Mount Werner Water and Sanitation District General Manager Jay Gallagher explains the filtration process that takes place inside the Fish Creek Filtration Plant. The district operates the plant for itself and the city of Steamboat Springs' water service area. The city expects the first draft of a water and wastewater rate study and master plan to be delivered this week.

Photo by John F. Russell

Mount Werner Water and Sanitation District General Manager Jay Gallagher explains the filtration process that takes place inside the Fish Creek Filtration Plant. The district operates the plant for itself and the city of Steamboat Springs' water service area. The city expects the first draft of a water and wastewater rate study and master plan to be delivered this week.

City expects overdue water study this week

Report to identify and prioritize improvements to system



Mount Werner Water District General Manager Jay Gallagher stands near a control panel at the Fish Creek Filtration Plant. The district operates the plant for both itself and the city of Steamboat Springs' water service area. The city expects the first draft of a water and wastewater rate study and master plan to be delivered this week.

By the numbers

Water supply and demand in Steamboat Springs* (in acre-feet per year)

- 2007 demand: 3,141

- 2027 projected demand: 7,206

- Current firm yield: 8,934

- Potential firm yield: 9,769 to 13,500**

* Includes city and Mount Werner Water and Sanitation District service areas

** Figure depends on whether and to what degree the Yampa River Wells are augmented by water in Stagecoach Reservoir and whether water storage is developed on the Elk River

— City officials expect to see this week the first draft of a study identifying needed improvements to water and wastewater systems, their cost and future rates necessary to pay for them.

Those who say the city was too inattentive to water-related issues in its review of Steamboat 700 have complained that the 487-acre annexation was approved two weeks ago before the water study's completion. The annexation is subject to a group of residents' efforts to force a referendum election.

Among the candidates in this year's City Council election, Kevin Bennett has been the most vocal about water issues and said they are the No. 1 reason he is running for council against Councilwoman Cari Hermacinski. Bennett has said Old Town residents and businesses will pay to provide water infrastructure for the new development, noting that the city water service area does not include the mountain area served by Mount Werner Water District.

Steamboat Springs Public Works Director Philo Shelton said Monday that the pending water study will identify and prioritize water projects. Within the existing city limits, the biggest project is a new million-gallon water storage tank in western Steamboat.

Although the cost of that and other water projects will be built into new tap fees and usage rates for the existing city, Shelton said water system improvements necessitated by Steamboat 700 and other annexed areas - such as a potential reservoir on the Elk River with a cost estimate of $12.5 million - will be covered by separate tap fees for those areas large enough to cover the costs.

That's the main reason City Council President Loui Antonucci said council was comfortable with voting on the annexation before the study's completion.

"The funding source is there," Antonucci said. "The rate is going to be what the rate needs to be."

Water and wastewater usage rates will not be similarly segregated, but Shelton said he would expect the annexation of Steamboat 700 to put downward pressure on those because 90 percent of the city's operation and maintenance costs are fixed.

"It's not how much water you sell that matters," Shelton said. "It's customers."

In addition to separate tap fees for the annexed area, the developer of Steamboat 700 also is paying for the cost of a new 1.5-million-gallon water tank and $960,000 for legal and engineering work to develop some of the city's existing water rights in Fish Creek, Stagecoach Reservoir and the Elk River. The city's annexation agreement with Steamboat 700 does not require that any new, "wet" water rights be dedicated to the city.

Bennett and some other critics of Steamboat 700 have questioned the city's refusal to force developers to bring water rights to the table as an annexation requirement.

City and Mount Werner Water officials, however, are relying on a recently adopted water supply master plan that concluded that "the ability of the city and the district to meet anticipated future demands is quite good" but that "the city and the district should continue to consider and pursue the development of alternative water supply sources to increase redundancy in the community's water supplies."

Bennett disagrees and says the surplus water is needed to serve areas already within city limits and in the case of emergencies.

The water supply master plan, created by Stantec, is based on historical population growth of 3 percent a year since 1980 and water demand growth during the same period of 1 percent a year. The study concluded that the city has several decades "to identify, design and implement the next significant expansion of water supplies."

Mount Werner Water and Sanitation District General Manager Jay Gallagher said he is comfortable with the study and its conclusions and noted that "firm yield" is based on a worst-case scenario, in this case, the drought year of 2002. The city's and district's combined water demand in 2007 was 3,141 acre-feet, according to the study, and the projected demand for 2027 is 7,206 acre-feet. The city's current firm yield is about 9,000 acre-feet per year and could be increased to 13,500 acre-feet with the water projects that could ultimately accompany annexed properties.

"I support the conclusions of the Stantec report. There's no reason not to," Gallagher said. "Under the worst conditions we have seen over the past 80 years, this information says we're in pretty good shape."

The study does note that the community is vulnerable to a fire or other natural disaster in the Fish Creek watershed, the source of about 80 percent of the city's current firm yield and capacity.

