Hinkson Creek needs pollution controls, but how do we reach that goal? | Viewpoints from a City Council hearing
The City Council voted on Monday to support the joint decision by the city, Boone County and MU to challenge federal regulations intended to improve the health of Hinkson Creek.
After 1st Ward Representative Paul Sturtz complained that the city staff should have consulted with the City Council before making that decision, Mayor Bob McDavid scheduled a public hearing to address the issue.
At the end of the nearly three-hour hearing, McDavid, Gary Kespohl, Jason Thornhill, Laura Nauser and Daryl Dudley endorsed the staff’s position, while Sturtz and Barbara Hoppe voted in opposition.
The Environmental Protection Agency wants the local governments and university to reduce the amount of stormwater entering the creek by 40 percent.
The regulation is known as the Total Maximum Daily Load of a pollutant entering a stream.
A 2001 court order stemming from a lawsuit against the EPA by the American Canoe Association and the Sierra Club required the environmental regulator to develop TMDL rules for 174 streams in this region that were in violation of the federal Clean Water Act. That court order stipulated a Dec. 31, 2010, deadline, but the EPA and the plaintiffs have both asked for an extension until the end of this month.
The City Council hearing began with a 15-minute presentation of the city’s position by Public Works Director John Glascock.
Afterward, Ken Midkiff spoke on behalf of the American Canoe Association and the Sierra Club, followed by remarks by 10 residents and representatives of the county and MU and comments by Council members.
Here are excerpts from the comments made during the hearing:
“Even those who have already made up their minds on this issue need to hear a perspective that they have not heard (or listened to) previously. I will endeavor to present the other side of the story. …
“First, I would like to thank Mayor McDavid for placing this matter on the agenda. But, from my perspective and backed up by the City Charter, this is sort of after-the-fact. And, make no mistake, this issue would not be on the agenda were it not for media — newspapers, radio and TV — that have called into question the actions of the mayor and the city manager and were it not for the rather blatant and erroneous actions of both men claiming to speak for the entire city. …
“Representatives of the city, Boone County and UMC have stated that they wish to see a healthy Hinkson Creek. Instead of Hinkson Creek getting better, it is becoming more fouled. For each reduction project, there are at least two projects that add more stormwater runoff. One step forward, two back.
“One other matter: There is nothing to show that Hinkson Creek is healthy and supports the expected range of aquatic life. To the contrary, there is much to show that there have been several fish kills and that aquatic life is suffering.
“Is stormwater runoff an appropriate surrogate for unknown pollutants? The answer, from my perspective and that of many others, is yes. The runoff from stormwater contains a number of water contaminants, and though oil from parking lots might not in itself cause fish kills or a diminishment of aquatic, when in combination with other contaminants that are carried in runoff, such as herbicides, pesticides, fertilizers, anti-freeze, grease or warm water, there is a synergistic effect.”
(Regarding the city’s call for more studies before taking the EPA’s recommended actions) “Sorry, the time is up. Hinkson Creek was placed on the 303(d) List in 1998. There have been 12 years for studies, and no one other than DNR has conducted studies to refute those.
“The city manager, the mayor and David Shorr keep insisting that reducing stormwater runoff by 39.6 percent will cost millions …. but it seems that most of the reduction can be achieved with minimal expense: rain gardens, making impervious surfaces permeable by chopping some holes, retention/detention ponds, streamside vegetation and so forth.
“Developers — represented by the Central Missouri Development Council with its attorney David Shorr — have made millions in the watershed of Hinkson Creek, and now that they are being ordered to change their ways and spend a few bucks to clean up the mess they have made, they are squawking.
“What is also ignored is that for years, the city, Boone County and UMC have only caused or added to the pollution problems in Hinkson Creek. The city and the county have allowed acres and acres of impervious surfaces at retail outlets, shopping malls and subdivisions and have ongoing projects that add more impervious surfaces. The University of Missouri has several building projects, all of these surrounded by impervious parking lots. In short, the three entities are now reaping what they have sown.
There is one issue that the TMDL does not address: a schedule for compliance with the 39.6 percent reduction target. Obviously, this is not going to be achieved next February. Therefore, we will advocate that a schedule for compliance, with benchmarks, be added to the TMDL document. Maybe a reduction of, say, 6 percent by January 2012 and 10 percent per year for each year afterward so that within five years, the goal of 39.6 percent is achieved.”
“It seems to me that the EPA issuing a TMDL on the Hinkson Creek for an unknown pollutant might be counterproductive. If, in fact, the Hinkson is polluted, wouldn’t less water allow the pollutant to become more concentrated?
“There are people and agencies who are obsessed with the environment and the Hinkson Creek pollution, and there are those who are very concerned about these issues. A fine line exists between these two attitudes. We as a community need to be very careful of our attitude as we approach this line. The city, county and university as a unit are very concerned about the Hinkson Creek and the environment.
“The city, county and university have employed practices during the past six or so years to reduce the amount of water going into Hinkson Creek, and yet the EPA has not taken new samples to see if these practices are having an effect on the creek.”
(Kespohl then listed the six lagoons and wastewater treatments closed by the county that have removed an estimated 700,000 gallons of water per day to the creek and the six the county intends to close.)
“The city has repaired sewer lines that impacted the creek, implemented a stormwater and stream buffer ordinance, implemented channel protection detention, implemented rain gardens and wetlands management, is using pervious pavement, removed Lake of the Woods Mobile Home Park Lagoon and is eliminating private sewer systems.
“Boone County is establishing a stream buffer ordinance and is in final stages of a stormwater ordinance
“With all these positive enhancements to the stream, it seems to me that we should insist on a new study to determine if the stream is currently impaired.
“I had the occasion to eat breakfast with the golf course superintendent on Friday of last week. He tells me that he and his crew fish the Hinkson during the summer months and have caught a large number of large- and small-mouth bass along the banks of the golf course. They have seen a four-foot river gar living in the Hinkson that feeds on smaller fish. If the Hinkson were impaired, would these things be possible?
“I have always tried to use logic in determining my course of action. You gather data, you study and process data, and that process determines the outcome. The most logical course of action at this point calls for a new study to see if the stream is truly impaired.”
John Glascock:
“Our goal is to get a healthy stream. It’s been said we’re dragging our feet, but that’s not so. … Our propose plan is a phased approach: a two-year intensive study of stream, build on what DNR started, incorporate other Hinkson studies, begin retrofitting to meet more modest goals (and) get public buy-in for cost of plan.”
Barbara Hoppe:
“We’ve seen a deterioration of the stream for some time. What if we would have decided in the early 1990s (to reduce pollution of the Hinkson)? We have a lot of time to make up for. I’m concerned about dragging our heels yet again.”
Paul Sturtz:
“The kind of good, serious conversation we’re having tonight is something to be proud of. (But) it’s insulting to ask us to vote in support of a document sent out weeks ago.”
Bob McDavid:
“We want to have a healthy Hinkson Creek. The Hinkson Creek TMDL proposal is unreasonable.”