “politics of the day” should consider an alternative career path.

Agree or disagree – become part of the conversation.

(not the actual bus)

Call it the SDS Express.

A city-owned bus is transporting former Mayor Lionel Rivera, City Council President Scott Hente, Colorado Springs Utilities CEO Jerry Forte and other city officials and Utilities employees Friday to the Pueblo Dam for a celebration commemorating the start of major construction on the 62-mile Southern Delivery System water pipeline.

“This is a more efficient way to transport the group than individual cars,” SDS spokeswoman Janet Rummel said in an email. “Those riding the bus will participate in a tour of construction at the dam prior to the event.”

Mayor Steve Bach is scheduled to attend Friday’s event, but he’s not going by bus, according the passenger list.

Rummel said such bus transportation “has been done for similar events that many Council members have attended in the past.”

Colorado Springs ratepayers will apparently foot the bill.

“I have been told that the bus gets 6 miles per gallon and the cost of the fuel per gallon is $2.56,” she wrote. “For the roundtrip, we estimate the cost of fuel to be just under $40. The City also has designated a City employee to drive the bus that morning instead of their normal dispatch duties.”

The bus is fueled from a city fuel station, Rummel said.

“Our understanding is that the driver was already scheduled to work that morning. We will work with the City to reimburse them for their costs,” she said.

Here’s the passenger list:

Council members riding the bus:
Scott Hente
Merv Bennett and his wife
Brandy Williams
Val Snider
Jan Martin
Tim Leigh (tentative)

Staff riding the bus:
Steve Cox
Jerry Forte
Gary Bostrom
John Fredell
Ken Burgess
Sherri Newell
Dave Padgett
Bill Cherrier
Bruce McCormick
Janet Rummel

In addition, former Mayor Lionel Rivera and Vice Mayor Larry Small will be riding the bus.

Colorado Springs Utilities is commemorating the start of major construction on the Southern Delivery System with an invitation-only celebration Friday at Pueblo Dam.

SDS is a 62-mile pipeline designed to pump water uphill from Pueblo Dam to Colorado Springs. The project, which will cost ratepayers $2.3 billion in construction and financing costs, will serve Colorado Springs residents for decades to come. The pipeline, which will also serve the neighboring communities of Fountain, Pueblo West and Security, will deliver up to 96 million gallons of water a day at full capacity.

“It’s one of the largest water projects to be built in the state of Colorado in quite a few years and it may be one of the last, so it’s pretty significant that we finally have construction under way,” SDS spokeswoman Janet Rummel said Wednesday.

Friday’s celebration will include multiple speakers, including Colorado Springs Mayor Steve Bach, former Colorado Springs Mayor Lionel Rivera, Fountain Mayor Jeri Howells and John Cordova, chair of the Pueblo County Board of Commissioners, among others.

Children from Colorado Springs, Fountain, Pueblo West and Security will participate in the event by contributing to a time-capsule for the project, Rummel said. Their participation is meant to “signify that this is what the project is all about,” she said.

Rummel said Utilities sent more than 400 invitations to people across the state and has received about 130 responses so far.

Even though Colorado Springs ratepayers who are paying for the project didn’t get an individual invitation, Rummel said Utilities would not turn anyone away.

“If people from our community wanted to attend, they’re welcome to,” she said. “It would be hard to accommodate a large crowd, a larger crowd than we were anticipating.”

Rummel initially said the celebration would cost less than $10,000. In a follow-up email, she said the cost was less than $8,000.

“Based on an estimate of 175 guests, we estimate the cost of the event at less than $8,000. This includes the invitations/mailing, time capsule, podium/sound system, tent and chairs, light food and beverages, portable restrooms, and a professional photographer to document the historic occasion — similar to photos that were taken of the Homestake project in the 1960s. We also purchased a permit from State Parks for use of the area for the event,” she wrote in the email.

“Most major construction projects have a ground-breaking ceremony. Many people from around the region and the state have played a significant role in advancing this critical project for our community over the last 20 years, and they deserve to be formally recognized and thanked,” she added.

Friday’s ceremony starts at 9:45 a.m., but people are encouraged to show up by 9:30 a.m. It will be on the east side of Pueblo Reservoir, area south of the Arkansas River and the State Park entrance station.

Kudos to Colorado Springs city officials, who filed their annual financial disclosure forms on time.

Elected officials are required to fill out the forms under the Fair Campaign Practices Act and disclose, among other information, investment interests in real estate in El Paso County and gifts they received.

The covered time period is from May to April and only incumbents have to file.

Here’s a partial look at what former Mayor Lionel Rivera, who served until Mayor Steve Bach took office, and council members Scott Hente, Bernie Herpin and Jan Martin reported:

Hente reported receiving free golf fees last June valued at $150 from the Housing and Building Association for an HBA golf tournament.

