The Arizona Water Banking Authority and Valley cities are in disagreement about how a pool of underground Colorado River water should be shared. City representatives and Water Bank commissioners shed light on some of their differences in a meeting on Tuesday.
Since the late 1990s, taxpayers have been funding a program to store excess Colorado River water underground, with the idea that it could be used as a backup in times of shortage. Now, the Colorado River is stretched thin by climate change, drought and demand. A new plan to manage its water is coming later this summer, and it will very likely include big cuts to the amount of water flowing to Central Arizona.
Cities are looking for answers about how much water they can get from that underground savings account, and said that Water Bank officials are not providing enough clarity about what to expect in the event that cutbacks are enforced in the near future.
Last week, city leaders made public calls for more information from the Water Bank. They received relatively little clarity in Tuesday’s meeting at the Arizona Division of Water Resources offices in Phoenix. However, the meeting exposed some of the sticking points between the Water Bank and city water leaders.
City leaders are essentially focused on one big question: How much water can cities expect to receive from the bank?
The Water Bank appears to want to preserve supplies into the longer-term future. That may involve limiting the distribution of underground water, instead of giving each city exactly as much water as it lost due to cutbacks. In a presentation, Water Bank officials hinted that they could distribute only a portion of the underground water, or create a system that requires cities to prove that they are conserving water before being granted access to the underground bank.
“The water bank is not a three-year water bank,” said Eric Braun, a Water Bank commissioner. “It's forever.”
Braun said the future will not likely bring new excess Colorado River water to add to the bank, so distributing large portions of water to each city “would not leave anything for future generations.”
City officials point to the Water Bank’s founding text as proof that it must give out enough water to fully compensate the cities that face Colorado River cutbacks and have been paying to store water in the bank.
Warren Tenney, director of the Arizona Municipal Water Users Association, wrote a blog post asking the Water Bank to fulfill its statutory obligation when it comes to doling out water, citing the document that created the agency.
“If the Legislature had intended proportional reductions or prioritization among uses or users, Tenney wrote, “It would have said so.”
Tenney’s group represents 10 large municipalities in the Phoenix area, including Phoenix, Scottsdale, Glendale and Mesa.
Other cities spoke out against a number of ideas floated by Water Bank officials at Tuesday’s meeting. Max Wilson, with the city of Phoenix, said many cities would not be likely to support some of the “policy considerations” presented by the Water Bank, many of which would involve the limiting of water distribution to cities.
Tom Buschatzke, chair of the Arizona Water Banking Authority, said the agency needs to move quickly and wants to “have something done” regarding water distribution policies before the end of July.
“The uncertainty attached to this process has been frustrating for everyone involved,” he said, “But we can do as much as we can give the water users the opportunity to understand at least what might be facing them in 2027 and 2028.”
