Latest news with #ADWR
Axios
20-05-2025
- Business
- Axios
Proposed federal land sale stokes concerns over Utah water pipeline
A proposed sale of federal land to local governments in Utah is raising concerns that it could help pave the way for a controversial water pipeline from Lake Powell. The big picture: The Lake Powell Pipeline is a proposed 143-mile duct that would transport 86,000 acre-feet of water annually from the lake into southwestern Utah. Water officials from Arizona, California, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico and Wyoming — the six states that share the Colorado River basin with Utah — asked U.S. Interior Secretary David Bernhardt in 2020 to halt an environmental impact statement for the pipeline until "substantive legal and operational issues" were resolved. The project has largely been on hold for the past several years. Driving the news: In the House Committee on Natural Resources on May 6, a late-night amendment to President Trump's " big, beautiful bill" by U.S. Rep. Mark Amodei (R-Nevada) included provisions to transfer federal land to Washington County in southwestern Utah, the Washington County Water Conservation District and the city of St. George. The intrigue: An analysis that the Arizona Department of Water Resources (ADWR) provided to U.S. Rep. Greg Stanton's office called the amendment "a direct threat to Arizona's water future." The analysis said the land sale that aligns with the pipeline's path would have "serious implications" for ongoing Colorado River negotiations, would weaken Arizona's negotiating position and would risk "an escalation of unilateral actions by other states, further destabilizing river governance." ADWR told Axios it contributed to the analysis, but it's unclear who else was involved or which details came from the agency. Between the lines: Maps obtained by Axios that the Bureau of Land Management prepared for U.S. Rep. Celeste Maloy (R-Utah), who introduced the amendment with Amodei, show that a small stretch of land running parallel to the Arizona state line, and another spur that juts off to the north, largely mirrors a segment of the pipeline route. A portion would also run through a block of land that would go to the water district. Yes, but: The overwhelming majority of the pathway is outside the federal land from the amendment, including lengthy segments in Coconino and Mohave counties in Arizona and Utah's Kane County. What they're saying: Stanton and U.S. Rep. Susie Lee (D-Nevada) said several of the federal parcels align with the pipeline's proposed route, and water managers in their states warned the land sale could be used to develop the project. They called on House Republicans to remove the proposed land sale from the bill, calling it a "Trojan horse to steal Nevadans' and Arizonans' water." The other side: Karry Rathje, a spokesperson for the Washington County Water Conservancy District, told Axios the land it would receive isn't related to the pipeline and wouldn't help expedite it, adding it wouldn't change the National Environmental Policy Act process required for the pipeline. The district plans to use that parcel for a potential reservoir, while the county said it intends to use the land for transportation and other infrastructure projects like enhancements to a regional water reuse system. County Commissioner Adam Snow said in a statement the amendment only authorizes the land's sale and doesn't require any purchases. The statement didn't directly mention the pipeline, but Snow said the county is open to discussions with anyone concerned about specific parcels, including about possible deed restrictions "to ensure proper use if the option to acquire was exercised." Maloy said the land is for "trails, roads, water infrastructure, a little bit for the airport," and is unrelated to the pipeline, E&E News by Politico reported last week.
Axios
03-03-2025
- Business
- Axios
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.
