2010/2011 Annual Report

k

Regional Flood
Control
D
istrict
k
Pima County, Arizona

Pima County Administration
					

2010/2011

Board of Supervisors
Ramón Valadez, Chair, District 2
Ann Day, District 1
Sharon Bronson, District 3
Raymond J. Carroll, District 4
Richard Elías, District 5
County Administrator
C.H. Huckelberry
Deputy County Administrator
Public Works
John M. Bernal
Director and Chief Engineer
Suzanne Shields
Deputy Director
Chris Cawein

Flood Control District
Advisory Committee
David Parker, Town of Oro Valley
Janice Hughes, District 4
Keith Brann, Town of Marana
Mike Zeller, Chair, City of Tucson
Andy Dinauer, City of Tucson
Justin Turner, District 3
Linwood Smith, City of Tucson
Joel Gastellum, City of South Tucson
Phil Pearthree, District 5
Doug Shakel, Vice Chair, District 1
Vacant, District 2
Robert Welch, Town of Sahuarita

Message
from the Chief Engineer

O

n behalf of the Board of Directors of the Pima County Regional Flood Control District, I am
pleased to present the District’s
Annual Report for fiscal year 2010/2011.
The following are a few of this year’s
highlights, which are described in more
detail later in this report:
In 2006, we received record rainfall
events in June, July and August with 8.6
inches of rainfall; two inches more than
the average. FEMA approved $8 million
in funding for emergency work and repair
projects for the flood damage. In addition to bank stabilization and sediment
removal projects reflected in recent year’s
CIP the debris flows, erosion and deposition associated with these floods as well
as changes over time necessitated the
restudy of numerous foothills floodplains.
During FY10/11 these studies continued
including:

•
•
•
•

Scott’s Knob;
Nanini;
Casas Adobe; and
Campbell Washes.

In addition to improved floodplain mapping and risk identification, our Capital
Improvement Program continues to be
successful resulting in the completion
of several flood safety projects each of
which provide multiple benefits including

flood control, recreation and neighborhood stabilization including:
• Mission View Wash;
• Green Valley Erosion Control; and
• City of South Tucson Urban Drainage.
The year increased attention was directed
toward technical procedures and standards. A technical policy was adopted facilitating calculation of alternative erosion
hazard setbacks, along with standards for
data collection, surveying, drafting and
soil cement repair.
I hope you’ll take some time to read this
year’s annual report, which details our
programs, CIP projects and other District
activities. This year’s report and all previous annual reports are also available at:
www.rfcd.pima.gov.

Suzanne Shields, P.E.
Chief Engineer and Director
Regional Flood Control District

Regional Flood Control District 		

				Pima County, Arizona
Vision

The District will continue to be a
leader in providing quality flood protection and floodplain management
services within Pima County.

Mission

The Pima County Regional Flood
Control District is a regional agency
whose mission is to protect the health,
safety, and welfare of Pima County
residents by providing comprehensive flood protection programs and
floodplain management services. These
services emphasize fiscal responsibility,
protection of natural resources, and a
balanced multi-objective approach to
managing regional watercourses, floodplains, and stormwater resources.

Overview
of the District
Drainageway Maintenance

To comply with federal law, the State of Arizona
passed the Floodplain Management Act of 1973.
This act authorized Arizona counties to adopt
rules and regulations concerning management
of floodplain areas. The Arizona State Legislature
subsequently authorized flood control districts
to levy taxes on real property to finance district
operating expenses. The Pima County Board
of Supervisors, which sits as the Pima County
Flood Control District Board of Directors (Board),
organized the Pima County Flood Control District
(District) on June 5, 1978. The District first became operational on July 1, 1978.
Provisions of state legislation also allow incorporated cities and towns within Pima County to
undertake their own floodplain management
duties and regulatory functions. In Pima County,
the incorporated areas of the City of Tucson, the
Town of Oro Valley, the Town of Marana, and
the Town of Sahuarita have elected to assume
floodplain management duties in their respective
jurisdictions. The District is responsible for floodplain management activities for the remainder of
unincorporated Pima County (with the exception
of national forests, parks, monuments, and Indian
Nations) and for the City of South Tucson.

