For five and a half months this year, to no avail, Prescott and Prescott Valley officials sought Salt River Project buy-in on their plan to build a 30-mile pipeline to bring water out of the Big Chino Sub-basin northwest of Paulden to the Prescott area.
In May 2007, Chino Valley announced plans to build its own pipeline, with Missouri-based developer Chino Grande LLC paying for it. However, a year later, this has not moved forward.
As 2009 approaches, it remains unclear whether Prescott, Prescott Valley and Chino Valley will work together to build one pipeline to spur future residential and commercial development in their growing communities.
Prescott Mayor Jack Wilson said his city's talks with SRP broke down without any resolution. The Arizona Department of Water Resources, or ADWR, handed down a decision order in November, which will go through administrative appeals expected to last into February, if not later.
The order says Prescott is entitled to pump 8,067 acre-feet of water per year from the Big Chino Sub-basin. But environmental groups and others say this deal will degrade the base flow of the Verde River severely and harm its federally protected endangered species.
Among other concerns, SRP has senior downstream rights to Verde River water for its Phoenix-based customers.
"We will proceed along the path that we have been proceeding with - with the one pipeline - until we get further down the line with Chino Valley," Wilson said. "If everything I've heard is true, we'll probably get sued by SRP, and that might drag on for six to 12 months. We're prepared to go to court."
ADWR Director Herb Guenther, who helped establish Prescott's initial meetings with SRP at the request of Gov. Janet Napolitano, helped with the closed-door discussions.
"One of the points we had put on the table in our negotiations with SRP was coming up with a single pipeline before SRP, in effect, closed the negotiations by their posture," Wilson said Dec. 24. "Until we have an agreement, there's no deal."
One major question mark is whether Chino Valley will proceed with its own endeavors.
Chino Valley Water Resources Director Mark Holmes and Mayor Karen Fann did not return phone messages the Daily Courier left with them this past week seeking comment on the matter.
"The outrigger at this time is Chino Valley," Wilson said. "I think that deal (with Chino Grande) is dead, as far as I know at this point in time. They may still be talking, but the original deal is dead."
Wilson added that it is possible Chino Valley could join Prescott and Prescott Valley on their pipeline plans.
Chino Valley could get a proportional share of the water flowing through a Prescott/PV pipeline, but any deal depends on how much water CV wants.
"Perhaps the major sticking point is they don't have a lot of money," Wilson said, referring to CV's lack of revenue without a property tax and low sales tax base. "We've offered to make an agreement, at least in terms and conditions, that would allow Chino Valley to come on board and pay down the line, basically."
Prescott, Prescott Valley and Chino Valley could sign an intergovernmental agreement. In that case, CV would say how much water it wants to push through the pipeline. As with its neighboring municipalities, Chino Valley would pay an amount of money toward building the pipeline in proportion to its water use.
"There are so many open questions at this point to even try to develop a timeline as to when this might happen," Wilson said.
