Latest news with #GroundwaterManagementAct
Yahoo
26-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Is Phoenix sustainable? Experts tell SEJ conference the region plans for heat, drought
As a major city in the middle of the Sonoran Desert, Phoenix has been in the spotlight in the debate over the sustainability of urban development, so much so that it's gained the reputation for being an "uninhabitable hellscape." But some on a panel at the 2025 Society of Environmental Journalists conference on April 25 argued that while Phoenix has its fair share of environmental and sustainability concerns — notably extreme heat and water shortages — a habitable future is still in reach. Water remains a major concern over the sustainability of Phoenix, especially on the Colorado River, and by extension, the Central Arizona Project. The CAP is a system of pipes, tunnels and aqueducts designed to bring water from the river to Indigenous communities and populous regions of the state. Kathryn Sorensen, director of research at Kyl Center for Water Policy at Arizona State University said a plan for the Valley has been in the works in case Colorado River water runs low. She said the plan is to fall back on other water supplies like the Salt River, the Verde River and groundwater. 'It would be highly disruptive – I don't want to minimize that,' Sorensen said. 'But it is something that the municipal water planners have known about, it's something they have planned for, and we have taken care of our aquifer exactly for that contingency.' But groundwater management remains a contentious battle. Sandy Bahr, director of the Sierra Club's Grand Canyon Chapter, said she sees this play out at the state Legislature, especially when it comes to the Groundwater Management Act, a law passed in 1980 that established rules for pumping groundwater. 'What I've seen in my time at the Legislature is whittling away at the protections that were in that Groundwater Management Act — weakening it, finding ways around it,' she said 'Yes, we require a 100-year assured water supply in Active Management Areas … but there are all kinds of ways to get around that, and developers are very influential at the city and the state level.' One way certain actors try to skirt the rules, she said, is to challenge the legitimacy of models showing that an area doesn't have the required 100-year supply and calling for other calculations to be used. Even so, Sorensen said there are reasons to remain optimistic, including increased efficiency in plumbing and appliances like washing machines, local efforts to reclaim and reuse wastewater and removal of grass lawns in exchange for more desert-adapted landscaping. Phoenix is also notorious for its extreme temperatures, but some neighborhoods, like the Grant Park Neighborhood in south Phoenix, suffer from it more than others. That's why community volunteers like Silverio Ontiveros are doing their best to plant trees so the neighborhood gets enough shade. Ontiveros said nonprofit organizations and community groups have previously worked with the neighborhood to plant trees, but maintaining them has proven difficult. 'We've planted … around 300 trees, and I would guestimate probably around a third of them are still alive today, only because they don't get watered,' Ontiveros said. One reason for this, he said, is that neighborhood residents don't have the know-how to maintain the trees. He also attributes the tree shortage to the fact that many properties in the neighborhood are rented, and landlords don't want to shoulder the cost of tree planting and maintenance. City officials are also making efforts to plant trees in the areas, often using resident feedback and identifying places with the most need, like areas with high pedestrian activity and transportation use, said Willa Altman-Kaough, deputy chief of staff to Phoenix Mayor Kate Gallego. Altman-Kaough also emphasized the need for other shade structures for places like street intersections that aren't hospitable for trees. All of these factors taken into consideration, journalist and author Tom Zoellner said the narrative of an unsustainable Phoenix, largely fueled by apocalyptic media coverage of the hot 2023 summer, 'doesn't take into account the tremendous adaptivity that has always been a feature of this particular state.' Naomi DuBovis is a journalism student at Arizona State University, and is part of a student newsroom led by The Arizona Republic. Coverage of the Society of Environmental Journalists conference is supported by Arizona State University's Cronkite School of Journalism, the University of Arizona, the Nina Mason Pulliam Charitable Trust and the Arizona Media Association. These stories are published open-source for other news outlets and organizations to share and republish, with credit and links to This article originally appeared on Arizona Republic: SEJ 2025: Panelists debate the question of whether Phoenix is sustainable
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
Yahoo
