It’s been a hot topic since 2002—and even before: When to dredge the silt and buildup from Mirror Pond, and who pays for it.
During the May 15 City Council meeting, Mayor Sally Russell asked the other councilors a series of questions, aiming at finding consensus on where the Council stood on Mirror Pond and whether the City should contribute funding for the proposed Mirror Pond dredging project. The pond, formed by the impoundment that is Newport Dam, hasn’t been dredged for nearly 35 years, causing silt buildup that turns into smelly mud flats in the summer time when river flows are low.
Last week, councilors expressed interest in funding the entire Mirror Pond project—not just dredging, but improving public spaces—but also suggested putting stipulations on the money. Councilor Justin Livingston said the City should cap funding at $3 million over a 10-year period, or 50 percent of the dredging, whichever was less. Others, including Councilors Bill Moseley and Barb Campbell, said Bend Park and Recreation should take over the management of the project. Moseley said the City should have no further role in funding or managing the pond.
“I want out,” Moseley said.
If the City contributes $3 million, it still leaves a significant funding gap for the dredging project, estimated to cost about $6.5 million. About $320,000 in private pledges has been raised by the Celebrate Bend Foundation, a group dedicated to preserving the pond. When the pond was last dredged in 1984, a federal grant contributed 48 percent of the cost. Councilor Bruce Abernethy said Wednesday federal dollars were not expected this time around.
Campbell identified four stakeholders for the pond: Pacific Power, BPRD, the City and private contributors. She said the $300,000 was the highest amount she was willing to spend on the project out of City funds.
Russell said Mirror Pond is a “heritage project for Bend and the centerpiece of our community,” asserting that Mirror Pond is an amenity that visitors and tourists use. Russell said she felt using the discretionary portion of the Transient Room Tax the City receives from hotel and short-term rental taxes could be used to fund the project.
“It is the responsibility of the Council to move it forward,” Russell said.
Councilor Gena Goodman-Campbell said she supports Livingston’s funding cap for the project, but for a complete vision for the park, not just for dredging. Goodman-Campbell raised the question about the navigability of the Deschutes, which may be challenged by environmental groups, Goodman-Campbell said.
If the river was found to be navigable, the state would own the land under the pond, Goodman-Campbell said—which could cause another wrinkle in a discussion that’s been going on for nearly two decades.
City Manager Eric King said he would take the Council’s proposal to BPRD’s board. If the park board is interested in the proposal, the groups would form an intergovernmental agreement between both bodies, and there could be a chance a project could be approved by both the board and the Council by the end of the current fiscal year, on June 30.
This article appears in May 22-29, 2019.
MAKE LOCAL JOURNALISM HAPPEN
Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.
Here’s a clip from the 2013 dam inspection done by Roger Raeburn, P.E – Chief Dam Safety Engineer of PacifiCorp.
“The observations provide better knowledge than previously available regarding the mode of the severe leakage events experienced in 2008, 2009 and most recently in October 2013. The needle bay sections of the timber crib are the most vulnerable to deterioration, in particular the ceiling boards. As the internal components of the needle bays age and deteriorate, their ability to provide adequate support/restraint for the rockfill material is gradually lost. The loss or failure of a needle bays side facing board does not appear to be as critical as the ceiling boards. A ceiling facing board failure results in a release of the rockfill into the bay. The associated loss of support to the upstream facing boards due to the release of the rockfill results in greater stress loads in those upstream facing boards. As individual upstream facing boards fail, the loads are shifted to adjacent boards, increasing the stress level in them, causing them to deform further, and eventually fail. As this cycle of aging and deterioration continues, larger pathways for leakage are created leading to the loss of more rockfill (and its associated support), resulting in an increased number of upstream facing board failures.”
The full facing of sheet-pile is only masking this deterioration to keep the dam’s condition out of the news. Shallow water and the MPS land grab are the least of the problems in saving the Iconic Mirror Pond (IMP). The only thing dredging will achieve, besides polluting the river and wasting public funds, will be the reduction of expenses for PacifiCorp when they decommission the project.
Crossing your fingers and covering your eyes is not public safety.
The reporter doesn’t walk along Mirror Pond very often. If he did, he’d know that the water level is NOT lower in summer. The only time I’ve seen silt exposed above the water level is when the dam owners have intentionally lowered the water level to do dam repair. Or when the dam has sprung yet another leak.
Wow, the city not pay? That means the city believes it receives no benefit at all from Mirror Pond?! What about the taxes from those million- or multi-million-dollar houses that line the west side of the pond? What about all the tourism dollars brought by the festivals in the park…? Sounds short-sighted to me.
“Russell said she felt using the discretionary portion of the Transient Room Tax the City receives from hotel and short-term rental taxes could be used to fund the project.”
Oh dear– is our Mayor trying to get the city sued AGAIN over misappropriation of the hotel tax?
Oh wait– Sally wants to apply the discretionary portion of the Room Tax, that which might otherwise be used to fund infrastructure repair and improvements. Our Mayor can always be assured to step up when fiduciary duty is calling. /s
Pacific Power is liable. Their dam. Their silt. Their cost of doing business. Why is our council considering this corporate subsidy?