RFCD 2010/2011 Annual Report

5

Goals and Objectives
The goals and objectives of the District represent both flood control and resource
protection. The District’s approach varies from traditional flood control approaches
because of a multi-benefit public philosophy. The District recognizes that it is necessary and desirable to maintain a balanced relationship between human communities
and the land and resources that sustain them. To that end, the following policy goals
and objectives have been adopted by the Board as part of the District’s Floodplain and
Erosion Hazard Management Ordinance:
• Minimize flood and erosion damages.
• Meet or exceed state and federal
requirements relating to floodplain
management.
• Establish minimum flood protection 		
elevations and damage protection
requirements for structures and other
types of development.
• Regulate encroachment and building
development within areas subject to
flooding or erosion.
• Encourage the most effective
expenditures of public money for flood
control projects.

• Help maintain a stable tax base by
providing for the protection of regulatory flood and erosion hazard areas.
• Inform the public when property is in a
regulatory floodplain or erosion hazard
area.
• Encourage the preservation of natural
washes and enhancement of the 		
riverine environment.
• Emphasize overall watershed
management.
• Protect, preserve and enhance
groundwater recharge.

• Minimize damage to public facilities,
utilities and streets located in regulatory
floodplain and erosion hazard areas.

6

RFCD 2010/2011 Annual Report

District Organization
Board
of Directors

Flood Control District
Advisory Committee

General Manager
(County Administrator)

Director
Public Works

Manager
Engineering Division

(Deputy County Administrator)

Manager
CIP/Project Delivery
Division
Chief Engineer
(Director)

Manager
Floodplain
Management Division

Deputy Director

Manager
Water Resources
Division

k

Manager
Planning and
Development Division
Manager
Infrastructure
Management Division

RFCD 2010/2011 Annual Report

7

District Activities

Service Programs
Customer Service
The District encourages residents
to become familiar with flood related
hazards that may impact their properties or properties they are considering
for purchase. In order to assist in this
research, the District maintains an
abundant amount of information at our
customer service counter which includes
floodplain maps, elavation certificates,
detailed hydrologic and hydraulic studies,
historic and current aerial photos, and
topographic information.
Residents may discuss any of this
information with a hydrologist who can
provide additional information regarding
any limitations on the property or requirements that may apply for proposed
improvements due to the extent of flooding or erosion hazards.
Floodplain Management also provides
an efficient Special Flood Hazard Area

Identification service. This information
is conveniently provided in writing via
a Flood Hazard Information Sheet. This
form identifies whether the property is
located in or out of the federal floodplain
and/or floodway and whether the structure is in or out of the floodplain. This
service can be provided at our customer
service counter. During 07/08 the District
created an online Flood Hazard Map
service. By going to http://rfcd.pima.gov/
fpm/hazrd.html a user can enter a parcel
id or address and download or print a
Flood Hazard Map.
Another customer service component
provided by Floodplain Management
includes performing field investigations in
response to constituent complaints and
concerns. Through these field investigations, Floodplain Management is able
to ensure that property owners are not
being adversely affected by improvements that they or their neighbors
construct, and can provide advice regarding improvements that can be made in
order to minimize the potential of flood
damage. If non-compliant improvements
are observed, Floodplain Management
personnel will proceed with compliance
enforcement actions.

Flood Protection Assistance

8

RFCD 2010/2011 Annual Report

Floodplain Management
The goal of Floodplain Management is to
provide floodplain information, establish
development requirements and provide
assistance to Pima County residents with
drainage questions in order to minimize
the threat to life and property from flooding and erosion hazards. This includes
ensuring that any new development
within the floodplain is safe from flooding
and erosion hazards, does not adversely
impact adjacent properties, and maintains
the integrity of the floodplain.

Another important goal is protecting
natural resources within floodprone areas.
Floodplains typically support important riparian ecosystems and associated wildlife.
These riparian areas are also important
for their role in mitigating flood hazards by
maintaining stable flood flow conditions,
providing natural erosion control, as well
as promoting recharge into underground
aquifers. As such, it is beneficial to all
residents of Pima County that these critical
resources are protected and maintained.

RFCD 2010/2011 Annual Report

One of the ways Floodplain Management
accomplishes these goals is by implementing floodplain regulations contained in
the Pima County Floodplain and Erosion
Hazard Management Ordinance (Ordinance). The Ordinance was developed to
conform to the National Flood Insurance
Program administered by the Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA),
which allows residents of Pima County to
purchase flood insurance. In addition, the
Ordinance includes provisions regarding
the construction of buildings and other
man-made structures within regulatory
floodplains. The Ordinance applies only
to those areas prone to flooding where
the peak discharge is 100 cubic feet per
second or greater, or prone to sheet
flooding. In other areas, the Ordinance
does not apply; however, other ordinances
may apply, such as the Grading Ordinance
administered by the Development Services
Department.