"That's why it's important to diversify the sources," Gallagher said, "and the city's doing the right thing."


StopTheBrutalChemtrails 7 years, 6 months ago

New Research: Fluoride Damages Children's Liver and Kidneys (NYSCOF)

PRNewwire | August 23 2006

Fluoride in drinking water damages children's liver and kidney functions, according to a new study in "Environmental Research"(1), reports the New York State Coalition Opposed to Fluoridation (NYSCOF). Xiong and colleagues write, "Our results suggest that drinking water fluoride levels over 2.0 mg/L can cause damage to liver and kidney functions in children." Further, dental fluorosis (fluoride-discolored teeth) can be an indicator of kidney function harm, they report.

Researchers grouped 210 Chinese children (aged 10 - 12 years old) by drinking water fluoride levels (averaging 0.76; 1.47; 2.58; and 4.5l mg/L). Dental fluorosis rates, respectively, were 15%, 41%, 79% and 94%.

Blood serum and urine samples revealed:

-- fluoride levels increased as water fluoride levels increased

-- liver and kidney enzymes elevated, indicative of liver or kidney damage, in children drinking water with over 2mg fluoride per liter.

-- liver function can be damaged without dental fluorosis

"Dose-effect relationship between water fluoride levels and damage to liver and kidney functions in animals has been reported," the authors write. However, this is one of the few to do so in humans. The liver and kidneys are especially susceptible to fluoride toxicity, they write.

Paul Beeber, NYSCOF President says, "2 mg fluoride daily is very often exceeded from food, beverages, pharmaceuticals, and dental products. Clearly this is more evidence showing fluoridation is not only harmful, but unethical and immoral," says Beeber.

To prevent crippling skeletal fluorosis, the Environmental Protection Agency set 4 mg/L as the maximum fluoride contamination of drinking water. But this doesn't protect all Americans from all of fluoride's adverse effects, according to a recent National Academy of Sciences (NAS) fluoride panel(2)

After reviewing hundreds of studies over 3-1/2 years, at least three scientists on the NAS panel recommend water fluoride levels be lowered well under 1 mg/L -- the current level dentists claim is optimal to reduce cavities, and deliberately added to public water supplies.(3)

"Fluoridated water is also linked to thyroid dysfunction, bone damage and cancer in humans -- even at 1 mg/L," says Beeber. "Americans are guinea pigs for the country's failed fluoridation experiment."

More information about fluoride's adverse kidney effects here:

Contact: Paul Beeber, Esq., 516-433-8882,

Paul Connett, Ph.D, Retired Chemistry Professor Emeritus and

Executive Director, Fluoride Action Network, 315-379-9200







StopTheBrutalChemtrails 7 years, 6 months ago

If Kevin, Cari and Loui really give a rats behind about their community, they will do something about the toxic fluoride being added to our city's water system. Time will tell.


Jay Gallagher 7 years, 6 months ago

FYI: The range of fluoride concentration in our water is 0.9 - 1.0 mg/L. Jay Gallagher General Manager, Mt Werner Water


George Danellis 7 years, 6 months ago

And of course the volume of consumption per user is a key denominator, whether it be for full time residences, rental units, hotels, and different types of businesses. Currently we waste enormous amounts of water, very valuable water. I understand that this report will contain recommendations on how we can see future reductions in water consumption compared with past usage. Because in the end the equation is about Supply and Usage. I believe that we have only just begun to address consumption. While the number of users may increase, do you thinks its possible to reduce the consumption per user? Indeed there is a lot of potential to do so regardless of whether 700 comes to fruition. And I believe it should be a part of the discussion surrounding 700 and water. Will it be stipulated in code for 700 that it require more efficient water appliances and systems, or will standard city code apply? Is low water landscaping mandated there etc. What about for the rest of the city? There are many ways to affect a lower demand on our scarce and expensive water supply that make great business sense.


danny 7 years, 6 months ago

George SB700 has an extensive sustainability plan which you can view on our website and is more robust than what was included in the annexation agreement. But included in the annexation agreement is the requirement for low flow fixtures, limited turf areas, xeriscaping, high efficiency irragation systems, and more. Call me or visit out website for more information about our sustainability plan


StopTheBrutalChemtrails 6 years, 11 months ago

Mount Pleasant Reduces Amount of Fluoride in Water

Ryan Taljonick Central Michigan Life June 23, 2010

The Mount Pleasant City Commission’s decision to temporarily reduce the amount of sodium fluoride added to the municipal water supply has not gone without controversy.

Some of the commissioners themselves disagree with the decision.

“I think when the people voted to put fluoride in the water, they wanted it in a proportion that will reduce tooth decay,” Vice Mayor Bruce Kilmer said. “I think we should take it back to a vote of the people and not (reduce fluoride levels) on our own.”

