Roundtable Tries to Focus on Big Picture
By Chris Woodka, The Pueblo Chieftain, Colo.
Jul. 13–The Arkansas Basin Roundtable wants to stop sweating the small stuff and start looking at the bigger picture.
As with any decision the 50-member group makes, it takes a ton of process to come up with an ounce of policy.
Formed by a state law in 2005 to bring a diverse group of public and private water interests together to look at water activities in the Arkansas River basin, the roundtable has met for nearly two years.
So far, it has moved a few projects to the Colorado Water Conservation Board for funding, using $315,000 of $500,000 available from its basin account and $250,000 from a $5.5 million statewide fund in the first year. The Arkansas basin is ahead of most other basins in the state, with the third highest total requests.
The projects are small in scale, however. Several members of the group complained Wednesday that the roundtable has spent little time discussing and evaluating the big water projects in the valley — the Super Ditch, Southern Delivery System, the Preferred Storage Options Plan and Fountain Creek issues.
“We have to find a way to do this without killing ourselves,” said Virgil Cochran, Prowers County representative.
Many on the roundtable agreed more open discussion of water issues will strengthen the roundtable.
“I like the thought that the roundtable could become a broader-based forum,” said Alan Hamel, roundtable president and executive director of the Pueblo Board of Water Works.
While the group was trying to determine a way to sort or possibly act on a list of nearly 100 water needs and issues in the valley — identified at previous meetings — frustration and anxiety over how to address any of the issues became apparent during an afternoon discussion.
In the end, the group agreed to discuss the Lower Arkansas Valley Water Conservancy District’s Super Ditch — a land management, lease and fallowing program that would allow farmers to lease part of their water — at its next meeting.
“I’ve taken the Super Ditch all over Colorado, but guess who has never asked for a presentation: the Arkansas Basin Roundtable,” said Jay Winner, general manager of the Lower Ark district.
Winner said one member of the roundtable had told him privately that a funding request would be killed if it were brought to the roundtable. The roundtable usually operates on consensus, rather than formal votes, in deciding which funding applications to send to the CWCB.
The Lower Ark will be making a formal funding request for more study of the Super Ditch along with its presentation at the August meeting, Winner said.
Tom Florczak, assistant city attorney for Pueblo, also spoke saying the testimony of a roundtable member on behalf of downstream ditch companies at a CWCB hearing was partly responsible for torpedoing a request for an instream flow the city had negotiated over the initial objections of large water utilities.
“In all these proposals, the devil is in the details and how you work them out,” Florczak said. “In order for us to make progress, we really have to talk to each other. The Super Ditch is a good idea, but you have to include recreation and environmental interests.”
Nearly all of the roundtable members raised their hands when asked if they would like more information on the Super Ditch, and many were clearly annoyed that more time has not been spent talking about big water issues.
“We need to look at SDS, PSOP, Super Ditch, Fountain Valley and excess-capacity contracts,” said Tom Piltingsrud, Florence city manager. “To do that, we have to be educated. Whether or not we agree is immaterial.”
Gary Barber, representing El Paso County, said time is running out for taking action on projects, citing work by the CWCB on a Statewide Water Supply Initiative, which has identified gaps in future municipal water supplies along the Front Range.
“In my opinion, we have 120,000-150,000 acre-feet of (unmet) demand in the basin and no projects to solve that demand,” Barber said.
Meanwhile, members of a subcommittee that has been meeting for nine months on developing guidelines for water transfers asked the group for its support in forming a “think tank” that would gather more information about potential impacts of water transfers.
“We need to start discussing ways to determine if there is going to be a transfer, is there a way to have a benefit. Can we have it both ways?” said Frank Wallace of Las Animas County.
The roundtable also lifted a self-imposed 90-day probation on consideration of water activity grants by the needs assessment committee. The roundtable paused its review of applications while state officials clarified guidelines in the grant proposal process. The state is using an estimated $42 million over five years in mineral severance taxes to fund water projects statewide through the CWCB, Interbasin Compact Committee and nine basin roundtables.
WATER SHARES
Senate Bill 179, passed by the Colorado Legislature in 2006, allocated up to $10 million for Colorado water projects, in the fiscal year that ended on June 30. The Interbasin Compact Committee and Colorado Water Conservation Board agreed to put $4.5 million into basin funds, while reserving the rest for statewide funding. Here are requests made by each of the state’s nine basin roundtables, most of which were subsequently approved by the CWCB. Money carries over if not spent, comes from mineral severance taxes and is expected to total $42 million over 5 years.
Source: Colorado Water Conservation Board, May 2007
NR: No request.
—–
To see more of The Pueblo Chieftain, or to subscribe to the newspaper, go to http://www.chieftain.com.
Copyright (c) 2007, The Pueblo Chieftain, Colo.
Distributed by McClatchy-Tribune Information Services.
For reprints, email tmsreprints@permissionsgroup.com, call 800-374-7985 or 847-635-6550, send a fax to 847-635-6968, or write to The Permissions Group Inc., 1247 Milwaukee Ave., Suite 303, Glenview, IL 60025, USA.