St. Charles Dam Task Force still has more questions than answers

The St. Charles Dam Task Force met for the fourth time Aug. 1 and members identified key questions about the dam and prepared to begin engaging with consultants.

The task force is a volunteer, joint initiative by the city and the park district. It was formed in February as a result of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ study of the Fox River and its recommendation to remove nine dams in Kane County, including the St. Charles Dam.

The goal of the task force is to help St. Charles City Council members make a well-informed decision on whether to remove the St. Charles Dam by engaging with the public and consultants to assess the environmental, recreational and economic impacts it would have on the city.

The task force consists of three aldermen and two residents representing the city, three representatives from the park district and one member from the River Corridor Foundation of St. Charles.

Since their first meeting in March, task force members have raised dozens of questions surrounding dam removal, from the possible hydrological changes to the river to who owns the dam. While they determined in June that the Illinois Department of Natural Resources owns the dam, most other questions remain unanswered.

At their May meeting, task force members were appointed to four subcommittees that will individually assess environmental, recreational and economic impacts and the Army Corps’ report. Each subcommittee was tasked with compiling a list of the most important questions surrounding their category before they begin engaging with third-party experts.

The task force’s July meeting was canceled because additional analysis by the Army Corps of Engineers was expected.

City Administrator Heather McGuire told task force members at the Aug. 1 meeting that they have yet to receive any additional information from the Army Corps, but it is believed they will be delaying the initial timeline for implementation. She said the deadline date that the city was expected to make a decision, which originally was May 2025, is now unclear.

“The good news from that is that this task force, the city and the park district have more time to evaluate some of the things that have been concerning to us,” McGuire said.

Each subcommittee presented several questions for consultants that they had gathered from among task force members, residents and the Army Corps’ report. Those questions will be included in requests for quotes and proposals that the city will be putting together as it begins the search for consultants.

Any costs incurred by the task force for engaging with consultants will be split between the city and the park district and will have to be preapproved by both parties.

Environmental subcommittee member Conrad Newell presented the questions they would be submitting, including how the removal of dams from neighboring communities could impact the river in St. Charles, questions relating to stormwater discharge and water quality testing and requests for surveys of the populations of fish and other wildlife species around the river.

Recreational subcommittee member Brian Pohrte presented the questions his subcommittee would like to have answered. He requested a more in-depth analysis of what water levels would look like without the dam, what the new depths and current speeds would be and how viable fishing, boating and other activities would be on the river.

Alderman and economic subcommittee member Bryan Wirball presented questions regarding economic impacts after dam removal. He requested data on how many people, businesses and activities in St. Charles use the river, how the dam’s removal would impact those uses and what the annual economic impact and tax revenue from those uses currently are and what they would be without the dam.

Army Corps report subcommittee member John Rabchuk presented questions surrounding the report from the Army Corps of Engineers. He requested more information about what times of year the river would be most shallow and in which areas, who would pay for reconstructing areas of the riverbank that may be exposed and other secondary expenses caused by removing the dam.

McGuire said putting those questions together and drafting the requests for proposals and quotes likely will take two months to develop and get approval from the city and park district and collecting proposal responses from prospective consultants would take another three to four months.

“You can see this is going to take some time,” task force chairman and Park Board Commissioner Jim Cooke said. “We’re not going to have an answer or the information we need ... for a while.”

Newell suggested asking representatives from the IDNR and the Army Corps to come and engage with the task force while they wait to engage with consultants.

While question gathering always was part of the game plan for the task force’s fact-finding mission, it has led to frustrations among some of those in attendance at meetings looking for answers.

A dozen community members spoke during the public comment portion of the meeting and raised additional questions, most of which the task force did not have answers.

Questions included what other Kane County communities were planning to do with their dams, if there is a threshold for how big of an economic impact dam removal would have to be to justify keeping the dam and if the cost of keeping the dam has been determined.

Multiple residents raised concerns with the broad level of analysis that the Army Corps plans to conduct and alleged that the data they used in their initial report is outdated and in some instances falsified.

St. Charles resident Stew Fishman asked if dam modification, rather than removal, is being considered.

Cooke told him that considering alternative options was not part of the task force’s mission and the City Council will be tasked with making any decisions on the matter.

“What is your function?” Fishman asked. “I’m a little bit confused here. Are you going to propose to the City Council one way or another?”

“No,” Cooke responded. “Our function is to gather facts, give the public an opportunity to speak and contribute to the process, and when we get to the point that we feel we’re done, we’ll submit to the City Council the facts that we have accumulated.”

Cooke said while they hope to keep moving forward in a productive manner and accomplish their mission as quickly as possible, there are factors that are outside of their control.

The task force originally was expected to meet monthly until the March 1, 2025, deadline when they planned to issue a final report to the City Council, which will then decide whether to remove the dam. With the city’s deadline now unclear and the timeline for engaging with consultants expected to take about six months, it is uncertain when the task force will meet again.

McGuire said when the city receives updates from the Army Corps and as the consultant engagement process gets underway, they will publish notices on the task force’s website, the city website and social media.

Previous meeting recordings can be viewed on the task force’s playlist on the city of St. Charles’ YouTube page. For more information, answers to frequently asked questions and to view public records, visit the task force’s website.