Posted: Friday, January 02, 2009
Article comment by:
Gary Beverly
No Name: Thanks for your response. I didn't suggest that Prescott "just continue pumping the Little Chino". I suggested that they need to "institute rigorous water conservation plus purification and recycling". I have lived in Chino Valley for 35 years, and I moved here because there was water. Over 10 years ago I had to deepen my well at a cost of $15K because Prescott's municipal pumping lowered the water table. It is absolutely correct that the Little Chino is now seriously in overdraft, and I find it totally amazing that the "solution" advocated by Prescott (devised by Springer and others) is to also dewater the Big Chino aquifer and reduce the Verde River to a dry wash. That's no solution, it merely spreads the damage. The Big Chino Aquifer is roughly in balance now, with the current agricultural and domestic withdrawals. Any additional withdrawals will eventually diminish the river. The term "mitigation" is being tossed around with no clear definition, eg. Jack Wilson's Talk of the Town. The only real mitigation is to do two things, both feasible, difficult, and expensive: a) import water from another source without destroying the environment, and b) decrease consumptive water use by conservation and recycling or by population control. As for SRP: we all recognize that their duty is to their stockholders. Fortunately, SRP is a good environmental citizen with a history of responsible operations - see their Habitat Conservation Plan for Horseshoe Lake, for example, or observe that they are purchasing habitat for the Verde Valley Greenway project. I'm pleased to ally with them to prevent the inevitable destruction of the Verde River by the Tri-cities pumping plan. I urge all citizens to learn about these issues. A good place to start is here: http://www.cwagaz.org/reports.html
Posted: Thursday, January 01, 2009
Article comment by:
No name provided
Gary,
You say you do not care where Prescott gets it's water...but your suggestion to just continue pumping from the Little Chino aquifer is not a viable option. We are told that a problem already exists because we are taking out more water than is going back in. The current Chino well field is surrounded by many homes that are dependent on a well for their water. That well field is not so far from your own residence in Chino, so I assume you just might care before too long. The popular mantra of the opponents is that the Verde River is doomed by a pipeline. The current wells are only half the distance from the Verde Headwaters as the proposed well sites are, yet are not predicted to stop the flow of the river. The opponents seem content to ignore the status quo is over-drafting right now. The City is trying to mitigate that situation with the only other legally availible water source they have. I am sure if there were other sources they would be considered. We need more water even if growth was to stop completely, and the Big Chino is the only regionl solution there is. Even if we don't like it, let's not pretend there is another water source to tap. As for SRP, if we were in their service area you guys would have to quit using them as the saviors of the river, they would be pumping all the water we needed. No, I am not employed by, nor speaking for the City. I'm just telling it like I see it.
Posted: Tuesday, December 30, 2008
Article comment by:
Gary Beverly
I challenge "It won't be that long now" to publicly and accurately identify themselves and their employer. You sound like a paid PR blogger for Prescott.
You clearly have no idea of the facts, and you are quite willing to make outrageous false statements to earn your pay.
First, you are apparently arguing that court procedures on water law will be resolved quickly. The pipeline is facing numerous legal challenges from several parties. Fast? Get real. If this thing gets resolved within a decade, that would be good speed.
Second, there is evidence in peer reviewed scientific literature published by U.S. Geological Survey (as opposed to purchased opinions from Prescott's hired- gun consultant) showing that as agricultural pumping in the Big Chino decreased over the last several decades, the base flow from Verde Springs has increased. This bit of history shows the connection between the Big Chino aquifer and Verde springs, and additionally shows that the "clay plug" isn't a plug at all. Pumping the Big Chino will eventually reduce the Upper Verde River to an intermittent stream, a dry wash, in a few decades. The river has been there for hundreds of thousands of years.
Third, the objectors to the pipeline are concerned with the viability of the Verde River. That's all. I really don't care how Prescott gets its water as long as they don't destroy our environment. The Tri-Cities can continue to grow for a decade or more by working with the water resources they now have; they only lack the commitment to institute rigorous water conservation plus purification and recycling methods. That will be more expensive, but that is the price of growth. Have the developers pay for it.
Fourth, I submit that the burden of proof is on the pumpers, not on the river. They need to prove that their pipeline will not harm the river. Although the pumpers give PR-lip service to not harming the Upper Verde, they refuse to commit to a realistic monitoring and mitigation plan to protect the base flow.
This pipeline is a risky project for taxpayers and destructive for the Upper Verde. I say stop it now and look for other solutions to the water resource problem.
Posted: Tuesday, December 30, 2008
Article comment by:
It won't be that long now
I beleive that the aquafer that they will pump from is so large and refills from so many places that pumping for Prescott won't lower it at all. And I don't think that that aquafer has anything to do with the Verde River either. Prove me wrong!