9

ALERT

One of our most used services is the
District’s Automated Local Evaluation in
Real Time (ALERT) system, which has
been providing precipitation and stream
flow data from a series of gauges located
throughout Pima County since 1981. The
ALERT system was established as part of
a three-way agreement with the National
Weather Service (NWS), the Arizona
Department of Water Resources and the
District. The ALERT system was initially
installed to provide advanced warning
of potential flood flows on the upper
Cañada del Oro watershed as a result
of the Golder Dam breach. Federal and
state financial assistance combined with
funding from the District has allowed us
to expand the ALERT system. The system
of gauges now covers most of the large
watersheds in eastern Pima County
and currently includes 93 precipitation
gauges, 36 stream gauges, and four
weather sites.

10

The precipitation gauges relay rainfall or
snowfall amounts and intensities, stream
gauges measure the depth of flow in
streams, and weather stations provide
precipitation information plus wind
speed, temperature, relative humidity
and barometric pressure. This network
of automated gauges transmits data in
real time using radio telemetry transmitted directly to the District, NWS, and the
Arizona Department of Water Resources
office in Phoenix. The NWS uses this data
to produce flash flood watches and warnings and to ground-truth radar estimates
of precipitation. District personnel utilize
the information to assist emergency
response agencies including the Pima
County Department of Transportation's
Maintenance Operations staff during
storm events. Data generated by these
sites may be viewed at the
District’s rfcd.pima.gov/wrd/alertsys/
index.htm

RFCD 2010/2011 Annual Report

Management Programs

Foothills Washes Hydraulic
and Hydrology Studies
In 2006, Pima County received record rainfall events in June, July and August with 8.6
inches of rainfall; two inches more than the average. With these events large amounts
of debris including sediment flowed from the National Forest headwaters of the canyon
washes into the foothills residential area and more intense development within the
geologic floodplains of the desert basin floor. Since that time the District had focused
attention on repairing damages including restoring channel capacity along the major
watercourses and where damages were the most severe.
In addition to bank stabilization and sediment removal projects reflected in our CIP the
debris flows, erosion and deposition associated with these floods as well as changes over
time necessitated the restudy of numerous foothills floodplains. Furthermore a significant rainfall event in 2007 flooded homes along the Valley View Wash and highlighted the
need for updated mapping and hydraulic studies. During FY10/11 District staff continued
developing floodplain mapping studies needed in the following foothills washes;
•
•
•
•

Scott’s Knob;
Nanini;
Casas Adobe; and
Campbell Washes.

These studies, conducted in-house by PCRFCD staff utilized approved local, state and
federal methodologies to determine discharge rates and floodplains limits and have in
most cases been used to submit Letters of Map Revision for approval by FEMA. These
“Technical Data Notebooks” use better topographic, hydrologic and hydraulic data than
was available when the original FEMA maps were created. Furthermore these studies
identified specific infrastructure including culverts, dip sections and bridges which may
restrict flow. Notices have been sent to every impacted property owner specifically
explaining if their buildings or land has been determined to be within or not within the
floodplain.

11

RFCD 2010/2011 Annual Report

Water Resources and Riparian
Habitat Management

This program consists of activities intended to prevent flooding, erosion and riparian
habitat loss by means other than constructing structural flood control improvements.
The District promotes and supports regional riparian restoration with the goal of recovering natural functions within riverine systems and establishing habitat for native wildlife.
Mitigation Guideline Revisions
The Floodplain and Erosion Hazard Management Ordinance (Ordinance) requires compensatory mitigation for disturbances to regulated riparian habitat. The Regulated Riparian Habitat Mitigation Standards and Implementation Guidelines (Guidelines) were developed as a supplement to Ordinance Number 1999-FC1 to provide guidance for applicants
going through the mitigation process. Since its inception in 1994, the riparian protection
regulations of the Ordinance have been revised twice, first in 1998 (Number 1999-FC1)
and again in 2005 (Number 2005-FC2). In a continuing effort to meet the goals of the
Ordinance and to ensure that requirements are being met, the District began revising the
Guidelines in FY 2007-08 to incorporate Ordinance revisions adopted in 2005.
The District selected a project team to conduct technical studies which would determine
the effectiveness of the current Guidelines, study offsite mitigation opportunities, and
assist them with the public participation process. Because of the complexity of offsite
mitigation issues, the revision process was split into two efforts, revision of the Onsite
Mitigation Guidelines and development of an Offsite Mitigation Program.
Public participation is an essential aspect in revising the onsite Guidelines and development of the offsite mitigation program. The Mitigation Working Group (MWG) was
created to assist the District in the process of revising the Guidelines, and members were
selected to represent a broad spectrum of the community.
MWG Members
• Southern Arizona Home Builders
Association (SAHBA)
• Tucson Audubon Society
• Coalition for Sonoran Desert Protection
• Rincon Institute

