Water supply issues are hindering Buckeye's growth
Buckeye is missing one key ingredient to continue its astounding growth — water.
Catch up quick: In 2023, Gov. Katie Hobbs announced the Arizona Department of Water Resources (ADWR) would halt groundwater certifications for new housing subdivisions in rapidly growing Buckeye and Queen Creek.
State law requires new subdivisions in urban areas to prove they have 100-year water supplies.
Based on an ADWR study, Arizona no longer grants those certifications in Buckeye based on groundwater alone, largely closing to the door to new housing development.
Why it matters: The policy bombshell means Buckeye must find other water supplies before most homebuilding can resume.
"We've lost two years' worth of homebuilding and infrastructure being put in place. It just gums up everything," Mayor Eric Orsborn told Axios.
He noted that the new policy "has meant essentially a wholesale stop in growth in Tartesso," one of Buckeye's hottest-selling communities.
And amenities like grocery stores won't come into some of the growing communities until more housing is assured.
Reality check: There are about 10,000 unbuilt homes in Buckeye that already have 100-year certificates from before the 2023 restrictions.
Yes, but: Many of those unbuilt houses are "stranded," Orsborn said, explaining that the certified homes can't be built without new infrastructure that developers can't afford until other new houses are approved.
ADWR has approved two 100-year certificates since the 2023 policy based on non-groundwater sources, which will allow construction on 804 lots, per agency spokesperson Shauna Evans.
Evans noted that Buckeye has several isolated water systems, "so what works for one may not necessarily work for the others."
Between the lines: Orsborn said Buckeye has expanded its water portfolio through methods like recharging wastewater and buying water from the nearby Harquahala basin.
Evans said the agency expects to receive an Alternative Designation of Assured Water Supply (ADAWS) application from Buckeye soon that would allow it to use effluent water to offset groundwater use in the Tartesso system.
And the city is considering other potential sources. Orsborn noted that Salt River Project wants to expand Bartlett Dam, and there's long been talk of a desalination plant.
The city is also open to purchasing water like Queen Creek did from landowners along the Colorado River.
What we're watching: The Home Builders Association of Central Arizona sued ADWR in January to overturn the groundwater restrictions.
GOP lawmakers are again running "ag-to-urban" legislation that would allow groundwater from retired farmland to be used as an assured supply for new housing, which uses less water.
Hobbs vetoed a similar bill last year.
ADWR is also considering an ag-to-urban program.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
San Francisco Chronicle
12 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Elon Musk deletes anti-Trump posts as president warns of ‘serious consequences'
Elon Musk has quietly removed several high-profile posts on his social media platform, X, that directly criticized President Donald Trump, signaling a possible deescalation in a feud that exploded into public view this week. Among the deleted posts were Musk's accusations linking Trump to the late financier and convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, as well as a now-vanished endorsement of a user's call for Trump's impeachment and replacement with Vice President JD Vance. The deletions were discovered Saturday morning, though it remains unclear why Musk removed the posts. On Thursday, Musk claimed that without him, Trump would not have secured the presidency, setting off threats from Trump to cut off government contracts with Musk's companies, including Starlink and Space X. 'Time to drop the really big bomb,' Musk replied. '@realDonaldTrump is in the Epstein files. That is the real reason they have not been made public. Have a nice day, DJT!' The X page that once hosted Musk's post now displays a generic error message: ' page doesn't exist. Try searching for something else.' Musk had also replied 'yes' to a user's post calling for Trump's impeachment. By Saturday morning, that post had also been removed. The posts had marked a sharp escalation in the rift between Musk and Trump, who were once closely aligned. Trump purchased a red Tesla Model S in March and, just last week, appeared at a White House event alongside Musk, where he presented him with a ceremonial golden key to the nation. The alliance began to crack after Musk publicly criticized a sweeping GOP-backed budget measure, the 'Big Beautiful Bill,' which he said did not include the reforms he had championed while leading the Department of Government Efficiency under Trump. On Thursday, Musk called on Trump to 'ditch the MOUNTAIN of DISGUSTING PORK in the bill.' Trump, in turn, dismissed Musk's opposition and suggested cutting off federal subsidies and contracts with Musk's companies. 'The easiest way to save money in our Budget, Billions and Billions of Dollars, is to terminate Elon's Governmental Subsidies and Contracts,' the president wrote on Truth Social. In an interview with NBC News on Saturday, Trump warned of 'very serious consequences' if Musk were to fund Democratic candidates in retaliation. 'He'll have to pay the consequences for that,' Trump said, though he declined to elaborate. Trump added that Musk was being 'disrespectful to the office of the President.' He added, 'I think it's a very bad thing.' Asked whether he intended to mend the relationship, Trump responded simply: 'No.'