Posted: Tuesday, December 30, 2008
Article comment by:
The Precautionary Principle
"It won't be that long now" says: "The issue that pumping the groundwater from the Big Chino will reduce the Verde headwaters cannot be proven." Shouldn't our focus be the fact that no one can prove pumping WON'T reduce the Verde baseflow? Seems to me, if you really gave a tinker's toot whether those first 25 miles of the river continue to flow year-round... But then, maybe you don't. You seem willing to spend the taxpayer dollars, build the system, cross your fingers and pump. Oh well -- if there's a problem, maybe our kids can fix it.
Posted: Tuesday, December 30, 2008
Article comment by:
Nancy Shelton
It won't be long now - so you don't think SRP will sue when the flows start going down two or three years out? At that point, there will be enough "circumstantial evidence" to prove the pipeline is reducing flows, since they will be measuring water coming out and there is unlikely to be another major source of pumping (it is unlikely there will be substantial residential development in Paulden in the next few years until the RE market picks up again.)
There are OVERLAPPING water rights between groundwater rights holders and surface water rights holders. Since Arizona law does not address this, a case like this will have to go to a high court in order to create the type of law to resolve these disputes in the future of which there are sure to be more as development continues and overlapping water rights impede upon each other more and more. This could have been avoided if Prescott had negotiated with SRP, but that possiblity appears to be "over."
Posted: Tuesday, December 30, 2008
Article comment by:
George Seaman
Jack,
What flavor is the kool-aid this year?
Posted: Tuesday, December 30, 2008
Article comment by:
No Name
I guarantee you if Fann Contracting was building the pipeline, Mayor Fann and/or Mark Holmes would have returned the phone calls.
Posted: Tuesday, December 30, 2008
Article comment by:
It won't be that long now
The litigation won't take years. It can't. SRP is saying the a 1991 law is unconstitutional. That'll take no time to decide, since nobody bothered to raise the issue for 17 years. The issue that pumping the groundwater from the Big Chino will reduce the Verde headwaters cannot be proven since no groundwater has been pumped (except for irrigation, and that has not affected the Verde flow at all). It's all hypothetical, and once the pumping begins flow rates will have to be monitored of course. The appeals are from the usual suspects that will oppose any new water use anywhere. They'll be shot down pretty fast. Finally, there will be a time limit on any litigation because the rights to the water have been granted already, and plans have to be made by Prescott et al to attain safe yield by 2025.
Posted: Tuesday, December 30, 2008
Article comment by:
Long time resident
Yee Ha, the wild and wooly west. the water wars have been going on out here for a long time and I suspect they will keep going on. It's always been "Greed vs Need" and usually the power structures with greed win in the end. Most of us know that we all need water to sustain our lives and this desert we live in. There are lots of ways to conserve the water we use but the greed gets 90 percent of the vote. Local muncipalities should have been changing the way of thinking years and years ago but instead, greedy politicians bought off by the hugh developers and land barons have allowed the water to dwindle into subdivisions that stand empty today in this very poor economy. So the poor taxpayer who has lived here most of their lives gets stuck with the bills. I have witnessed the fact that the planning and zoning departments of these cities and towns give water away that is mostly just paper with no reality to actual water. This pipe line dream may or may not become a reality but it is certain that the power structures are going to make a mess out it one way or another while the citizens get stuck with higher bills.
Posted: Tuesday, December 30, 2008
Article comment by:
Nancy Shelton
So Chino Valley doesn't have any money for the pipeline, but Prescott DOES? What about all the budget shortfalls we have been hearing about? What Mayor Wilson REALLY means is that Chino Valley doesn't have enough TAXPAYERS (population) to pay for the pipeline while Prescott and Prescott Valley do. His estimate of 6-12 months of litigation is laughable. The issues of determining groundwater versus surface water rights will have to be resolved in the higher courts, and SRP is likely to take it that far, which I'm sure lawyers hired by the municipalities are aware of. For them, more litigation means a bigger pay day. Again, who will be paying for this? It's the taxpayers.
Posted: Tuesday, December 30, 2008
Article comment by:
No name provided
"we'll probably get sued by SRP, and that might drag on for six to 12 months"...huh? That must be a typo. Even the simplest of lawsuits go on for years. Let's be realistic.