•
•
•
•
•

American Society of Landscape Architects
Metropolitan Pima Alliance
Westland Resources
Diamond Ventures
Pima County Resident

Two MWG meetings were held in FY 2008-09. These meetings occurred on October 27,
2010 and January 25, 2011 and focused on revising the onsite guidelines. The revisions to
the Guidelines were not completed at the end of FY 2010-11 and are continuing.

RFCD 2010/2011 Annual Report

12

“Habitat loss contributes to flooding erosion hazards.”

“Healthy habitat absorbs floodwater.”

13

RFCD 2010/2011 Annual Report

National Flood Insurance Program
Map Modernization
The national response to flood disasters
prior to 1968 was to install dams, levees,
and seawalls; however, this approach
failed to reduce flood losses. Flood victims
were often left destitute because homeowners and business owners could not
purchase private flood insurance. Insurers
were either unwilling to offer flood insurance or premiums were too costly—consequently flood disaster costs
and the number of flood
victims continued to increase
over time.
In 1968, Congress created
the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). The
three basic goals of the
program are to:
1) Promote sound
floodplain management
to reduce future flood
losses, 2) Provide flood
insurance, and 3) Identify
flood hazards and create
floodplain mapping.
The Federal Emergency
Management Agency
(FEMA) identifies flood
hazard areas by publishing Flood Insurance Rate
Maps (FIRMs). The first FIRMs for
Pima County became effective in 1983,
however, revising the FIRMs to accurately
reflect flood hazards is a never-ending
process. Watercourses move and watersheds change over time, so the maps are
continually being updated.

RFCD 2010/2011 Annual Report

Digital FEMA Data
On October 23, 2008 FEMA announced its
intent to discontinue distribution of paper
maps and initiation of the distribution of Digital Flood Insurance Rate Maps or DFIRM’s.
In anticipation of this announcement the
Regional Flood Control District (District) has
been working with FEMA to create a digital
GIS library that includes hyperlinks to all
map change documents such as Letters of
Map Revision, and Letters of Map Amendments. In Fiscal Year 2008/09, the District
obtained digital map documents for all
of the incorporated communities in Pima
County that participate in the National
Flood Insurance Program (NFIP).
We also made available digital
map products in the form of
ESRI shape files or AutoCAD
files to engineering companies
to assist them in preparation
of map revision applications
to FEMA. Conversion of the
paper to digital Flood Insurance Rate Maps facilitated
comparison to recent aerial
photography. This enabled
District engineers and
landowners to work together
in submitting more accurate
information for FEMA approval. In FY 09/10
we created a Mapguide comparison site
so that property owners could look to see
how the map changes would impact them.
Stakeholder review of these maps continued throughout FY 10/11 and the DFIRMs
became effective on June 16, 2011.

14

Community Rating System:
Pima County a Top 6% Community
The Community Rating System (CRS) is
a voluntary incentive program that rates
local communities participating in the
National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP)
who are interested in providing a level
of service that is above and beyond the
minimum NFIP requirements. Participating communities receive discounted flood
insurance premium rates in increments of
5%. For example, a Class 1 community,
whose service is considerably above the
minimum, would receive a 45% premium
discount, while a Class 9 community
whose service is nominally above the
minimum would receive a 5% discount.
A Class 10 community only meets the
minimum level required, which in turn
would not receive a discount for their
constituents.
The CRS classes for local communities are
based on 18 activities and are organized
under four categories: 1) Public Information, 2) Mapping and Regulations, 3)

15

Flood Damage Reduction, and 4) Flood
Preparedness.
While we recertify our rated activities
each year FEMA utilizes auditors from the
Insurance Services Organization (ISO) to
verify our performance. During March
of 2011 the District was audited by FEMA
contractors to verify our performance.
This audit includes preparation of documentation, and a “cycle verification visit”
conducted by the ISO. For Class 5 communities these visits are conducted every
five years and require extensive follow up
submittals.
In recognition of the excellent level of
floodplain management performed by the
District, Pima County is a Class 5 Community, which yields a 25% discount in flood
insurance premiums for our constituents.
Pima County ranks in the top 6% of all
participating communities nationwide.

