Coconino Plateau Water Advisory Council

May 25, 2007

Flagstaff City Hall

110 E. Aspen

Flagstaff, Arizona

Water Advisory Council Members Present

Liz Archuleta, Coconino County, WAC Chairman

John Kocjan, City of Page

Joelynn Roberson, Hopi Tribe

Tom Whitmer, Arizona Department of Water Resources

Sybil Smith, ADEQ

Brenda Smith, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

Ron Sieg, Arizona Game and Fish Department

Bob Michaels, Bureau of Reclamation

Nick Melcher, USGS

John Rihs, Grand Canyon National Park

Barry Baker, Tusayan

Michael Macauley, Coconino NRCD

Lisa McNeilly, The Nature Conservancy

Nikolai Ramsey, Grand Canyon Trust

Charlie Schlinger, NAU

Liz Archuleta, Chairman, called the meeting to order and introductions were made by those present. The first item on the agenda was a presentation by Ron Doba, reviewing the North Central Arizona Water Demand Study Phase 1 report. Ron gave a background of the study which was completed in June 2002 by the Rocky Mountain Institute, he described the study area, and that the purpose of the study was to how water is currently provided and used in the study area, and some conservation measures. Ron described some of the City of Flagstaff changes in consumption, noting that most are due to recent conservation measures adopted by the City. He noted the report was critical of existing water demand forecasting citing “problematic assumptions about needs for new sources…”, “assumptions and methods used for the demand forecasts in these documents are not clear,” and, “A more thorough analysis of future water demand is highly recommended.”

The study recommended a Phase II using a more accurate model to forecast demands in the study area. Ron reviewed the proposed steps. Ron was asked if they needed a consultant or whether they could do it themselves. Ron said that the study area members don’t really have the resources to take it on; some water suppliers don’t have system set up to obtain the necessary information. Liz asked who would participate and fund the study. Ron said he wasn’t sure if all parties identified in Phase 1 would participate or not. Nikolai said that the need to find out economically how much each of the conservation practices save per gallon, that would help make decisions. Nikolai thought it would be good to have an outside consultant for objectivity across the community, he thought they should check with RMI who did the Phase 1 study.

There was discussion of a study done in the southern Arizona that includes an economic analysis of conservation measures. There was discussion of funding a phase 2 study.

Liz asked Leslie how this would interface with the Bureau of Reclamation study and the TAC work, and if she sees the TAC as part of the information gathering for such a study.

Leslie said that it fits in with the strategic plan, which is why Ron was asked to present. She said that the feasibility study will not go back through the demand analysis.

Liz asked the WAC members for their initial thoughts. Lisa said that at the TAC meeting the day before she understood that the unmet 2050 demand doesn’t reflect the conservation measures. Leslie clarified that the cities projected demands included their current conservation measures. There was discussion regarding using current but not projected savings through future conservation measures. Leslie said that the 20% was a test to see if demands could be met with conservation measures. Ron Doba said the city’s 120 gpd includes existing conservation meaures, and commercial and industrial. Tom said that the southern Arizona study was an eye opener revealing high cost of some measures, but that they also have education component that isn’t factored in.

Leslie said that the strategic plan gives direction to the TAC to do a lot of this. There was a question regarding the ability of the TAC to do the studies. Liz suggested the TAC form a scope of work. John Fortune said that he has started to look into the study Tom mentioned and can put some information together to bring to the TAC. He said if it is looked at on a community level it’s easier to address. Liz asked the WAC if they were comfortable referring this matter to the TAC for direction and there was agreement.

After a short break Leslie gave an update from the TAC meeting the day before, noting that the Hopi’s made a presentation about what they would like to have included in the feasibility study. She also mentioned that the TAC is moving forward with studying the Lake Powell intake location, which was identified as a potential fatal flaw that should be considered sooner rather than later.

Tom Whitmer provided a legislative update, that the SWAG bill to provide county’s with the authority to require water adequacy for subdivisions was approved. He said it will require a unanimous vote of the County Board of Supervisors to establish such an adequacy ordinance. Tom said the Rural Development Bill was going to the governor for her signature.

Tom also updated the WAC on the Government Affairs Committee, saying that they want to establish a lobbying team and preliminarily have identified Coconino County, Flagstaff, Williams, Page, Hopi, and Navajo, possibly The Nature Conservancy and Grand Canyon Trust too. He asked for feedback from the WAC. Liz asked if anyone else wanted to participate, Barry Baker said he could probably get a letter from the Grand Canyon Chamber of Commerce. There was general agreement and Tom said he would schedule the first meeting.

There was no report from the Public Outreach Committee.

Next on the agenda was the election of chair and vice chair. Liz first read a letter from the Hopi Tribe stating that Joelynn Roberson is their official Hopi representative on the WAC.

First was election of the WAC Chair. Liz said that she would like to continue as chair, at least through the rest of the year, noting that in January when the Board of Supervisors discusses committee membership someone else may want to sit on the WAC. She said if so, Deb Hill has agreed to step forward at that time to chair. There was a question if that occurred if the WAC would have to have an election, if the vice-chair would move forward, or if Deb could just step in. Sue Pratt said that the bylaws don’t specify the process for replacement.

With no one else expressing an interest, Liz was unanimously re-elected chairman.

Next was the election of the vice-chairman. Liz noted that three people were either nominated or had expressed an interest and those were Brenda Smith, Lena Fowler, and Joelynn Roberson. Brenda said she would back down with the other two interested at this time.

Liz asked Joelynn to step outside (Lena was not present). Since the membership of the WAC includes voting and non-voting members Liz reviewed the designations with those present and then called for a vote, which resulted in Joelynn Roberson being elected as vice-chairman.

Next was the formation of the executive committee. Liz reminded everyone that the intention was that the executive committee would consist of the Chair, Vice-Chair, committee chairs, and one at-large member. She anticipated that prior to most WAC meetings the executive committee will meet to review the agenda, discuss any issues that arise, and keep track of the strategic plan. She said overall they will provide support and advice to the chair of the WAC. Liz said that Brenda had previously expressed an interest to be the at-large member. No other members present expressed an interest at that time.

For the finance committee, Liz said that Joe Haughey had suggested a need for this and she suggested he lead it, but she hasn’t had confirmation from him. She said this committee would establish and oversee a budget, identify fundraising possibilities, etc. Tom asked if this is a task that could be managed by the executive committee. Liz asked if anyone else wanted to serve on this committee, seeing no interest, Liz suggested that she will invite Joe Haughey to also participate on the executive committee and roll the two into one.

There were a couple of announcements. Charlie Schlinger handed out registration information the upcoming 2007 Field School on Water Science, Policy, and Law for Decision Makers.

Mike Macauley said that Marion Black from the Hereford Conservation District was going to be speaking on storm water runoff at 5:30 on June 7.

Nick Melcher announced that he was retiring from USGS after 34 years and thus this is his last WAC meeting. He thought that Bob Hart would probably be replacing him.

Liz then read a letter she had received from Bob Hart, USGS, regarding the monitoring of the C aquifer. She asked Nick if he could explain it. Nick said that it relates to loss of funding from the BIA and is related to work Don Bills has been conducting regarding the effects of withdrawals on the C aquifer. He said the program costs $300,000 per year. He thought a reduced effort could be made at a reduced funding level. He also suggested that the BIA may be responsive to local pressure. Joelynn pointed out that it is funding from the Navajo BIA, not the Western Region.

There was discussion regarding this and the WAC requested a follow-up at a future meeting, and considering the possibility of sending a letter to the BIA to encourage continuation of the project.

There being no more business, the meeting adjourned at 11:45 a.m.