Yahoo
24-02-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Arizona's water director wants a fight over growth? He's getting it
Arizona's top water bureaucrat, Tom Buschatzke, attempted to justify his agency's illegal rule that has shut down new home construction in some of Maricopa County's fastest-growing and most affordable areas. But no matter how he spins it, his argument fails — both legally and as a matter of sound water policy. The Arizona Department of Water Resources' new 'unmet demand' rule, unilaterally imposed without legislative approval and without allowing those most impacted to have a voice in the rulemaking process, is now driving up housing costs for all Arizonans and threatening our state's economic growth. Yet writing in these pages, Director Buschatzke boldly asserts that Gov. Katie Hobbs 'designated me to defend Arizona residents' right to enjoy an assured water supply.' No. Despite Buschatzke's apparent desire to act as a mini czar with unilateral power to determine this state's water policy, his authority — like all government power — is constrained by Arizona law. And that law is crystal clear: When regulatory agencies like ADWR attempt to impose sweeping policies — such as halting all new home construction across large parts of the Valley — they must do so through formal rulemaking, allowing for public input. Instead, Buschatzke sidestepped this requirement and imposed his homebuilding moratorium with the stroke of a pen. The Goldwater Institute, where I work, is now suing the agency to halt the illegal rule. This may shock career bureaucrats like Buschatzke, but Arizona is not a command-and-control, Soviet-style government. We live in a republic. That means administrative agencies must act with authorization from our elected lawmakers. The Arizona Legislature has codified this basic principle of democratic government in state law, which says that administrative agencies can only impose rules that are 'specifically authorized' by state law. Buschatzke's legal defense collapses on this front, too. He claims that his actions are justified under Arizona's Groundwater Management Act. Yet, he cannot point to a single provision granting him the broad power he now asserts — because no such provision exists. On the contrary, the law is clear: To demonstrate an assured water supply, homebuilders must show a 100-year groundwater supply for the 'proposed use' of a subdivision. In other words, if builders want to develop homes, they must prove they have enough water for that project for 100 years — a requirement that homebuilders have historically shown and can show now. Buschatzke's so-called 'unmet demand' rule turns this requirement on its head. He argues that if a projected groundwater shortfall exists anywhere in a management area, then no groundwater can be considered available for any use across the entire region. This interpretation is not just legally indefensible — it's absurd. It violates the law and defies common sense. Homebuilders in Arizona don't just prove a 100-year water supply — they also replenish virtually every gallon of groundwater they use across metro Phoenix. And this has been the requirement since 1995. No other water user faces this requirement. Semiconductor factories, for example, are exempt from the 'unmet demand' rule and can pump unlimited amounts of water without replenishing a drop. Meanwhile, homebuilders are forced to replace almost everything they use — yet they're the ones being shut down. Opinion: Inside the plan to build houses without draining water Buschatzke also claims that his policy is not 'new.' Yet his agency's rule marks the first time in Arizona's history that the government has prohibited new home construction on groundwater in specific areas of Maricopa County — sadly, the very areas where affordable housing is most needed. If you care about unelected bureaucrats dictating Arizona's water policy, you should be alarmed by ADWR's 'unmet demand' rule. If you care about affordable housing, you should be outraged by ADWR's reckless policy, which — at the governor's direction — will continue pricing thousands of Arizonans out of homeownership. And if you care about the rule of law, you should be deeply troubled by Buschatzke's defiant defense of his agency's lawlessness. Buschatzke promised a 'fight' over these rules. When you trample the rights of Arizonans — and crush the dreams of everyday families trying to achieve homeownership — that's a fight we're ready to take. See you in court. Jon Riches is the vice president for litigation at the Goldwater Institute. Reach him on X, formerly Twitter, @GoldwaterInst. This article originally appeared on Arizona Republic: Arizona wants to fight over housing? We'll see you in court | Opinion
Yahoo
16-02-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
I won't let lawyers tear down Arizona water protections without a fight
Some things are fundamental to our success and way of life in the Arizona desert. Having a reliable water supply ranks first among them. The governor designated me to defend Arizona residents' right to enjoy an assured water supply lasting at least 100 years, and I am more firmly committed to that promise today than ever before. Under my watch, no homeowner in an Active Management Area should ever feel concerns for future water supplies, even in an age of chronic drought and climate change. Today's challenges are precisely those that Arizona's landmark 1980 Groundwater Management Act was designed to confront. What is concerning, on the other hand, are recent efforts to undermine our state's invaluable consumer protections that guarantee a reliable water supply amid the backdrop of booming growth in the Phoenix metro area. On behalf of a powerful group of irresponsible development interests, the Phoenix-based Goldwater Institute recently filed a lawsuit against the Arizona Department of Water Resources, predictably alleging a litany of vague complaints about 'bureaucratic overreach' and 