RFCD 2010/2011 Annual Report

Floodprone Land Acquisition Program
FLAP provides relocation assistance to property owners and purchases flood damaged
land, whether it is improved property or vacant land. Specific criteria used to rank FLAP
applications and determine eligibility include the extent of flood damage or severity
of potential flood and erosion hazards on the property. The highest priority is given to
improved properties that have or may suffer significant damage as a result of flooding.
This program is completely voluntary and is designed to assist property owners who
are likely to experience, or have experienced, flooding which resulted in severe damage and flood hazards. The community also benefits from these acquisitions, which
increase open space for overbank storage, enhance groundwater recharge, and provide riparian habitat preservation, wildlife corridors, passive recreation opportunities
and protects cultural resources. FLAP also protects emergency responders and county
resources from harm by reducing potential rescue needs.
Additional grant monies to purchase additional floodprone and damaged property
became available after subsequent disasters because Pima County had an established
floodprone land acquisition program.

Before Flood

After Acquisition

16

RFCD 2010/2011 Annual Report

In 1986, after voters approved general obligation bond sales of $20 million for floodprone land acquisition, a land acquisition plan was adopted by the Pima County Board
of Supervisors outlining criteria to guide the District’s overall acquisition efforts and allow the dedication of tax levy revenues to be used for acquisition of floodprone lands.
This newly adopted plan aided in the expansion of the program to include purchasing
undeveloped land to prevent future floodplain development in sensitive riparian areas
and to meet the open space goals of the community.
In fiscal year 2010/2011 the District spent $365,507 and added 27 acres of land to the
FLAP inventory bringing the total of District-owned property to 10,370.76 acres at a
cost of $67,817,544 since the program’s inception.

RFCD 2010/2011 Annual Report

17

Capital Improvements Program
Fiscal Year
July 1, 2010-June 30, 2011
CIP No. Project Name

Completion Date

Total Cost

December-10

77,934

5MISWA FC-04 Mission View Wash

March-11

8,913,034

5GVERC

FC5.02 Green Valley Erosion Control

March-11

1,438,094

5MEDIO

El Rio Medio (USACOE Study)

May-11

879,934

5PKOLB

Pantano Wash: Kolb Executive Park Bank Protection

May-11

724,078

5UDSTU

FC5.03 City of South Tucson Urban Drainage

June-11

1,521,282

5UBDRC

FC5.02 Tanque Verde Creek Lakes of Castle Rock Erosion Protection

June-11

24,588

5CRMAC

Carmack Wash Channel Erosion

TOTAL			 $13,578,944

Mission View Wash
The Tucson Stormwater Management Study identifies 44 existing homes, in the Greyhound Wash
drainage area that will be protected from flooding. The expanded project will also protect the
City of South Tucson, reduce flooding along the UPRR from 34th Street to 22nd Street and reduce
flooding in the Tucson downtown area at 18th and 22nd Streets, and roadway flooding would also
be reduced, resulting in safer driving conditions. The detention basin has been designed to provide
future areas to be developed for multi-purpose uses by the proposed Bridges Planned Development, thereby providing park, recreation and open space benefits to the surrounding community.

Green Valley Erosion Control
The project provided drainage improvements to control flooding and erosion in drainage ways
located in Green Valley, Arizona. Drainage improvements were performed in drainage ways 1, 3, 6,
7, 9, 13, 17, 24, and 25. The improvements ranged from filling scour holes with rip-rap and repairing existing structures to the construction of new bank protection and grade control structures.

18

RFCD 2010/2011 Annual Report

Oblique Aerial Photo of Project Taken Feb 12, 2009
looking north

Drainage Way 17 – New maintenance ramp

In addition to the improvements, the District also conducted the Green Valley 2010 Drainage Way
Evaluations to reassess the original RS Engineering May 2004 report and to update the maintenance and engineering improvements needed for Green Valley.