Hente also reported receiving free golf fees from The Broadmoor, also valued at $150 and also last June, for the “U.S. Women’s Open kick-off.”

Hente, now the City Council president, reported a long list of private interests. Click here to see his report.

Martin reported that she “attended various local events hosted by community organizations,” but didn’t disclose the name of the organizations or other required information.

“Most of them are nonprofit kinds of things that I went to,” Martin said in an interview.

“If somebody wants more (information), I’m glad to provide it,” she said.

Actually, it’s required by law.

According to the form:

“Any person who willfully files a false or incomplete report pursuant to this section, who willfully fails to file the
report required by this section, or who willfully fails to provide the statement of value required by Section 24-6-
203, C.R.S., is guilty of a misdemeanor and, upon conviction thereof, shall be punished by a fine of not less than
fifty dollars nor more than one thousand dollars.”

Click here to read Martin’s report.

Herpin said he “received no gifts or other benefits in excess of those allowed by the Fair Campaign Practices Act.”

That amount is $50, Herpin said.

Click here to see Herpin’s report.

Rivera reported four free meals, including two valued at $30 from the Pikes Peak or Bust Rodeo Club.

He also reported receiving a meal valued at $85 for the “Cinco de Mayo dinner.”

“I was invited to make welcome comments and was presented an award,” the former mayor wrote in his forms.

Click here to see Rivera’s report.

Photo by Daniel J. Chacon

“I’m sorry. I got a bad connection.”

– former Colorado Springs Mayor Lionel Rivera joked when asked what he thought about the mural that’s being painted on the roof of a downtown building to promote the city as the home of the U.S. Olympic Committee.

Rivera, who worked on the deal to keep the USOC from leaving Colorado Springs, said he would reserve judgment until the mural was completed.

“Hopefully it will be done professionally and look attractive, and it will shed good light on the city. It’s not done yet,” he said.

Before he was elected, Mayor Steve Bach made it clear he wouldn’t issue a proclamation for PrideFest, an annual celebration in Colorado Springs for the gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender community and its supporters.

But the Colorado Springs Pride Center asked the mayor anyway.

On June 23, Bach rejected the request, drawing sharp criticism over his decision.

“He says in quotes that you see all over the Internet and I believe in his speech that day when he was inaugurated, he said, ‘We’re going to work together, and we’re going to fix this city together,’” Charles Irwin, the center’s executive director, said Wednesday.

“Together means, to me, everybody,” Irwin said. “He has already set the precedent that he’s excluding a large portion of the community.”

During his swearing-in ceremony June 7, Bach said he wanted to be inclusive, although he didn’t specifically mention the GLBT community.

“I truly hope we’ll have a more diverse community leadership involving more, younger people, more women and more people of color,” he said at the time. “I’ve already begun working on finding ways to do that, and that will be a priority in my administration.”

Before the run-off, Bach said in a Focus on the Family election questionnaire that he wouldn’t issue a proclamation in support of the annual gay pride parade.

“The Mayor must be focused on the issues affecting city government and the advancement of Colorado Springs. The Mayor should be focused on the day-to-day operations of the City, allowing private entities to engage in, and support, their own private initiatives,” Bach wrote in the questionnaire.

During a mayoral debate with opponent Richard Skorman, a gay rights supporter, Bach reiterated his position but stressed he didn’t tolerate any form of discrimination.

“I don’t think we should have a parade for people 6-feet-5,” Bach, who stands that tall, said during the debate.

Skorman pounced on Bach over his comments.

“Steve, I think that’s bad for business, what you just said,” Skorman said during the debate. “People that happen to be gay and lesbian live in this community, they pay taxes, they create jobs. If you’re really interested in jobs, why shut the door?”

Irwin said the center isn’t trying to create controversy.

“What we’re trying to do is to obtain equality for the GLBT community, nothing more, nothing less, just equal,” he said.

In a letter to Irwin, Bach said he was focused on the business of the city.

“My priorities are to transform our city government so that it works for everyone again and lead the charge to facilitate job creation for our citizens,” the mayor wrote.

“Therefore, I will not be signing proclamations such as you requested. I am committed to working diligently to create an environment that encourages economic opportunities for everyone in our community.”

In previous years, former Mayor Lionel Rivera refused to issue a proclamation for PrideFest because of his opposition to gay marriage, so former Vice Mayor Larry Small would write a letter of support.

This year, Irwin also said the center plans to ask the City Council to issue a proclamation.

When asked if there was enough support on council, Irwin said: “From what I understand, yes.”

PrideFest, which is celebrating its 21st year, is downtown July 16-17. The event draws thousands of people annually.