- Kuosman to manage district
- Water exchanges minimize “stranded” water
- Four water source strategies discussed
- Both choices require rate increases
By James Howald and Jackie Burhans
At a special session on March 27, the Donala Water and Sanitation District (DWSD) board interviewed finalists for the role of general manager and chose John Kuosman to fill the position.
At its regular meeting on April 16, the board heard three presentations addressing complex strategic decisions facing the board. Kelsey Briggs and Carly Bonwell, of Spheros Environmental, discussed Donala’s renewable water rights and analyzed how exchanges could be used to maximize the district’s ability to translate water rights into water available to its customers. Brett Gracely, of Plummer, led the board in a discussion of four alternative approaches to water source management the district could pursue. Todd Cristiano, of Raftelis, analyzed how the district’s participation in the Loop water re-use project and decisions about its wastewater treatment will affect user rates.
Kuosman to manage district

The board interviewed Christina Hawker, who is currently serving as interim general manager, John Kuosman, Kevin Niles, and Jonathon Smith for the job of general manager. The four finalists were selected from a field of 14 applicants. They were asked about their qualifications, management experience, plans for transitioning into the role, and vision for the district. Kuosman previously served as the interim workflow manager for the Loop.
Following the interviews, the board moved into an executive session to discuss the interviews. After returning to open session, Director Ken Judd moved to offer the job to Kuosman at a salary of $190,000, and the board voted unanimously in favor. Judd made a second motion to promote Hawker to deputy general manager and chief financial officer at a salary of $175,000, effective immediately, and the board voted all aye.
Water exchanges minimize “stranded” water
In an introductory letter to the board, Briggs said Donala currently relies mostly on non-renewable groundwater drawn from Denver Basin aquifers, and this reliance brings risks for the district’s customers. In addition to groundwater, Donala has three renewable water rights, but two of the three are “stranded,” that is, the district currently has no way to convey the water to its customers. Donala’s Laughlin Ditch water and the effluent from its Upper Monument Creek Regional Waste Water Treatment Facility (UMCRWWTF) are in the stranded category. The Laughlin Ditch diverts water from Fountain Creek near the Stratmoor Hills neighborhood in southwest Colorado Springs. The district also has renewable water from its Willow Creek Ranch near Leadville. DWSD has a contract with Colorado Springs Utilities to treat its Willow Creek water and convey it to customers after it is stored in the Pueblo Reservoir.
In her presentation, Briggs explained that a water exchange is an administrative mechanism that allows water to be diverted from an upstream “exchange-to” location and then replaced at a downstream “exchange-from” location, so that other water right owners get the water they are entitled to. In effect, water exchanges move water upstream without the use of pumps or pipelines. Water exchanges do not create additional water for water right holders but allow existing water rights to be used more efficiently and sustainably, Briggs said, and can be used to make stranded water available to customers.
The district has four “exchange-to” locations: the Chilcott Ditch headgate, an inlet of Bristlecone Reservoir off Beaver Creek, a future point of diversion at the confluence of Jackson Creek and Monument Creek, and a non-potable pipeline diverting off Monument Creek directly below the UMCRWWTF.
The district has five “exchange-from” locations: the confluence of the Arkansas River and Fountain Creek, the Stonewall Springs Reservoir Complex, the Spring Creek augmentation station, the outfall of the UMCRWWTF and the outfall of the J. D. Phillips Water Resource Recovery Facility.
Briggs analyzed how the locations above could be connected to minimize the district’s reliance on its costly contract with CSU, use its Laughlin water rights and UMCRWWTF effluent return flows, avoid having to release water when the Pueblo Reservoir is full, avoid the need to lease water to downstream users at below-market rates, and support the district’s Aquifer Storage and Recovery goals.
Each of the possible exchanges has its own average and maximum potential to convey water, number of days when water is likely to be available for exchange, requirements for storage, and set of legalities related to water rights. Briggs noted that exchanges can vary in their volumes between wet and dry years, so groundwater would continue to be necessary as a backup.
Board President Wayne Vanderschuere said the district’s goal was to transition as completely as possible to renewable water sources and asked Briggs which scenario would bring the district closest to that goal. Briggs suggested pursuing several exchanges simultaneously. Vanderschuere asked Briggs to continue her analysis by ranking the exchanges with and without the Loop.
