Date: 08/11/2015
Final
BILL SUMMARY for Public Testimony
WATER RESOURCES REVIEW COMMITTEE
| Votes: View--> | Action Taken: |
| <none> | <none> |
06:52 PM -- Public Testimony
Tom Goodwin, representing himself, discussed the importance of food production. He explained that the share of personal income spent on food has decreased over the past several decades, but that the loss of agriculture could lead to rising food prices and loss of disposable income that consumers spend on other products. He stated his support for additional storage on the Eastern Slope.
06:56 PM
Bob Senderhauf, Chairman, Upper Arkansas Water Conservancy District, thanked Senator Roberts and the committee for visiting a water project in his district.
06:58 PM
Kip Petersen, Vice President, Pikes Peak Regional Water Authority, stated his district's concern regarding the security of its water supply. He presented information on the history of his district, and explained that the changing economy has spurred the district to seek water supply outside of its traditional sources (Attachment A). He thanked the CWCB and basin roundtables for their work on the plan.
Attachment A.pdf
07:01 PM
Mr. Petersen stated his organization's support for the water plan. He explained that unnecessary reviews and studies could delay the district's provision of water improvements to customers. He spoke in opposition to duplicate analysis, and stated that federal permitters should support and expedite projects identified as critical by the state. He also called for additional outside review of projects identified in the water plan that appear to benefit only Denver Water. He also expressed his concern that the plan may disincentivize partners from taking actions not mandated in the plan, as the plan does not appear to recognize past successes except as history.
07:04 PM
Mr. Petersen suggested that all means to increase municipal water supply, including especially direct potable water reuse, ought to be explored before expansion of trans-mountain diversions. He conveyed his district's concern that the plan focuses on municipal and industrial use, while not emphasizing agricultural use, which is much more extensive.
07:07 PM
Dick Brown, representing Pikes Peak Regional Water Authority, stated his support for Senate Bill 14-115 and thanked the committee for conducting public hearings to gather feedback on the state water plan. Mr. Brown stated that funding projects in the state plan would require multi-year financing, which could be difficult for the legislature because of restrictions on long-term financing, including restrictions in the Taxpayer's Bill of Rights. He called for the state to provide financial support to farmers participating in water conservation, including via tax credits or other tax incentives. Finally, he called for extensive involvement of local actors.
07:11 PM
Mr. Petersen spoke on his experience as a planning director in Teller County. He explained that, in his experience, there was very little concern paid to discharge of mineral waste from mines, and suggested that assistance from the state would be necessary to resolve waste management issues resulting from the mineral waste discharge on the Animas River.
07:16 PM
Bob Kattnic, representing himself, stated his view that water is a human right and ought to be held in the public trust. He also stated his support for private property rights. He also suggested that the state's water supply has a human carrying capacity, and that an ideal population would be below the carrying capacity in order to preserve a healthy state. He stated his support for additional storage to reserve precipitation in wet years so that it can be used in dry years.
07:21 PM
Dr. Kattnic suggested that California's growth and political muscle would eventually lead it to draw more water from Colorado's Pacific drainage. He stated his concern that this could restrict the state's ability to divert water from the Western Slope to the Eastern Slope in years to come. He expressed his belief in the importance of irrigation, explaining that, without irrigation, the Wet Mountain Valley in Custer County would look like South Park. He stated his belief that Colorado is not an agricultural state, but rather a municipal state, and that water would eventually follow money to the detriment of the state's agriculture industry.
07:25 PM
Dr. Kattnic thanked the committee for its attention to his comments. He suggested that water planning would require prioritizing competing interests, and that the state only had one chance to create a successful plan.
07:28 PM
Drew Peternell, representing Trout Unlimited, introduced himself and his organization. He stated that, while Trout Unlimited has not completed its review of the state plan, it supports the portions of the plan that it has reviewed. Mr. Peternell conveyed Trout Unlimited's belief that the state ought to consider ideal stream flow rates through stream management plans, and stated his support for the inclusion of stream management plans in the current draft of the state plan. He suggested that these plans are underfunded in the status quo. He stated his organization's support for the emphasis on agricultural efficiency in the plan, and called for additional commitment of funds to these programs. He thanked the committee for its participation in the state water planning process.
07:34 PM
Brett Gracely, representing Colorado Springs Utilities, introduced himself and his utility, which is a full-service utility with experience in the energy and water nexus. He explained that his utility is the largest in the Arkansas Basin. Mr. Gracely explained his utility's engagement in two major projects, including delivery of water from Pueblo Reservoir to the east and northeast side of Colorado Springs and the utility's development of its own long-term plan.
07:38 PM
Mr. Gracely presented the utility's perspective on the state water plan (Attachment B). The utility believes that the plan ought to recognize that projects occur simultaneously, and often lack coordination with one another. Additionally, while the utility supports conservation, it believes that the level of conservation advocated in the plan will be difficult to achieve quickly because no court order or executive action can drive conservation at such a pace.
Attachment B.pdf
07:41 PM
Mr. Gracely discussed the utility's prior experience with multi-year trade, wherein the utility has traded presently available water for future commitments from other water right holders. He explained that these types of trades require the flexibility afforded by additional storage capacity. The utility also believes that navigating diverse regulations promulgated by different agencies can be difficult, particularly for smaller water providers, which will be a hindrance to the progress of projects identified in the water plan. Mr. Gracely explained that different BIPs have different goals and are, at times, in conflict with one another, which could lead to future inconsistencies in planning.
07:46 PM
Julie Nania, representing High Country Conservation Advocates, explained her organization's experience with heavy metal waste in the water supply of its town, Crested Butte. Ms. Nania explained that Crested Butte's water supply, Coal Creek, is listed as contaminated with heavy metals from mining, including cadmium and zinc. Coal Creek is treated via a water treatment facility that is required to operate in perpetuity, despite the plant's 1981 opening date and the financial difficulties faced by its owner and operator, U.S. Energy. Ms. Nania called for the state to revisit bonding to finance water quality projects. She explained that, under current law, the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment may utilize bonds, but that these are rare in practice and could require legislative review.
07:52 PM
Senator Roberts closed public testimony and thanked members of the public for their participation. The meeting was adjourned.