Water act eases growing pains Deal ensures supplies for Valley development
by Shaun McKinnon
Nov. 19, 2004 12:00 AM

Water from Arizona's landmark tribal settlement would fuel growth on the Valley's edges where supplies are running low and help cities hedge against drought and other unplanned setbacks.

The reallocated water wouldn't flow to those cities for months or even longer, but deals are already in the works that would allow communities to lease water back from Indian tribes, providing a long-term source for tens of thousands of new homes.

The measure would also reshape one of the Valley's critical water supplies, the share of the Colorado River set aside for central Arizona. It would enlarge the pool of water available for tribes. But by writing in law the amount of water that can be used for tribal claims, the settlement protects cities and farmers from potentially larger claims in the future.

President Bush is expected to sign the Arizona Water Settlement Act before year's end, ending nearly two decades of negotiations among federal, state, local and tribal leaders.

On paper, the Gila River Indian Community and the Tohono O'odham Nation appear to be the biggest winners based on the more than 200,000 acre-feet of Colorado River water that would be moved permanently to the tribal side of the water ledger.

But Valley leaders are generally satisfied with the results and see few downsides as they begin to make plans for water windfalls that, in one case, would triple a city's share of Colorado River water.

"I think the Arizona settlement is a comprehensive and historic act for Arizona," said David Mansfield, Scottsdale's general manager for water resources. "For Scottsdale, it's especially important because it helps predict future water supplies."

The deal would reshuffle the water that flows through the Central Arizona Project, the 336-mile canal that delivers water from the Colorado to Phoenix and Tucson. It would take water that had not had an assigned user or water that had been banked in underground aquifers and shift it to the tribes and to about 20 cities and water companies whose CAP allocations would grow.

It also would set aside about 90,000 acre-feet to be reallocated in the coming years, mostly to help cities continue to deal with growth.

An acre-foot supplies one or two average households for one year.

Here's a sampling of the plans cities were examining Thursday:

• Phoenix would add about 23,000 additional acre-feet of water supplies, enough for about 115,000 people.

Its base CAP allocation would grow by 8,000 acre-feet per year. It also is working on a lease with the Gila River Indian Community for 15,000 additional acre-feet.

That 100-year lease wouldn't be completed until 2007 or 2008 and is expected to cost the city about $1,500 per acre-foot for the right to use the water, said Tom Buschatzke, the city's water adviser.

• Peoria would receive 5,527 acre-feet of newly allocated CAP water and plans to lease 7,000 acre-feet of water from the Gila River tribe, Water Resources Manager Brad Hill said.

Overall, that would be enough to provide for at least 60,000 new residents, mostly in north Peoria.

Under the proposed tribal lease, Peoria would probably make a one-time payment of $1,500 to $1,800 for each acre-foot of water, Hill said.

The up-front expense would be heavy, he acknowledged, but ensuring that much water for 100 years would be worth it.

Over 100 years, the city would be getting water at $15 to $18 an acre-foot per year, compared with its current cost of $107 per acre-foot per year from the CAP.

• Goodyear's CAP supply would more than triple with the new allocation, and the city is likely to pursue a lease from the Gila River tribe, said Dave Iwanski, water resources manager. The lease would likely bring in an additional 7,000 acre-feet of water.

Iwanski said he's not concerned about tribes having too much control over water because the ability to plan for water resources is such a boon for Goodyear.

"The benefits far outweigh any concerns that we might have," he said.

• Mesa and Chandler are working on less-traditional deals with the Gila River Community, water swaps that would bring the cities drinking water from the CAP Canal in exchange for treated effluent that tribal farmers could use to irrigate.

Mesa, for example, would deliver 29,400 acre-feet of reclaimed water to the reservation for agricultural uses.

In exchange, the Indian community would give the city 23,530 acre-feet of CAP water to use for its potable water system.

This exchange would be a better financial solution for the city than recharging the water into aquifers and pumping it back out of wells for treatment, said Kathryn Sorensen, Mesa's water resources coordinator.

• Carefree is still trying to decide whether it would need more CAP water, said Stan Francom, general manager of the Carefree Water Co.

"I'm assuming if we get more CAP water the costs will go up," he said.

Cave Creek Town Manager Usama Abujbarah said an increase in rates may not be a bad thing for Arizona.

"Maybe this will finally spur on more conservation in the state," Abujbarah said.