Pantano Wash: Kolb Executive Park Bank Protection
On July 31, 2006 the observed peak flow in Pantano Wash at Broadway Blvd wash measured to
be 15,900 cfs, this corresponds to a 33-year event. Existing gabion bank protection failed at Kolb
Executive Park, threatening to wash the busines complex’s parking lot and parking structures away.
The District provided temporary riprap to stabilize the bank and worked with FEMA to provide a
temporary and permanent solution to the failure created by the emergency. The temporary repairs
were completed in 2007, while the permanent bank protection solution was be designed.
The project included removal of the temporary riprap bank protection, stabilizing and coating the
existing riprap with an 8 foot thick layer of soil cement bank protection, new handrail, maintenance
road and associated drainage structures.
The project was bid and awarded on Nov. 17, 2009. Construction was started on Feb. 2, 2010 and
substantially completed by Sept. 1, 2010. Landscaping and handrail were completed by Oct. 2010.

Tanque Verde Creek Lakes of Castle Rock Erosion Protection
The project provided improvements to restore the bank and prevent erosion at Common Area of
the Lakes of Castle Rock. The improvements involved installing five weirs constructed of over 600
lineal feet of gabions. The project also diverted the deepest part of the flow away from the north
bank. By diverting the flow, the project protects the Castle Rock property and the property immediately downstream owned by Pima County and used by Therapeutic Riding of Tucson (TROT),
a non-profit organization. The project worked in tandem with bank protection installed this past
spring at TROT to prevent erosion along the north bank at both properties. The project also preserved a large tree that was at least 50 years old and provided habitat for birds of prey.

RFCD 2010/2011 Annual Report

19

Financial Overview
Revenues

Flood Control District Tax
Levy Rate 1981 to 2011

Fiscal
Year
Ending

*Levy
Rate

Tax

1981.............................0.5143......................$4,637,000
1982............................0.4683......................$5,342,000
1983............................0.5072......................$6,882,000
1984............................0.4739......................$7,652,000

Although the District receives assistance
from state and federal agencies to
construct major capital facilities, most of
the District’s funding is generated from
the property tax levy along with general
obligation bond sales authorized by the
electorate. Information on the District tax
levy rate is shown in the table at left

1985............................0.5269......................$9,243,000
1986............................0.5102..................... $9,969,000
1987.............................0.5346.....................$11,713,000
1988............................0.7630....................$17,272,000
1989............................0.5592....................$13,730,000
1990............................0.5985....................$14,663,000
1991.............................0.5985....................$14,058,000
1992............................0.5871................... $13,689,000
1993............................0.5871....................$13,767,000
1994............................0.5398....................$12,678,000
1995............................0.4623.................... $11,379,000
1996............................0.3596......................$9,368,000

Expenditures
The table on Page 18 provides information on capital project expenditures for
projects completed during Fiscal Year
20010/11. The remainder of District expenditures goes toward debt service and
operating expenses, which include funds
allocated for maintenance of flood control
structures, floodplain management, planning and administration activities.

1997.............................0.3596......................$9,467,000
1998............................0.3296....................$10,392,000
1999............................0.3246.....................$10,411,000
2000............................0.3046.....................$10,327,151
2001............................0.3046.....................$10,414,427
2002............................0.3546..................... $13,713,102
2003............................0.3546....................$14,467,389
2004............................0.3546....................$14,467,389
2005............................0.3546....................$14,467,389
2006............................0.3746....................$19,720,839
2007............................0.3746................... $22,620,303
2008............................0.3446....................$25,331,448
2009............................0.2935.................... $25,145,000
2010.............................0.2635.................... $23,142,303
2011.............................0.2635................... $22,220,943

20

Pantano Crumble

RFCD 2010/2011 Annual Report

Financial Highlights

Fiscal Year 2010/2011
Revenues

The primary source of revenue is the

District’s secondary property tax levy of
$0.2635 per $100 of real property assessed valuation (this rate was the same
in FY2000/2010). In 2010/2011, the District
received approximately $22.2 million dollars in tax levy revenue reflecting declining
property values. Other local sources of revenue include revenue for capital improvements from the sale of general obligation
(GO) bonds (2.9) and reimbursements
from other funds ($250,500). The total
revenue from all sources in FY2010/2011
was almost 25.4$ million.
Revenues

FY 10/11

Property Tax
Federal Participation
State Participation
General Gov’t
Interest Income
Rents & Royalties
Misc.
Bond Proceeds

$ 22,220,943.00
$10,000.00
$$25,000.00
$35,000.00
$30,000.00
$150,500.00
$2,911,710.00
$25,383,153.00

Expenditures

87.5%
0.0%
0.0%
0.1%
0.1%
0.1%
0.6%
11.5%
100.0%

The total expenditures for the District
in FY2010/11 were approximately $18.4
million. The Capital Improvement
Program expenditures of over $8 million
were direct capital expenses. The annual
operating budget for the District was
approximately $10.2 million. The other
significant expenditure was $32,954 for
debt service on flood control bonds and
our contribution to the Pima Association
of Governments.