'arbitrary' choices related to how the department calculates the availability of water underground. ADWR is accused of acting aggressively in defense of Arizona homeowners who accepted the state's most sacred pact with its homebuying residents: That if you buy a new home in a region protected by Arizona's Assured Water Supply Program, you can count on an assured water supply. That is the commitment that a bipartisan majority of Arizona lawmakers made in 1980 with the Arizona Groundwater Management Act — a political act of courage and commitment that has stood the test of time now for 45 years. For decades, Arizona has been heralded for having demonstrated the rare governmental foresight to protect its homebuyers — and, in turn, its economic future — by standing on a unique legal principle: That a homeowner in an area stamped with an assured water supply seal of approval need never lose a night's sleep worrying that some vast, new development tapping into the same water supply might someday leave the homeowner with a kitchen faucet spewing dust. 'For me, that was the most historic thing that I had anything to do with,' the late Republican state Senate President Stan Turley recalled for the Arizona Memory Project. It was a complex piece of legislation, to be sure, running more than 100 pages. It created Active Management Areas and mandated groundwater-use reporting requirements in AMAs for major agricultural and commercial users, among others. But also fundamental to the act were those consumer protections designed to assure that the state's groundwater would not be depleted by excessive pumping. Written into the 1980 act — as well as into subsequent legislation — was language authorizing specific steps the department could take to protect groundwater supplies and the homeowners who were already tapped into them. A term of art long used to describe these groundwater protections is 'unmet demand.' Unmet demand occurs when the Assured Water Supply Program forecasts the potential for water users' groundwater wells to dry up, and thus their demand — their future need for groundwater — is 'unmet.' This concept is what the Goldwater lawsuit rails against: the state's efforts to protect existing homeowners and communities from having their wells go dry because of new developments. Amazingly, the Goldwater Institute has opted to characterize the unmet demand concept as something new and 'flawed.' Claims that this is a 'new' policy established in 2023 are patently false. Discussions related to the Assured Water Supply Program and groundwater constraints date back at least to 2017, when Gov. Doug Ducey's then chief of staff hosted meetings on this exact topic, attended by the very same stakeholders who are suing over what they describe as a 'new' policy. What is at stake in this lawsuit is the ability of the state to protect the Arizonans that are here today, by ensuring that their water supplies don't run out or water levels fall to alarming depths of 1,000 feet due to new groundwater pumping. Opinion: It's time to reform the groundwater law I helped pass The Goldwater lawsuit would create a policy directive to rubberstamp new developments if water was available beneath them, while forcing ADWR to ignore any potential impacts to neighboring homeowners or communities. Such a position violates the very spirit of our water laws that are designed to protect the residents and communities who are here today. There have been claims leveled recently that ADWR is anti-growth. These claims are false, as well. The department is every bit as committed today to helping builders find alternative water supplies as it was in 2017 under Governor Ducey when modeling found similar conditions in the Pinal Active Management Area. In November 2023, the department — along with the Governor's Water Policy Council — proposed alternatives to the Assured Water Supply Program that would allow new development to make use of grandfathered groundwater rights as a sort of bridge to a permanent, renewable supply of water. Those innovative alternatives would allow home construction to include groundwater that previously could not be included in an assured water supply determination. Vitally, it would do it in a way that allows water providers to firm up the groundwater supplies for existing users while allowing for new growth. To this day, ADWR continues to process and issue assured water supply determinations where conditions allow. It has led the way in streamlining regulations and creating flexibility for communities to continue building their robust economies. The department has enthusiastically supported market-based reforms, such as permitting the movement of water supplies from legislatively approved groundwater basins. It has helped to provide greater flexibility for Arizona's Native American tribes to market their supplies, and it is currently developing a voluntary conservation incentive program that will make it easier for farmers to develop their lands into housing and other urban uses — while saving water at the same time. Growth is essential to the state's economy, and it is accelerated by the guarantee of a reliable water supply. When families and businesses make the decision to relocate and invest in Arizona, they should be able to do so with the assurance that they will have water security long into the future. The department has a legal obligation to protect the water supplies of Arizonans who are here today when new developments are considered, and we will stand by that obligation. Arizona has had a 100-year water assurance promise that has stood up for 45 years. The department is not about to allow Goldwater's lawyers — or anyone else — to tear it down without a fight. Tom Buschatzke has served as director of the Arizona Department of Water Resources for more than 10 years. On X, formerly Twitter, @azwater. This article originally appeared on Arizona Republic: Arizona water law protects homeowners. We can't erode that | Opinion