Four water source strategies discussed
Gracely laid out four alternatives for the board to consider:
- Alternative 0—Increase reliance on ground water and plan to replace one well every three years instead of every seven years, at a long-term cost of $167 million.
- Alternative 1—Make greater use of water provided by CSU, while still pumping 500 acre-feet per year of groundwater, at a long-term cost of $143 million.
- Alternative 2—Participate in the Loop water re-use project, at a long-term cost of $160 million.
- Alternative 3—Make full use of water exchanges, at a long-term cost of $112 million.
Each alternative was discussed from the perspective that DWSD might continue to operate the UMCRWWTF by itself or might decide to participate in the Northern Monument Creek Interceptor (NMCI) project. The NMCI is a project managed by CSU that conveys wastewater from districts north of Colorado Springs to CSU’s J.D. Phillips Water Resource Recovery Facility, thereby sparing those districts the cost of operating their own treatment facilities. DWSD currently operates the UMCRWWTF with two partners, Triview Metropolitan District and Forest Lakes Metropolitan District, but those partners have decided to move to the NMCI to handle their wastewater. NMCI does not provide a way for participating districts to reuse their treated wastewater.
Vanderschuere pointed out that the alternatives 0 and 1 could be done at the discretion of DWSD alone but neither advances the district’s goal of moving to all renewable water sources. DWSD’s Laughlin water rights remain stranded in those approaches. Alternative 2—participation in the Loop—provides more renewable water at a lower price, Vanderschuere said. He added that using the NMCI was more expensive in present value.
Gracely said “if he could wave a wand” the Loop would be built at an affordable price, DWSD would get an exchange decree to convey its Willow Creek Ranch water to the Chilcott Ditch and would be able to use 300 acre-feet per year of its Laughlin water rights, and Direct Potable Reuse of effluent from the UMCRWWTF would be added as a water source.
Both choices require rate increases
Cristiano discussed how two scenarios will impact rates from 2027 to 2035:
• Scenario 1—DWSD participates in the Loop and is sole operator of the UMCRWWTF.
• Scenario 2—DWSD participates in the Loop and joins the NMCI project.
Cristiano said scenario 1 would add $3.8 million in new debt service per year by 2035, while scenario 2 would add $4.7 million in new debt service over the same period. Scenario 1 would require operating and maintenance costs of $2.2 million per year, while scenario 2 would require lower operating and maintenance costs of $1.8 million per year. Both scenarios require $7 million in well replacements.
Both scenarios lead to significant rate increases between 2027 and 2030, after which time rate increases will decrease to 3% per year until 2035.
Scenario 1 will require the following increases for the next four years:
– 2027–20%.
– 2028–14%.
– 2029–13%.
– 2030–12%.
Scenario 2 will require the following increases over the same period:
– 2027–26%.
– 2028–15%.
– 2029–15%.
– 2030–10%.
**********
The next board meeting is on Thursday, May 21, at 1:30 p.m. Generally, board meetings are held the third Thursday of the month at 1:30 p.m. and include online access; call (719) 488-3603 or access www.donalawater.org to receive up-to-date meeting information. The district office is located at 15850 Holbein Drive, Colorado Springs.
James Howald can be reached at jameshowald@ocn.me. Jackie Burhans can be reached at jackieburhans@ocn.me.
Other Donala Water and Sanitation District articles
- Donala Water and Sanitation District, March 19 – District weighs financial trends and capital project impacts (4/1/2026)
- Donala Water and Sanitation District, Feb. 19 – Board considers fire mitigation at Willow Creek Ranch (3/4/2026)
- Donala Water and Sanitation District, Jan. 15 – 2026 rates and fees amended (2/4/2026)
- Donala Water and Sanitation District, Dec. 11 – 2026 budget adopted (12/31/2025)
- Donala Water and Sanitation District, Nov. 20 – Water rights and exchange options reviewed (12/4/2025)
- Donala Water and Sanitation District, Oct. 9 – 2026 budget planning (10/30/2025)
- Donala Water and Sanitation District, Sept. 11 – 2026 budget planning kicks off (10/2/2025)
- Donala Water and Sanitation District, Aug. 13, 22 – General manager on administrative leave (9/4/2025)
- Donala Water and Sanitation District, July 17 – Board tours treatment facility, adjusts sewer bills (8/1/2025)
- Donala Water and Sanitation District, June 12 – Positive audit report; inconsistent waste treatment numbers (7/3/2025)

Leave a Comment