New York Post
43 minutes ago
- New York Post
Trump says Elon Musk will face ‘very serious consequences' if he funds Dems in future elections
WASHINGTON — President Trump warned Saturday that his former ally Elon Musk will face 'very serious consequences' if he starts bankrolling Democratic candidates for office after their nasty public split over a Republican spending bill working its way through Congress. 'If he does, he'll have to pay the consequences for that,' Trump told NBC News' Kristin Welker in an interview. 'He'll have to pay very serious consequences if he does that,' the president added. Advertisement 3 Musk and Trump have been feuding after the Tesla CEO spoke out on the president's 'big beautiful' bill. AP 'Is there anything else you just want people to know about the status,' Welker asked. 'No, not at all. We're doing great,' Trump replied. 'The bill is great. It looks like we're going to get it passed. Looks strongly like we're going to get it passed.' Advertisement 3 Musk was part of cabinet meetings during the first few months of Trump's second term. Molly Riley/White House / SWNS Musk knocked Trump during a multi-day X tirade over the debt increases contained in the 'big beautiful bill' earlier this week and said without his hundreds of millions of dollars in contributions, the president would never have been re-elected in 2024. Here is the latest on Donald Trump and Elon Musk's feud He also claimed credit for delivering the GOP a 53-47 majority in the Senate — and holding onto its majority in the House. Advertisement 3 Trump has hit back at Musk's comments in the ongoing feud. The Tesla and SpaceX billionaire contributed more than a quarter of a billion dollars to Republican candidates in the 2024 cycle, federal campaign filings show.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
How Trump's big bill could affect your taxes
President Trump's bill to cut taxes and spending centers on an extension of his previous round of tax cuts, which Republicans slated for expiration at the end of this year back in 2017. As such, it will preserve the status quo on many big parts of the code so that taxpayers won't see any change in things like the amount of money the government takes out of their paychecks. Other tax cuts in the legislation now moving through Congress will be brand new, though most of the new additions are scheduled to end after a few years. Here's a look at some of the big-ticket items in the latest round of GOP tax cuts. Trump's 2017 tax law cut many individual income tax rates, and those would continue into the future through the current legislation. Under current law and moving up the income spectrum, marginal rates are 10 percent, 12 percent, 22 percent, 24 percent, 32 percent, 35 percent, and 37 percent. The new GOP law will lock those rates in place. The extension of those rates will reduce federal revenues by $2.2 trillion through 2034, according to the Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT). If they were allowed to lapse, rates would change to 10 percent, 15 percent, 25 percent, 28 percent, 33 percent, 35 percent, and 39.6 percent. Only the 10-percent and 35-percent rates were left alone by the 2017 tax cuts. Trump in recent weeks floated letting the top rate go back to 39.6 percent from 37 percent as a way to lower the $3.8 trillion cost of the bill's tax portion, but he has since backed away from that idea. The law preserves — and temporarily boosts — the higher standard deduction, which was nearly doubled back in 2017. The new boost is $1,000 for individuals and $2,000 for couples filing jointly and will last for four years. This is paired with getting rid of personal exemptions, making tax filing simpler for many taxpayers. In 2024, the standard deduction was $14,600 for individuals and $29,200 for married couples. The higher standard deduction is projected to reduce revenues by $1.3 trillion through 2034. The loss of personal exemptions will add $1.9 trillion to federal revenues, resulting in a net revenue gain between the two measures. The bill creates a temporary full deduction for tips and overtime pay, allowing taxpayers to avoid paying taxes on those types of compensation. Taken together, the tax breaks will reduce revenues by about $164 billion through 2028 when they expire. People who work in the restaurant industry say they're concerned that the tax break will motivate customers to pay fewer gratuities, since tipping is left to the discretion of individual shoppers and diners as opposed to being a component of the employer-paid wage. 'I'm afraid that people are going to want to tip less with that income not being taxed,' one New York City bartender, who asked not to be named, told The Hill. The person also expressed concern that the no-tips rule could add to tensions in his restaurant between the front-of-house staff, who work for tips, and the kitchen staff, who do not. 'In the industry, the bigger concern is, why would the front-of-house not pay taxes when the back-of-house will still be paying taxes because they don't get tips?' the person said. Tax experts told The Hill the measures could add to the amount of paperwork that tax filers — both employers and employees — need to fill out, depending on how the IRS interprets the law and modifies its regulations and forms. The law gives an additional $4,000 tax break to seniors below a certain income threshold, which would be added to the $15,000 standard deduction and an already existing $2,000 deduction for seniors. Trump promised while campaigning to remove taxes on Social Security, which is funded through a payroll tax and then taxed again, above an income threshold, upon disbursal to bolster the Social Security fund along with Medicare. The enhanced deduction for seniors is a close substitute for the Social Security tax cancellation promised by Trump but is technically a different tax. According to congressional rules, the Social Social program cannot be altered through budget reconciliation, which is the legislative workaround Republicans are using to allow a party-line vote on their bill and avoid a Democratic filibuster in the Senate. Republicans haven't agreed on the most controversial provision of their tax bill — the state and local tax (SALT) deduction cap — but they're getting close. The initial proposal from the Ways and Means Committee raised the cap to $30,000, but members of the SALT caucus shot it down. Another proposal floated late Tuesday would bump the SALT deduction cap up to $40,000 — four times the current $10,000 cap — for people making $500,000 or less in income, three sources told The Hill. That level would increase by 1 percent a year over 10 years, according to one of the sources. Whatever they agree to, it will be expensive. Various estimates from the JCT put the cost of canceling the cap — which is a top priority for many blue-state Republicans — at around $1 trillion over 10 years. The SALT cap interacts with different parts of the tax code, including the higher standard deduction and the extended effective repeal of the alternative minimum tax (AMT), which costs more than $1.4 trillion in revenues. 'Even if you live in a place like New York, the combination of repealing the AMT and the $10,000 SALT cap was actually still positive for you. You were better off with the SALT cap because you lost the AMT than you would have been if the law hadn't happened at all,' Tax Policy Center senior fellow Howard Gleckman told The Hill. 'It was actually a good deal for people,' Gleckman said. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