29-01-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
As governor, I'm not just talking about Arizona's problems. I'm fixing them
In my State of the State address and executive budget, I shared my vision for an Arizona that is laser-focused on delivering security, opportunity and freedom for our state. That vision is the Arizona Promise — the one Arizonans elected me to deliver. The Arizona Promise means families feel safe in their communities and our border is secure, that Arizonans have the opportunity to get ahead without working two or three jobs, that we have the freedom to live our lives as we see fit without government interference. It's what Arizona, at its best, has always stood for, but for too long politicians have let it slip away. I have taken definitive, measurable action to restore the Arizona Promise. So, it was disappointing to read a recent Arizona Republic editorial that did not acknowledge its own paper's reporting on the work my administration has done to secure our water future, protect Arizona from wildfires and create good-paying jobs by securing historic semiconductor industry investments. On top of that, my executive budget takes common sense steps to grow on our success by cutting costs for working families and investing in public safety. And I'm not just speaking loudly about these critical issues — contrary to what the editorial board suggested — I'm taking decisive action. I have used my 'bully pulpit' to protect groundwater and fight for our fair share of the Colorado River. In fact, after I traveled to the Willcox basin, witnessed family farms going dry and saw houses cracking in half due to overpumping, I took action without hesitation. I enacted the first governor-led Active Management Area in the Willcox basin to protect our water. When foreign corporations were pumping a rural county dry, I again took action to protect Arizona families and farmers. I ended Fondomonte leases in the Butler Valley. I did this without hesitation, before the editorial board made this recommendation. I'm proud to say I've done more to protect our groundwater than any governor in the last four decades, since Bruce Babbitt passed the historic Groundwater Management Act. I'm also fighting to protect our Colorado River water. As reported many times by this very news organization, I've already secured a deal on the Colorado River to protect Arizonans through 2026 from federally mandated, draconian cuts. Thanks to my leadership, no Arizonan will be forced to cut their water use. And while we work toward a long-term Colorado River compromise, my executive budget sends a clear message that Arizona is ready to fight for our fair share, with a $3 million litigation fund. The Arizona Promise also means we stand ready to fight wildfires. I've already secured $29 million to build wildfire resiliency. And my proposed budget includes another $30 million to bolster our Wildfire Suppression Fund. Most importantly, it includes a 15% raise for our state firefighters, who work tirelessly to prevent disaster and remain willing to run toward danger. Opinion: Hobbs' budget is out of touch The editorial board also suggested I help put our state in a position to recognize and maximize opportunities from the CHIPS Act. I couldn't agree more. In fact, as reported in The Arizona Republic, my administration helped secure $3 billion in federal funding for Arizona's first national laboratory, a facility that is certain to help attract billions of dollars in further business investment and create thousands more good-paying jobs for Arizona workers. All of this is in addition to my commitment to secure the southern border. I deployed the Arizona National Guard and stood up Task Force SAFE, which has stopped 8 million fentanyl pills from coming across the border and poisoning our communities, in addition to more than 2,000 pounds of cocaine, meth and other drugs. When I travel the state, Arizonans talk about the cost of housing, child care and food. They worry about water, fires and immigration. My plan lowers the cost of child care by two-thirds and lowers the cost of housing by cutting red tape and helping working-class people buy their first home. My budget provides even more resources to secure the border and stop the flow of drugs. It offers pay raises for state police and firefighters because they need to be paid what they're worth. I also set out an ambitious plan to end veterans' homelessness with a down payment into the Homes for Heroes fund to support the men and women who have given so much to our country. I've heard from the people of Arizona, and I'm committed to standing with them. I know these aren't Republican issues or Democratic issues — they're Arizona issues — and it's why I've taken them on. While there remains much to do, I'm delivering. Like the editorial board wisely suggested. Katie Hobbs is governor of Arizona. Follow her on X, formerly Twitter, @GovernorHobbs. This article originally appeared on Arizona Republic: Katie Hobbs is taking strong action on water, fires, border | Opinion