However, Commissioner Kathleen Ling, head of the Fluoride Task Force that made the recommendation to the commission, emphasized the commission’s decision was within the boundaries of the 2005 fluoride ballot language.

The 2005 ballot language regarding fluoride levels states, “the Commission by resolution shall have the authority, from time to time, to change the proportions thereof.”

Full article here:


StopTheBrutalChemtrails 6 years, 11 months ago

Fluoride is good for you.
jimschultz [Moderator] 17 hours ago I will explain the comment about Poughkeepie NY and SelmerTn. Poughkeepsie asked the health department a list of 33 specific fluoridation questions about safety and benefit but never received a single response. The commission then by a every commissioner to ZERO voted to end fifty years of fluoridation. I spoke to attorney Frank Mora on the water board who did the review to verify the facts. Selmer Tn just recently had Mayor David stop fluoridation after 3 commission members would not even after not receiving adequate answers from from the Health department, NSF testing, Chemical suppliers, Insurance carrier. This is after several times asking the questions again and again. 33 were the same ones asked in Poughkeepsie but 11 new one about the double damage for blacks for kidneys and dental fluorosis . For some it is about trust of dentists and health department even when proof is not given. For many of us the ingested vs topical issue needs real answers not just trust. Even the CDC in 1999 and 2001 MMWR admitted topical is primary benefit. What they did not admit is not a single of over 20 researchers can prove a mechanism of ingested benefit exists especially at 1ppm. The topical benefit has many saying it does not exist below 1000ppm especially for young kids. Featherstone 1999, showed this clearly with data it has no topical benefit from ingestion and even very fluoride rich enamel had no additional cavity resistance. Also the increase in fluoride in the spit had no benefit from the very small increase. That is what the data showed but somehow false claims are listened to with no proof. Just trust me sort of the little man behind the curtain in OZ. Natick Ma had a panel of top would leading science professionals rule totally against fluoridation. The commission followed until a new group came in. Alamo Heights Tx had Bill Kiel a PHD do the research and as a commissioner asked the tough questions. The Health department was caught in all the false claims and shown the honest facts on the big screen. A very new experience to be proven incorrect over and over again. Every commissioner voted to stop fluoridation. Bill and many other very bright experts went to Austin TX to set the record straight and show the proof. Real science and real studies not lists of endorsements and claims of thousands of proofs not showing one. Even the FDA admitted in 2006 infants have no benefit from fluoride in bottled water. Nursery Water still makes the claim even after a 2009 warning letter from FDA. BiPolar behavior maybe by people paid to promote policy not be correct. Fluoride will be the new asbestos on night time TV. Wise people avoid this type of litigation. The National Kidney Foundation and American Water Works Association have been served to not destroy evidence for kidney damage litigation. Class action cases are forming now for this new growth area in environmental toxins.


mmjPatient22 6 years, 11 months ago

Fluoride is just one small part of what is concerning a growing number of Americans about their water. More and more Americans are becoming afraid of flammable tap water. That's right, flammable water, straight from your sink. Oh, it's real alright. After having hundreds, if not thousands, of gallons of fraking fluid pumped into the ground around their homes and wells, many people(even a bunch right here in our blessed state of Colorado) have discovered that the water that comes from their faucet(s) is not only toxic, but flammable too. Recently, I was exposed to a film that opened my eyes to the destruction and terror that is being brought upon everyday Americans, like you and me, by the oil & gas companies that operate with-in our borders. I thought the big threat was supposed to be from foriegn oil, right? The name of the film, showing currently on HBO, is "Gasland." The meaning of the film's name didn't quite sink in until part way through the film. It came across to me to be in the possessive form. In other words, with the wreckless and careless abandon that these gas drilling companies have shown for our earth, they have affirmed their position as above the law/regulations. They have claimed their industry, and subsequently affected lands, for their own; above and beyond reproach or correction. It's the wild west of energy. We've all seen the destruction in the Gulf and the incompetance that envelopes that whole mess. But what about all of the "green-er" & more "eco-friendly" options that they push on us? What about all the hype over natural gas? Is it really all that much better for our planet than reaping the consequences of our addiction to oil? Or is it just the latest and greatest way for them to doop us into lining their pockets, while LITERALLY destroying our planet? Were it not for Dick Cheney(former CEO of Halliburton, one of the largest natural gas entities in the world), these companies could still be held accountable to the laws that were enacted to protect and preserve our planet. Unfortunately, that is not the case. These companies have free reign to profitably destroy our earth, at our expense. If you watch a single movie this year, it would do you good to see this one.


mmjPatient22 6 years, 11 months ago

I guess the oil is already finding alternative means of transportation from the well head, to your backyard/front door/dinner plate/water source. This is some pretty scary $#!+.

Or, for you non-youtubers:


Requires free registration

Posting comments requires a free account and verification.