RFCD 2010/2011 Annual Report

Expenditures

FY 10/11

Capital Improvements
Operating Budget
PAG
PimaCore/Debt Services

$8,172,211.02
$10,257,511.00
$30,266.00
$2,688.00
$18,462,676.02

44.3%
55.6%
0.2%
0.0%
100.0%

Breakdown of Expenditures
Capital Improvements
The expenditures for capital improvements
include engineering service costs for planning
and design; construction costs; right-of-way
acquisition and utility costs; and other costs
such as preparing new FEMA Flood Insurance
Rate Maps once a capital project is completed.
CIP Expenditures FY 10/11
Right of Way
Planning
Design
Construction
Utility
Public Art
Contingency

$1,097,518.77
$986,050.83
$567,595.86
$5,519,033.06
$2,012.50
$$$8,172,211.02

13.4%
12.1%
6.9%
67.5%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%

Operating Budget

The Districts operating budget includes
administrative, personnel, supplies,
and service costs associated with Flood
Control Support, Flood Prevention and
Riparian Protection. Flood Control Support Services include programs such as
customer service, permits, public education, and financial management. Flood
Prevention Services include maintenance,
flood warning, emergency preparedness,
and enforcement activities. Riparian
Protection services include the environmental restoration, water resources and
riparian habitat management programs.

21

Coordination

A

with other gencies

Pima County Department
of Transportation
The District contracts with Pima
County for services from divisions
within the Department of
Transportation:
• Field Engineering Division
• Maintenance Operations
		Division

Local Governments
The District has entered into
intergovernmental agreements
(IGAs) to provide specific flood
control or floodplain management
services to, or to jointly fund flood
control activities with, the
following:
• City of Tucson

• Real Property Division

• City of South Tucson

• Technical Services Division

• Town of Oro Valley

• Administrative Services Division

• Town of Marana
• Town of Sahuarita

Other Pima County
Departments
The District cooperates with other
Pima County Departments on
various projects and exchanges
information as needed:
• Pima County Attorney’s Office
• Development Services
		Department
• Department of
		Environmental Quality
• Health Department
• Natural Resources, Parks
		 and Recreation Department
• Tucson-Pima County Office
		 of Emergency Management
• Regional Wastewater
		 Reclamation Department
		(RWRD)

Pima Association of
Governments (PAG)
PAG facilitates coordination among
local government agencies, including the District, on environmental
matters affecting the community.

State Agencies
The District coordinates activities
with the following state agencies:
• Arizona Department of
		 Water Resources (ADWR)
• Arizona Department of
		 Environmental Quality (ADEQ)
• Arizona Game and Fish (AGFD)
• Arizona State Land Department

Federal Government
Several federal agencies participate in local flood control projects,
as listed below:
• U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
		(USACOE)
• Federal Emergency Manage		 ment Agency (FEMA)
• Federal Highway Administration
		(FHWA)
• U. S. Bureau of Reclamation
		(USBR)
• U. S. Natural Resource
		 Conservation Service (NRCS)
• National Weather Service
		(NWS)
• U. S. Geological Survey (USGS)
• U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service
		(USFWS)

Nongovernmental
Organizations
Other nongovernmental agencies
that the District works with
include:
• The Nature Conservancy (TNC)
• Cortaro-Marana Irrigation
		 District (CMID)
• Central Arizona Water 		
		 Conservation District (CAWCD)
• Metropolitan Domestic Water
		 Improvement District (MDWID)
• University of Arizona (UA)

22

RFCD 2010/2011 Annual Report

Pima County Regional Flood Control District
97 East Congress Street • 3rd Floor
Tucson, Arizona 85701-1797
Design and layout by Pima County Communications Department

RFCD 2010/2011 Annual Report

23