CIRPAC meeting on conservation, Lake Powell pipeline

ST. GEORGE – The public is invited to attend a CIRPAC meeting Thursday focusing on water conservation and reliability in relation to the Lake Powell Pipeline at the Washington County Water Conservancy District.

CIRPAC is the water district’s Community Integrated Resource Planning Advisory Committee, is a 29-member citizen advisory committee that represents the residents of Washington County.  The committee evaluates the district’s management and development of water resources, conservation, water quality, planning, funding and more.

The Lake Powell Pipeline is a project of the state of Utah that is projected to deliver 86,000 acre feet of water to Washington and Kane counties.

Presenters include Amelia Nuding, a water/energy analyst for Western Resource Advocates, and Eric Millis, deputy director for Utah’s Division of Water Resources.

Nuding is presenting the organization’s proposed “Local Waters Alternative to the Lake Powell Pipeline.”

Millis is discussing the history and purpose of the 2006 Lake Powell Pipeline Development Act.

Meeting Recap:

  • When: 4-6 p.m., Thursday, Aug. 15
  • Where: Washington County Water Conservancy District, 533 E. Waterworks Drive, St. George

Submitted by: Washington County Water Conservancy District

Email: news@stgnews.com

Twitter: @STGnews

washington-county-water-conservancy

Free News Delivery by Email

Would you like to have the day's news stories delivered right to your inbox every evening? Enter your email below to start!

8 Comments

  • Larry Morrison August 11, 2013 at 9:48 am

    The most cost effective way to do this is to have Las Vegas pay the “full amount” for a pipeline from the Snake Valley to Southern Utah. This would cost them less than what it would cost them to build a pipeline the 100 extra miles to Vegas.

    We in exchange sign over gallon for gallon our water rights we have in the Colorado River (Lake Powell). They already have a natural pipeline to their back door for that water! It is called the Colorado River, and it is delivered to them in to a catch basin called Lake Mead.

    One (shorter) Pipeline would make Environment as well as economic sense. (except for those insiders that would make mega bucks off the LP pipeline).

    The cost to Washington and Iron County would be next to nothing and Las Vegas gets their water at less cost than if they had to build a pipeline al the way to Vegas.

  • Ken August 11, 2013 at 10:18 am

    I have yet to hear anyone address the fact that the water supply in Lake Powell and it’s feeder the Colorado River are constantly lower and lower year after year! But as long as some chosen few can reap big money this project will be shoved down out throats! Until I see massive conservation efforts my mind won’t change!!

  • Curly August 11, 2013 at 10:42 am

    Larry’s above comment is the most intelligent and well-reasoned thought about water pipelines I have yet read or heard. Unfortunately, I don’t trust that government entities that use tax revenues of the people to sue each other “for the benefit of the people” will grasp the gist of Larry’s reasoning.

  • Lisa August 11, 2013 at 10:47 am

    Larry Morrison, I’m afraid that’s not possible at this time. It’s essentially “water marketing” which is not allowed between the Upper Basin states such as Utah and Lower Basin states such as Nevada. It would be nice but efforts to date to break that part of the Colorado River Compact have been unsuccessful. Lots of info out there to study if you’re interested.

  • Lisa August 11, 2013 at 10:49 am

    One more thing…all interested citizens (and ALL citizens should be interested in our area’s water future!) should attend the 8/15 CIRPAC meeting where The Local Waters Alternative to the Lake Powell Pipeline will be presented. Citizens need to hear the options to the $1 (will be more with financing costs) pipeline.

  • Paul August 11, 2013 at 12:47 pm

    We in the Washington City area have already been hit with a new “Water Development Surcharge fee” that takes effect on our August 2013 bill cycle, this fee is to cover future lost impact fees and revenue in regards to capital funding of future projects ( lake powell comes to mind ) So Who approved this fee and when was it approved? I keep an eye on these fee’s and any public postings to this effect. Seems to me anyway, that this is WCWCD way of getting their foot into all our doors and now WE ARE on the hook for any future costs as this fee also says the have the right to “Adjust the surcharge fee in the future”, you all know what that means right folks? Washington City told me that the fee will start at $1.75 a month for a regular household water meter per month and more for businesses. Ok, a $1.75 x whatever amount of households in Washington county will not pay for the pipeline so guess what, how about that fee being “Adjusted” upwards to maybe $20 a month on top of what your already paying for your water. Time to wake up folks before it’s too late..

  • DoubleTap August 12, 2013 at 8:33 am

    The Lake Powell Pipeline WILL become a reality. Weather, we the people, like it or not. You all need to keep in mind that the WCWCD administrators are NOT elected. They are appointed. But what is really galling is the fact that these common citizens also have the legal authority to impose fees (aka: TAXES) on the population who use water. Now, would somebody please name one citizen who does not use water? And now with the proposed Pipeline that these common citizens of the WCWCD want, combined with the “to date” estimated cost of more than $1 BILLION dollars at the populations expense; do you really think that the Pipeline will go away? As much as I am opposed to this “pipe dream”, I cannot support the added costs that will become my childrens and my grandchildrens debt, just to make a few common citizens of the WCWCD rich and happy. Time for the WCWCD administrators to be elected to serve the population that elects them rather than impose their will (and taxes) on the rest of us.

  • Lisa August 12, 2013 at 9:42 am

    Perhaps electing them might help, but given that the water manager is appointed by “elected” county commissioners, I’m not sure you’d get a different type person if the position were an elected one. People in Washington County vote by party not “issue” it seems. I’ve talked to plenty of Republicans who are troubled by the idea of the pipeline and what it would cost, but whether they’d step up and vote for someone who wasn’t of the fold is another matter. One could always hope.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.